Poster Sessions - Virginia Tech Continuing and Professional

Poster Sessions All poster sessions are in the Regency Ballroom; the numbers indicate the location of each poster in the ballroom. Session I: Monday, March 14, 11:00 a.m. -­‐ Noon I.1: Influence of Social Capital on Under-­‐Represented Engineering Students’ Academic and Career Decisions Julie Trenor (Clemson University) I.2: Global Engineering Work Practices Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Hon Jie Teo (), Akshay Kota (Industrial Design, Virginia Tech) I.3: Collaborative Research: Newcomer Participation in Online Learning Communities Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Vandana Singh (), Raktim Mitra (), Sheeji Kathuria () I.4: Interactive Knowledge Networks for Engineering Education Research (iKNEER) Krishna Madhavan (Purdue University), Hanjun Xian (Purdue University), Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Mihaela Vorvoreanu (Purdue University), Brent Jesiek (Purdue University), Phil Wankat (Purdue University) I.5: CAREER: Advancing engineering education through learner-­‐centric, adaptive cyber-­‐tools and cyber-­‐environments Krishna Madhavan (Purdue University) I.6: Global Concepts to Action Roadmap: Engineering Education and Engineering Competency Yi Shen (Purdue University), Yating Chang (Purdue University), Brent Jesiek (Purdue University), Eckhard Groll (Purdue University), Dan Hirleman (Purdue University) I.7: CAREER: An Exploration of Expert Teaching and Student Learning in Capstone Experiences Marie Paretti (Virginia Tech), James Pembridge (Virginia Tech) I.8: Lifting the Barriers: Understanding and Enhancing Approaches to Teaching Communication and Teamwork Among Engineering Faculty Holly Matusovich (Virginia Tech), Marie Paretti (Virginia Tech) I.9: Empirically-­‐based Instructional Tools for Fostering Engineering Problem Solving and Cognitive Flexibility in Pre-­‐college Students Martin Reisslein (Arizona State University), Roxana Moreno (Univ. of New Mexico), Amy Johnson (Univ. of Memphis), Gamze Ozogul (Arizona State University) I.10: Instructional Sequences in Pre-­‐College Engineering Education Martin Reisslein (Arizona State University), Roxana Moreno (Univ. of New Mexico), Amy Johnson (Univ. of Memphis), Gamze Ozogul (Arizona State University) I.11: Online and Networked Education for Students in Transfer Engineering Programs Amelito Enriquez (Canada College) I.12: Virtual Reality Games Promoting Engineering Literacy and Problem Solving Ying Tang (Rowan University), Sachin Shetty (Tennessee State University), Xiufang Chen (Rowan University) I.13: Integrating Professional Ethics into Graduate Engineering Courses Michael Davis (Illinois Institute of Technolo) I.14: Planting Seeds of Transformation: The faculty's process of rediscovering meaning Lizabeth Schlemer (California Polytechnic State University), Roger Burton (), Linda Vanasupa (California Polytechnic State U) I.15: Enable Project-­‐Based Learning of Ecodesign Method Development and Curriculum Reform Fu Zhao (Purdue University) I.16: From Defense to Degree: Accelerating Engineering Degree Opportunities for Military Veterans David Soldan (Kansas State University), Noel Schulz (Kansas State University), Don Gruenbacher (Kansas State University), Blythe Vogt (Kansas State University), Rekha Natarajan (Kansas State University) I.17: The Role of International Students in Domestic Engineering Graduate Student Recruitment and Retention Erin Crede (Virginia Tech), Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) I.18: Collaborative Research: Use and Knowledge of Research-­‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) I.19: Student Socialization in Interdisciplinary Doctoral Education Stephanie Cutler (Virginia Tech), Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) I.20: Transitioning America’s Veterans to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Academic Programs Julia Narvaez (University of Washington), Barbara Endicott-­‐Popovsky (University of Washington) I.21: A Collaborative Research Project: Using RoboBooks To Build Scalable K12-­‐Engineering Partnerships David Crismond (City College, CUNY), Morgan Hynes (Tufts University) I.22: The Role of Intentional Self-­‐regulation in Achievement for Engineering Morgan Hynes (Tufts University), Richard Lerner (Tufts University), Ann McKenna (Arizona State University), Megan Kiely (Tufts University), Chris Rogers (Tufts University) I.23: Exploring the Role of Computational Adaptive Expertise in Design and Innovation Ann McKenna (Arizona State University), Robert Linsenmeier (Northwestern University), Adam Carberry (Arizona State University), Jennifer Cole (Northwestern University), Matthew Glucksberg () I.24: Implementation, Dissemination, Barrier Identification and Faculty Training for Project-­‐Enhanced Learning in Gateway Engineering Courses Razi Nalim (IUPUI), Robert Helfenbein (IUPUI) I.25: E-­‐book Dissemination of Curricular and Pedagogical Innovations in Engineering Thermodynamics Donna Riley (Smith College) I.26: Toward Expert Problem Solving: Blending Conceptual and Symbolic Reasoning Andrew Elby (Univ. of Maryland College Park), Ayush Gupta (Univ. of Maryland College Park) I.27: Improving Learning in Engineering Classrooms by Coupling Interactive Simulations and Real-­‐Time Formative Assessment via Pen-­‐Enabled Mobile Technology Frank Kowalski (Colorado School of Mines), Susan Kowalski (Colorado School of Mines), Tracy Gardner (Colorado School of Mines) I.28: Creating Industry-­‐Ready Engineering PhDs Jed Lyons (USC -­‐ Columbia) I.29: A Comparative Study of Engineering Matriculation Practices Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Catherine Brawner (Research Triangle Educational Associates) I.30: The Effect of Academic Policies on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Achieving Student Outcomes Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Catherine Brawner (Research Triangle Educational Associates) I.31: Socioeconomic Factors in Engineering Pathways Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Marisa Orr (Purdue University), Valerie Lundy-­‐Wagner (New York University), Russell Long (Purdue University), Cindy Veenstra (Veenstra Consulting), Nichole Ramirez (Purdue University) I.32: Minor in Nanoscale Science and Engineering at Washington University in St. Louis Dong Qin (Washington University) I.33: NUE: NanoScience and Molecular Engineering Option Programs in Engineering and Science Rene Overney (University of Washington), Ethan Allen (University of Washington) I.34: NUE: Development of the Nano Engineering Minor Option (NEMO) Program at the Cullen College of Engineering at the University of Houston Dmitri Litvinov (University of Houston) I.35: Assessing Students' Consideration of Context in Engineering Design Deborah Kilgore (University of Washington), Ken Yasuhara (University of Washington), Cynthia Atman (University of Washington) I.36: Preparing for the Grand Challenges: When and how do engineering students learn broad thinking? Cynthia Atman (University of Washington), Sheri Sheppard (Stanford University), Deborah Kilgore (University of Washington), Ken Yasuhara (University of Washington) I.37: Stanford Engineering Research Experience for Teachers (SERET) Kaye Storm (Stanford University), Sheri Sheppard (Stanford University), Beth Pruitt (Stanford University) I.38: NanoCORE at the FAMU-­‐FSU College of Engineering Ongi Englander (Florida State University), Aaron Kim (Florida State University), Amy Chan Hilton (Florida State University), Mei Zhang (Florida State University), Rufina Alamo (Florida State University), Petru Andrei (Florida State University) I.39: Applications of Renewable Energy Sources, Emphasizing Hybrid Technology with Advanced Nanosensors for Safety and Efficiency, An International Workshop at the Arab Academy Science and Technology and Maritime Transport in Alexandria, Egypt Ahmed Elantably (General Machines Corp., LLC), Yasser Dessouky (Arab Academy of Egypt), Maher Rizkalla (IUPUI) I.40: Workshop for Conversations Related to Motivating Interest in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering among Oklahoma K-­‐12 Students Susan Walden (University of Oklahoma) I.41: (RET) site at the University of Houston (UH): “Innovations in Nanotechnology” Frank Claydon (University of Houston), Stuart Long (University of Houston), Madeline Landon (Friendswood High School) I.42: REU Site: Innovations in Nanotechnology at the University of Houston Frank Claydon (University of Houston), Gila Stein (University of Houston), Stuart Long (University of Houston), Audra Patterson (University of Houston) I.43: A Biomedical Engineering Course of Study at the Secondary School Level Joseph Cocozza (University of Southern Califor) I.44: UT Arlington RET Site on Hazard Mitigation Nur Yazdani (UT Arlington) I.45: RET-­‐PLUS (Partners Linking Urban Schools) Claire Duggan (Northeastern University) I.46: Vanderbilt University Bioengineering Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) Stacy Klein-­‐Gardner (Vanderbilt University) I.47: PREPARES: Partnering Researchers and Educators to Create Problem-­‐based Curricula that Adapt Research in Engineering for Students Susan Parry (Kenan Fellows Program) I.48: Transitioning Engineering Research to Middle Schools (TERMS) Karen High (Oklahoma State University) I.49: Active Learning about Active Learning: Nanotechnology for Teachers Carolyn Nichol (Rice University), Carrie Cloonan (Rice University), John Hutchinson (Rice University) I.50: Summer Undergraduate Research in Engineering/Science Program at the Georgia Institute of Technology Leyla Conrad (Georgia Institute of Technology), Gary May (Georgia Institute of Technology) I.51: NUE: An Integrated Approach to Environmentally Responsible Nanotechnology Education Mira Olson (Drexel University), Patrick Gurian (Drexel University), Alisa Morss Clyne (Drexel University), Peter Lelkes (Drexel University), Wan Shih (Drexel University), Wei-­‐Heng Shih (Drexel University) I.52: REU Site: Engineering Cities Mira Olson (Drexel University), Patrick Gurian (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University), Katie Morrison (Drexel University) I.53: Life Cycle Assessment of Algae Biodiesel Production Easar Forghany (UC Berkeley), Mira Olson (Drexel University), Sabrina Spatari (Drexel University) I.54: iREU: Interdisciplinary Research Experience for Undergraduates in Medicine, Energy, and Advanced Manufacturing Anne Hanna (Drexel University), Geri Kneller (Drexel University), Colleen Rzucidlo (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University), Alisa Clyne (Drexel University), Surya Kalidindi (Drexel University) I.55: Undergraduate Research and Real World Sensor Applications Caroline Schauer (Drexel University), Jin Wen (), Keiko Nakazawa (Drexel University), Dorilona Rose (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University) I.56: Novel Advanced Materials and Processing with Applications in Biomedical, Electrical and Chemical Engineering Christos Takoudis (University of illinois-­‐chicago), Gregory Jursich (University of Illinois-­‐Chicago) I.57: REU Site for Increasing Diversity In Engineering at the Pratt School of Engineering of Duke University Martha Absher (Duke University) I.58: One Day's Pay: Educating K-­‐16 Engineers to Create Affordable Innovations Lauren Rockenbaugh (University of Colorado Boulder), Malinda Zarske (University of Colorado at Boulder), Derek Reamon (University of Colorado at Boulder), Daria Kotys-­‐Schwartz (University of Colorado at Boulder) I.59: Using Digital Pens for Fine-­‐Grained Examination of Skill Acquisition in Engineering Statics Tom Stahovich (UC Riverside) I.60: Developing Adaptive Expertise in Engineering Taylor Martin (Univ. of Texas at Austin) I.61: Bridge to the Future for GIs: GI Bill Survey Information & Results Sue Rosser (Georgia Tech), Don Giddens (Georgia Tech), Laurence Jacobs (Georgia Tech), Julia Melkers (Georgia Tech), Adjo Amekudzi (Georgia Tech), William Long (Georgia Tech), Deepak Divan (Georgia Tech) I.62: ASPIRE (American Student Placements in Rehabilitation Engineering) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Alicia Koontz (University of Pittsburgh), Rory Cooper (University of Pittsburgh) I.63: Quality of Life Technology Center (QoLT) Engineering Research Center (ERC) Research Experience for Undergraduates Program (REU) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Dan Ding (University of Pittsburgh) I.64: Experiential Learning for Veterans in Assistive Technology and Engineering (ELeVATE) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Rory Cooper (University of Pittsburgh) Session II: Monday, March 14, 1:30 – 2:30 p.m. II.1: CAREER: Characterization of Cognitive Models of Conceptual Understanding in Practicing Civil Engineers and Development of Situated Curricular Materials Shane Brown (Washington State University) II.2: What is Engineering Knowledge: A Longitudinal Study of Conceptual Change and Epistemology of Engineering Students and Practitioners Shane Brown (Washington State University), Devlin Montfort (Washington State University) II.3: On Complex Problem Solving: From Relevance to Research to Practice Olga Pierrakos (James Madison University), Anna Zilberberg (James Madison University), Kelli Samonte (James Madison University), Jacquelyn Nagel (James Madison University) II.4: Understanding the Development of the Engineer Identity: From Identifying with Engineering to Becoming an Engineer Olga Pierrakos (James Madison University), Kathleen Casto (James Madison University), Bryant Chase (James Madison University), Jacquelyn Nagel (James Madison University), Heather Watson (James Madison University), Robin Anderson (James Madison University) II.5: Technology-­‐based Evaluation of Classroom Learning Peter Beling (University of Virginia), Qifeng Qiao (University of Virginia), Barry Horowitz (University of Virginia), Jianping Wang (University of Virginia), Robert Pianta (University of Virginia) II.6: Accelerated Masters Program for Returning Veterans Barry Horowitz (UVA) II.7: CAREER: Learning from Small Numbers: Using personal narratives by underrepresented undergraduate students to promote institutional change in engineering education Alice Pawley (Purdue University) II.8: IEECI-­‐ASK: Assessing Sustainability Knowledge Alice Pawley (Purdue University), Ranjani Rao (Purdue University), Stephen Hoffmann (), Monica Cardella (Purdue University), Matthew Ohland (Purdue University) II.9: REU Site: Tackling Some of the Grand Challenges of Engineering Inez Hua (Purdue University), Michael Harris (Purdue University), Stephen Hoffmann () II.10: A Holistic Assessment of the Ethical Development of Engineering Undergraduates Cynthia Finelli (University of Michigan), Donald Carpenter (Lawrence Technological University), Trevor Harding (California Polytechnic University) II.11: Comprehending Systems with Graphical Representations Sean Brophy (Purdue University) II.12: Support of Innovative Design Decisions Sean Brophy (Purdue University) II.13: Gender Differences in Engineering Education: Is What's Good for the Goose Good for the Gander? Jennifer Walter (Bucknell University), Candice Stefanou (Bucknell University), Susan Lord (University of San Diego), Katharyn Nottis (Bucknell University), Michael Prince (Bucknell University), John Chen (California Polytechnic State University), Jon II.14: Making the Connection: Improving Engineering Education for Veterans at the University of San Diego Kathleen Kramer (University of San Diego), Susan Lord (University of San Diego), Rick Olson (University of San Diego) II.15: Finding Personal Meaning and Societal Connections in Engineering Education: A Case Study in Integrated Course Transfer Robert Martello (Olin College), Jonathan Stolk (), Lynne Slivovsky (), Thomas Trice () II.16: Veterans@VT: A Program for Recruiting, Transitioning, and Supporting Veterans to Graduate Programs in Engineering and Beyond to Civilian Careers (NSF Award Number:EEC-­‐0949209) Ennis McCrery (Virginia Tech), Mary Kasarda (Virginia Tech), Eugene Brown (Virginia Tech), Mark Pierson (Virginia Tech), Karen DePauw (Virginia Tech) II.17: Investigation of Hands-­‐On Ability for Mechanical and Electrical Engineers Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), Leonard Bohmann (Michigan Technological University), Chris VanArsdale (Michigan Technological University), Anna Pereira (University of California, Berkeley), Ben Mitchell (Michigan Technological University) II.18: Weaving Threads of Sustainability into the Fabric of the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum: Impacting the Fundamental Manner in which Students Solve Problems Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), John Gershenson (Michigan Technological University), Chuck Margraves (Michigan Technological University), Ibrahim Miskioglu (Michigan Technological University), Gordon Parker (Michigan Technological University) II.19: Meeting the NAE Grand Challenge: Personalized Learning for Engineering Students through Instruction on Metacognition and Motivation Strategies Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), Sheryl Sorby (Michigan Technological University), Jim De Clerck (Michigan Technological University), Bill Endres (Michigan Technological University) II.20: Research Intervention to Improve Engineering Self-­‐Efficacy of Minority Students at Predominantly White Institutions Sheryl Sorby (Michigan Technological University), Kari Jordan (Michigan Technological University), Susan Amato-­‐Henderson (Michigan Technological University), Tammy Haut Donahue (Michigan Technological University) II.21: Engineering Veteran Pathways Ingrid St. Omer (University of Kentucky), Anthony Dotson (University of Kentucky), Richard Sweigard (University of Kentucky), James Chambers (Bluegrass Community & Technical College) II.22: Programming Standing Up Matthew Berland (Univ. of Texas at San Antonio), Taylor Martin (Univ. of Texas at Austin) II.23: Collaborative Learning Environment for Automated Manufacturing System Integration (CLE-­‐ASI) Sheng-­‐Jen Hsieh (Texas A&M University) II.24: REU Site for Interdisciplinary Research on Imaging and Biomarkers Sheng-­‐Jen Hsieh (Texas A&M University) II.25: Project IVEHOL: Integrating Virtual Experiments and Hands-­‐On Labs -­‐ A Synergistic Approach to Enhance Engineering Education Yakov Cherner (ATeL) II.26: Engineering Education in Context: An Evidence-­‐Based Intervention System Donald McEachron (Drexel University), Elisabeth Papazoglou (Drexel University), Fred Allen (Drexel University), Sheila Vaidya (Drexel University) II.27: Use of Haptics in a Virtual Reality Environment for Learning of Nanotechnology Curtis Taylor (University of Florida), Dianne Pawluk (Virginia Commonwealth University), James Oliverio (University of Florida) II.28: Collaborative Research: Sustainability in SCM & Facility Logistics Suzanna Long (Missouri University of Science), Hector Carlo (UPRM) II.29: Developing Integrated Creativity Assessments for the Engineering Classroom: Building on the Creative Action-­‐Assessment Cycle for the Engineering Classroom James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Holli Burgon (university of Illinois), Raymond Price (University of Illinois), David Goldberg (University of Illinois) II.30: A Participatory Investigation of Learning in International Service Projects James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Russell Korte (University of Illinois), Laura Hahn (University of Illinois), Valeri Werpetinski (University of Illinois) II.31: The First-­‐to-­‐Fourth Flatline: Assessing undergraduate students’ creativity James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Holli Burgon (university of Illinois), Raymond Price (University of Illinois), David Goldberg (University of Illinois) II.32: Infusing Sustainability and Renewable Energy Concepts into Electrical and Computer Engineering Curriculum Anil Pahwa (Kansas State University), William Kuhn (Kansas State University), Ruth Douglas Miller (Kansas State University), Andrew Rys (Kansas State University) II.33: A Simulations Game for Teaching Construction Engineering and Management Concepts: The Virtual Construction Simulator (VCS) Dragana Nikolic (Penn State University), John Messner (), Sanghoon Lee () II.34: Integrating Nanotechnology into Undergraduate Engineering Curricula at Bucknell University Erin Jablonski (Bucknell University), Donna Ebenstein () II.35: NUE: Integration of Nanoscale Devices and Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology into Undergraduate Engineering and Science Curricula James Boerio (University of Cincinnati), Vesselin Shanov (), Donglu Shi (), Dionysios Dionysiou (), Anant Kukreti (), Ian Papautsky (), Mark Schulz () II.36: It's All About the Research Experience! Andrea Burrows (University of Cincinnati), Anant Kukreti (), Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School) II.37: Water Filtration is Elementary Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School), Andrea Burrows (University of Cincinnati), Anant Kukreti () II.38: Water Filtration Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School) II.39: NUE: Bottom-­‐Up Meets Top-­‐Down -­‐ An Integrated Undergraduate Nanotechnology Laboratory at NC State Yong Zhu (North Carolina State Universit), Mellisa Jones (), Joseph Tracy (), Jingyan Dong (), Xiaoning Jiang () II.40: Renewable Energy Education in an ERC: College and precollege strategies for the Engineer of 2020 Lisa Grable (NC State University), Penny Jeffrey (NC State University), Leda Lunardi (NC State University) II.41: Design Squad: Inspiring a New Generation of Engineers Marisa Wolsky (WGBH) II.42: Leveraging Military Training to Enhance the Study of Engineering David Hayhurst (SDSU), Dave Lighthart (SDSU), Alyson Lighthart (San Diego City College) II.43: Engineering Innovation and Design for STEM Teachers Margaret Pinnell (University of Dayton), Rebecca Blust (University of Dayton) II.44: Boston University RET in Biophotonics Cynthia Brossman (Boston University), Michael Ruane (Boston University) II.45: RET Site: Inquiry-­‐based Bioengineering Research and Design Experiences for Middle-­‐School Teachers (EEC 0743037) Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) II.46: Cutting-­‐edge Biomedical Engineering Design Project for Teachers Results in Meaningful Engineering Design Projects for Middle School Students Jared Quinn (WPI / Ashburnham-­‐Westminster R.S.D.), Anastasia Padilla (WPI / Wachusett Regional School District), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institut), Jeanne Hubelbank (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) II.47: REU Site: Integrated Bioengineering Research, Education, and Outreach Experiences for Females and Underrepresented Minorities at WPI (EEC0754996) Amanda Reidinger (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Jeanne Hubelbank (), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Marsha Rolle (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) II.48: REU Project: Nanoscale Surface Modification of the Skin-­‐Implant Interface to Enhance Keratinocyte Attachment Sarah Mattessich (WPI), Cara Ting (WPI), Ivan Ivanov (WPI), Aung Khaing (WPI), Marsha Rolle (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Christopher Lambert (WPI), W. Grant McGimpsey (WPI), George Pins (WPI) II.49: Research Experience for Teachers: Processing and Characterization of Engineered Particulate Materials for the Pharmaceutical Industry Kwabena Narh (NJIT), Howard Kimmel (NJIT), Rajesh Dave (NJIT), John Carpinelli (NJIT), Levelle Burr-­‐
Alexander (NJIT), Linda Hirsch (NJIT) II.50: REU Site in Fluid Mechanics: Educational Goals and Outcomes Amy Lang (UA), Tom Zeiler (UA), James Hubner (University of Alabama) II.51: An Inexpensive Accelerometer-­‐Based Sleep-­‐Apnea Screening Technique Christie Bucklin (Oakland University), Manhor Das (Oakland University), Sam Lou () II.52: REU Site in Regenerative Medicine, Multi-­‐Scale Bioengineering, and Systems Biology at UC San Diego Melissa Micou (UC San Diego) II.53: Texas Center for Undergraduate Research in Energy and Combustion Eric Petersen (Texas A&M University) II.54: NSF/REU Site: Interdisciplinary Water Sciences and Engineering (2007-­‐2013) Vinod Lohani (Virginia Tech), Tamim Younos () II.55: REU SITE: Educating the Culturally-­‐sensitive Industrial Engineer – A complex interdisciplinary systems perspective to global IE issues Viviana Cesani (University of Puerto Rico), Alexandra Medina-­‐Borja (University of Puerto Rico) II.56: Can Gaming Provide Enough Context to Improve Knowledge Integration and Retention in Engineering Freshmen? Agustin Rullan (University of Puerto Rico), Miguel Figueroa (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Alexandra Medina-­‐Borja (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Cristina Pomales (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Felix Zapata (University of Puerto Rico) II.57: REU Site: Summer Research Experiences in Wireless Sensor Networks – Design and Applications Scott Smith (University of Arkansas), Jingxian Wu (University of Arkansas) II.58: BIOSENSE REU Site – Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems for the Development of Biomedical Applications and Devices at Northeastern University Kristin Hicks (Northeastern University), Michael Silevitch (Northeastern University), David Kaeli (Northeastern University), Paula Leventman (Northeastern University) II.59: REU Site in Additive Manufacturing Robert Landers (Missouri S&T), Hong Sheng (Missouri S&T), Douglas Bristow (Missouri S&T), Gregory Hilmas (Missouri S&T), Ming Leu (Missouri S&T), Frank Liou (Missouri S&T), Joseph Newkirk (Missouri S&T) II.60: From Battlefield to Classroom: Designing Pathways to Engineering for American GIs Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Corrinne Zoli (Syracuse University), Jay Henderson (Syracuse University), Ann Sheedy (Syracuse University), Tim Eatman (Syracuse University), Yingyi Ma (Syracuse University), Dawn Johnson (Syracuse University), Nicholas Armstrong (Syracuse University) II.61: Battlefield Perceptions of Engineering: An Institutional Response to Absent Pathways and Missing Engineering Students Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Corrinne Zoli (Syracuse University), Tim Eatman (Syracuse University), Yingyi Ma (Syracuse University), Andria Costello (Syracuse University), Nicholas Armstrong (Syracuse University) II.62: Inspiring Innovation: Merging Pedagogical Paradigms from Engineering and Architecture Sinead Mac Namara (Syracuse University), Clare Olsen (Syracuse University), Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Samuel Clemence (Syracuse University) II.63: Construction of a Microscope that Incorporates TIRF and Confocal Microscopy in the Same System Rachel Kilmer (Lone Star College) II.64: AIR DISPERSION MODELING: PLANNING FOR AIRBORNE TERRORISM RELEASES IN DFW Jennifer Cook (UTA RET) Session III: Monday, March 14, 4:30 – 5:30 p.m. Please note: Refreshments for the evening reception are available in the Regency Foyer, just outside the poster session room, from 4:30-­‐6:30. III.1: In-­‐Class Peer Tutoring: A Model for Engineering Education Shane Brown (Washington State University) III.2: A Model for Faculty, Student, and Practitioner Development in Sustainability Engineering through an Integrated Design Experience Nadia Frye (Washington State University), Shane Brown (Washington State University), Michael Wolcott (Washington State University), Paul Smith (The Pennsylvania State University), Liv Haselbach (WSU), Deborah Ascher-­‐Barnstone (WSU) III.3: Developmental Engineering: An Examination of Early Learning Experiences as Antecedents of Engineering Education Demetra Evangelou (Purdue University), Diana Bairaktarova (Purdue University), Christina Citta (Purdue University) III.4: Examining the Migratory Patterns of Engineering Students Using Social Psychological Theories Demetra Evangelou (Purdue University), Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Ida Ngambeki (Purdue University) III.5: Virtual Facilitation and Team Skill Education Ray Luechtefeld (University of La Verne) III.6: An Overview of Research Exploring the Attributes and Career Paths of Engineering Ph.D.s Monica Cox (Purdue University), Jiabin Zhu (Purdue University), Jeremi London (Purdue University), Benjamin Ahn (Purdue University), Shree Frazier (Purdue University), Anna Torres (University of South Florida), Osman Cekic (Purdue University), Rocio Chave III.7: Prototype to Production (P2P): Conditions and Processes for Educating the Engineer of 2020 Patrick Terenzini (Pennsylvania State University), Lisa Lattuca (Pennsylvania State University) III.8: Synergistic Learning & Inquiry through Characterizing the Environment Annie Pearce (Virginia Tech), Christine Fiori (Virginia Tech) III.9: Pathways to Engineering Through Improved REU Experiences Adin Mann (Institute for Broadening Participation), Ashanti Johnson (Institute for Broadening Participation), David Siegfried (Institute for Broadening Participation), Liv Detrick (Institute for Broadening Participation), LeAnn Faidley (Iowa State University) III.10: Problem Framing Skills for Engineering Problem Solving John Jackman (Iowa State University), Gloria Starns (Iowa State University), Mathew Hagge (Iowa State University), Stephen Gilbert (Iowa State University), Gregory Aist (Iowa State University), LeAnn Faidley (Iowa State University) III.11: Foster Complex Systems Thinking in Construction Engineering Education Using a Case-­‐Based Multidimensional Virtual Environment (CMVE) Zhigang Shen (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln), Yimin Zhu (Florida International University) III.12: Using a Virtual Gaming Environment in Strength of Materials: Increasing Access and Improving Learning Effectiveness Jon Preston (Southern Polytechnic State University), Wasim Barham (Southern Polytechnic State University), James Werner (Southern Polytechnic State University) III.13: The Role of Service-­‐Learning: Improving Engineering Education; Attracting Women into Engineering Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Linda Jarvin (Tufts University) III.14: A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering Students (ISES) Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Kurt Paterson (Michigan Technological University) III.15: Assessing Students’ Motivation to Learn and Practice Sustainable Engineering Angela Bielefeldt (University of Colorado Boulder), Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Kurt Paterson (Michigan Technological University), Mary McCormick (Tufts University), Jonathan Wiggins (University of Colorado Boulder), Kristina Lawyer (Michigan Technological University) III.16: Search Experience for Undergraduates in Environmental Engineering Angela Bielefeldt (University of Colorado Boulder) III.17: Identifying Characteristics of Successful Engineering Education Innovation Adopters Kirsten Davis (Boise State University), Ross Perkins (Boise State University), Sondra Miller (Boise State University) III.18: Teacher Training and STEM Student Outcome: Linking Teacher Intervention to Students’ Success in STEM Middle and High School Classes Gisele Ragusa (University of Southern California) III.19: Characterizing a Trajectory of Conceptual Change in an Introductory Materials Course with Multi-­‐
Level Formative and Summative Assessment Feedback Loops Stephen Krause (Arizona State University), Dale Baker (Arizona State University), Jacquelyn Kelly (Arizona State University), Jessica Triplett (Arizona State University), Andrea Eller (Arizona State University) III.20: Implementation of Differentiated Active-­‐Constructive-­‐Interactive Activities in an Engineering Classroom Michelene Chi (Arizona State University), Muhsin Menekse (Arizona State University), Glenda Stump (Arizona State University), Stephen Krause (Arizona State University) III.21: Developing and Implementing a Plan for Transitioning America's Veterans to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Academic Programs Robert Green (Mississippi State University), Sarah Rajala (Mississippi State University), Rayford Vaughn (Mississippi State University) III.22: CU Thinking: Problem-­‐Solving Strategies Revealed Lisa Benson (Clemson University), Sarah Grigg (Clemson University), David Bowman (Clemson University) III.23: Agent-­‐Monitored Tutorials to Enable On-­‐Line Collaborative Learning in Computer-­‐Aided Design and Analysis Jack Beuth (Carnegie Mellon University), Carolyn Rose (Carnegie Mellon University), Rohit Kumar (Carnegie Mellon University) III.24: ADEPT: Assessing Design Engineering Project Classes with Multi-­‐Disciplinary Teams Daniel Siewiorek (Carnegie Mellon University), Asim Smailagic (Carnegie Mellon University), Carolyn Rose (Carnegie Mellon University) III.25: Collaborative Research: Development and Testing of 4-­‐P Model to Assess the Effectiveness of Case Study Methodology in Achieving Learning Outcomes P.K. Raju (Auburn University), Chetan Sankar (Auburn University), Qiang Le (Hampton University), Barbara Kawulic (University of West Georgia), Howard Clayton (Auburn University), Nessim Halyo (Hampton University) III.26: Building Design Apps for Early Engineering Education Scott Ferguson (NC State University), Larry Silverberg (North Carolina State University), William Deluca (North Carolina State University) III.27: Transforming and Integrating: Evolving Construction Materials & Methods to the Next Level Chung-­‐Suk Cho (Univ. of NC at Charlotte), David Cottrell (Univ. of NC at Charlotte), Candace Mazze (Univ. of NC at Charlotte) III.28: AggiE-­‐VET Cesar Malave (Texas A&M University) III.29: Encouraging Innovative Pedagogy through Long-­‐Term Faculty Development Teams Jill Nelson (George Mason University), Margret Hjalmarson (George Mason University) III.30: Linking Interest and Conceptual Knowledge in Electrical Engineering Margret Hjalmarson (George Mason University), Jill Nelson (George Mason University) III.31: JavaGrinder: Microworlds James Palmer (Northern Arizona University) III.32: NUE: Teaching Undergraduates Nanomanufacturing Engineering (TUNE) James Palmer (Louisiana Tech University), Hisham Hegab (Louisiana Tech University) III.33: Nanotech Innovations Enterprise: Students Creating the Future – One Atom at a Time John Jaszczak (Michigan Technological Univ.), Mary Raber (Michigan Technological Univ.), A. Nasser Alaraje (Michigan Technological Univ.), Paul Bergstrom (Michigan Technological Univ.), Michael Bennett (Northeastern University) III.34: Assessing the Impact of Faculty Advising and Mentoring in a Project-­‐Based Learning Environment on Student Learning Outcomes, Persistence in Engineering and Post-­‐Graduation Plans Mary Raber (Michigan Technological University), Valorie Troesch (Michigan Technological University), Susan Amato-­‐Henderson (Michigan Technological University) III.35: Sustainability, Energy, and Environment: Creating and ARK of Excellence on the “SEE” Brad Mehlenbacher (North Carolina State University), Christine Grant (NCSU), Steven Peretti (NCSU), Tuere Bowles (NCSU), Pamela Martin (NCSU) III.36: The Nanosystems Emphasis – Valuing Disciplinary Depth and Differences in Nanoscale Science and Engineering Teams Dimitris Korakakis (West Virginia University), Kasi Jackson (West Virginia University), Robin Hensel (West Virginia University) III.37: NUE: A Nanotechnology Certificate Program for Engineering Undergraduates Wendy Crone (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Naomi Chesler (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kimberly Duncan (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Tola Ewers (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kristyn Masters (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), David Shaffer (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison) III.38: Cross-­‐Cultural Connections: An RET Site Program with UPRM and UW Greta Zenner Petersen (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Juan de Pablo (University of Wisconsin-­‐
Madison), Nelson Cardona Martínez (University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayagüez), Juan López Garriga (University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayagüez), Tracy Stefonek-­‐Puccnelli (Universit III.39: NSF Engineering Research Center for Biorenewable Chemicals Pre-­‐College Education Program Adah Leshem-­‐Ackerman (CBiRC), Mari Kemis (RISE) (Iowa State University) III.40: NSF Engineering Research Center for Biorenewable Chemicals (CBiRC): University Education Program D Raj Raman (CBiRC) (Iowa State Univ.), Mari Kemis (RISE) (Iowa State University), Karri Whitmer (RISE) (Iowa State University), Lindsey Long (CBiRC) (Iowa State University) III.41: NSF NUE 0939355: Creating a Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Minor James Brenner (Florida Tech), Kurt Winkelmann (Florida Tech), Joel Olson (Florida Tech), Yekaterina Lin (Florida Tech), Xu Shaohua (Florida Tech) III.42: T-­‐CUP: Two -­‐ Three Community College to University Programs Project: An Innovative Model for Broadened Pathways into Technical Careers Patricia Mead (Norfolk State University) III.43: Education and Outreach Activities of the Engineering Research Center for Collaborative Adaptive Sensing of the Atmosphere Paula Sturdevant Rees (CASA ERC) III.44: Enrichment Experiences in Engineering (E3) for Teachers Program Robin Autenrieth (Texas A&M University), Karen Butler-­‐Purry (Texas A&M University), Cheryl Page (Texas A&M University) III.45: Notre Dame RET Site in Engineering (EngRET@ND) Wolfgang Porod (University of Notre Dame), Alexander Hahn (University of Notre Dame), Nevin Longenecker (University of Notre Dame) III.46: RET Site on Bio-­‐Inspired Technology and Systems (BITS) Xiaobo Tan (Michigan State University) III.47: Science and Mechatronics Aided Research for Teachers (SMART): An RET Site Project Vikram Kapila (Polytechnic Institute of NYU) III.48: Expanding the EUV ERC RET Program Through a Partnership with the Alliance Program Kaarin Goncz (Colorado State University) III.49: Research Experience for Teachers (RET) -­‐ Chicago Science Teacher Research (CSTR) Program Nicole Bogdanovich (Edwin G. Foreman High School), Seon Kim (UIC), Andreas Linninger (UIC) III.50: REU Site in Electrical & Computer Engineering at the University of Kentucky Regina Hannemann (University of Kentucky) III.51: Interdisciplinary Research Experience in Electrical and Computer Engineering at Oakland University Osamah Rawashdeh (Oakland University), Daniel Aloi (Oakland University) III.52: Evaluating a Four Site Undergraduate Research Program in Biofuels and Biorefining Engineering Daniel Knight (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Frannie Ray-­‐Earle (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Nancy Tway (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Alan Weimer (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder) III.53: Computer-­‐Integrated Surgical Systems and Technology (CISST) Engineering Research Center (ERC) Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program,The Johns Hopkins University Ralph Etienne-­‐Cummings (Johns Hopkins University), Jerry Prince (Johns Hopkins University), Anita Sampath (The Johns Hopkins University) III.54: Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowships (SURF) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology Joseph Kopanski (NIST), Richard Steiner (NIST), Lisa Fronczek (NIST), Christopher White (NIST), Chiara Ferraris (NIST) III.55: SURF NIST Boulder Builds Bridges to Ph.D. Programs Joseph Magee (NIST), Ron Goldfarb (NIST), Matthew Pufall (NIST), Mitch Wallis (NIST), Annemiek Kamphuis (NIST) III.56: Undergraduate Research in Wireless Sensor Networks and Security Infrastructure Heidar Malki (University of Houston), Xiaoging Yuan (University of Houston) III.57: REU Site: Retaining Engineers through Research Entrepreneurship and Advanced–Materials Training (RETREAT) at Florida State University Okenwa Okoli (HPMI, Florida State University), Ben Wang (HPMI, Florida State University) III.58: 2010 Research Experiences for Undergraduates – Nanotechnology and Materials Systems Dimitris Lagoudas (Texas A&M University), Jacques Richard (Texas A&M University), Kristi Shryock (Texas A&M University) III.59: 3D Scanning For Bridge Inspection Christian McGuire (University of Arkansas), Anu Pradhan () III.60: Nature InSpired Engineering Research Experience for Teachers Poster Abstract for Summer 2010 RET Cohort Kenneth Barner (University of Delaware) III.61: Nature InSpired Engineering Research Experience for Teachers (NISE RET) Working in the Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory of Ismat Shah Brian Gross (Delcastle Technical High School) III.62: Aligning Educational Experiences with Ways of Knowing Engineering: How People Learn Engineering Sandra Courter (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madiso), Mitchell Nathan (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Al Phelps (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kevin Anderson (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison) III.63: Building New Engineering Education Theory and Practice for Interdisciplinary Pervasive Computing Design Lisa McNair (Virginia Tech), Kahyun Kim (Virginia Tech), Tom Martin (Virginia Tech), Ron Kemnitzer (Virginia Tech), Jason Forsyth (Virginia Tech), Ed Dorsa (Virginia Tech), Eloise Coupey (Virginia Tech) Session IV: Tuesday, March 15, 8:30 – 9:30 a.m. IV.1: Model Updating Cognitive Systems Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina) IV.2: Collaborative REU Program in Smart Structures Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina), GunJin Yun (University of Akron), Richard Christenson (University of Connecticut) IV.3: Nano in a Global Context for Engineering Students Navid Saleh (University of South Carolina), Ann Johnson (University of South Carolina), Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina) IV.4: CAREER: Implementing K-­‐12 Engineering Standards through STEM Integration Tamara Moore (University of Minnesota) IV.5: University Education for ERC Partners, HBCU and African Engineering Programs – SMART LIGHTING ERC Kenneth Connor (RPI SMART LIGHTING ERC), Elizabeth Herkenham (), Dianna Newman (), Meghan Morris (), Thomas Little (), Gretchen Fougere (), Steven Hersee (), Charles Joenathan (), Mohamed Chouikha (), Peter Bofah (), Charles Kim (), Craig Scott (), Yacob IV.6: Integrated Outreach Across Age Groups and Institutions for K-­‐12 and University Students and K-­‐14 Teachers – SMART LIGHTING ERC Kenneth Connor (RPI SMART LIGHTING ERC), Elizabeth Herkenham (), Thomas Little (), Gretchen Fougere (), Steven Hersee (), Charles Joenathan (), Deborah Walter (), Mohamed Chouikha (), Peter Bofah (), Craig Scott (), Yacob Astatke (), Judith O'Rourke (), W IV.7: Introducing Nanotechnology into the Thermal and Fluids Curricula: A Multi-­‐Department, Modular Laboratory Diana-­‐Andra Borca-­‐Tasciuc (RPI), Theodorian Borca-­‐Tasciuc (), Amir Hirsa (), Joel Plawsky () IV.8: Engineering Students' Attitudes and Threshold Concepts Towards Sustainability and Engineering as Environmental Career Johannes Strobel (Purdue University), Nicole Weber (Purdue University), Melissa Dyehouse (Purdue University), Jun Fang (Purdue University), Constance Harris (Purdue University) IV.9: Preparedness Portfolios and Portfolio Studios Jennifer Turns (University of Washington) IV.10: Encouraging Diversity in Engineering through a Virtual Engineering Sciences Learning Lab Stephanie August (Loyola Marymount University), Michele Hammers (Loyola Marymount University) IV.11: How Can You Get There If You Don’t Know Where You Are Going? A theory for understanding the lack of interest among domestic students in the engineering PhD Michelle Howell Smith (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln), Namas Chandra (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln) IV.12: A Unified Framework for Remote Laboratory Experiments Xuemin Chen (Texas Southern University), Claudio Olmi (University of Houston), Bo Cao (University of Houston), Gangbing Song (University of Houston) IV.13: The Civil Engineering Sketch Workbooks – Mechanix-­‐Free Body Tracy Hammond (Texas A&M University), Tony Cahill (Texas A&M University), Martin Field (Texas A&M University) IV.14: Chemical Engineering Undergraduate Curriculum Reform Charles Glover (Texas A&M University), Mahmoud El-­‐Halwagi (Texas A&M University), Lale Yurttas (Texas A&M University), Larissa Pchenitchnaia (Texas A&M University), Patrick Mills (Texas A&M University Kingsville), Irvin Osborne-­‐Lee (Prairie View A&M University) IV.15: Exploratory Study of a University Partnership with Three Non-­‐Metropolitan Community Colleges Mary Anderson-­‐Rowland (Arizona State University) IV.16: Learning to Innovate Through Bioinspired Design Julie Linsey (Texas A&M University), Daniel McAdams (), Michael Glier (Texas A&M University) IV.17: Acquisition of Instrumentation to Support a Multi-­‐disciplinary Acoustic Laboratory for Faculty and Student Research at Union College Palmyra Catravas (Union College), Helen Hanson (Union College) IV.18: Engineering the Common Good John Duffy (U Mass Lowell), Linda Barrington (U Mass Lowell), Manuel Heredia (U Mass Lowell) IV.19: Formative Feedback: Impacting the Quality of First-­‐Year Engineering Student Work on Modeling Activities Monica Cardella (Purdue University), Heidi Diefes-­‐Dux (Purdue University) IV.20: Students' Understanding of Human-­‐Centered Design and the Impact of Service Learning Monica Cardella (Purdue University), William Oakes (Purdue University) IV.21: Reforming Environmental Engineering Laboratories for Sustainable Engineering: Development of Problem Based Learning and Case Studies for an Environmental Engineering Lab Course Stephanie Luster-­‐Teasley (North Carolina A&T State Univ), Cynthia Waters (NCAT) IV.22: A Practical Approach to Integrating Nanotechnology Education into the Undergraduate Curriculum Dhananjay Kumar (NCAT), Devdas Pai (NCAT), Sergey Yarmolenko (NCAT), Cynthia Waters (NCAT), Robin Liles (NCAT) IV.23: Education and Outreach Update: ERC for Revolutionizing Metallic Biomaterials Devdas Pai (NCAT) IV.24: NUE: Nanophotonics Modules for Diverse Curricular Incorporation Albert Titus (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Alexander Cartwright (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Natalia Litchinitser (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Vladimir Mitin (University at Buffalo, SUNY) IV.25: “NUE: Nanotechnology for Manufacturing Flexible Electronics” at Binghamton University Howard Wang (Binghamton University) IV.26: Nano Technology and Engineering Education in Maine Rosemary Smith (University of Maine) IV.27: Introduction of Nanotechnology in Introduction to Materials Science for Engineers Daniel Lewis (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) IV.28: WEPAN Knowledge Center: Expanding Access to Research-­‐Based Practices to Advance Women in STEM, www.wepanknowledgecenter.org C. Diane Matt (WEPAN) IV.29: Learning Nano and Bionanotechnologies through Educational Games Development (RET Supplement: NSF EEC-­‐0836680: NUE: Development of the NanoEngineering Minor Option (NEMO) at the University of Houston) Andrey Koptelov (University of Houston/HISD) IV.30: Gen-­‐III ERC Center for Integrated Access Networks Education Programs Frances Williams (CIAN), Meredith Kupinski (), Arlene Maclin () IV.31: Responsible Research in Action Posters Chloe Lake (University of Buffalo), Katherine McComas (Cornell University), Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University) IV.32: NNIN iREU: An International Undergraduate Research Experience in Nanotechnology Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University), Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology) IV.33: Nanooze: Nanotechnology Magazine for Kids Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University), Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology), Carl Batt (Cornell University) IV.34: The NNIN RET Program in Nanoscale Science and Engineering Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology), Angela Berenstein (University of California Santa Barbara), Gary Harris (Howard University), Kathryn Hollar (Harvard University), Ron Redwing (Pennsylvania State University) IV.35: RET Site: Bioengineering Toolkits for 4th and 5th Grade Teachers (BET 4 Teachers) Lisa Friis (University of Kansas), Erin Lewis (University of Kansas), Lisa Blair (Greenbush -­‐ Southeast Kansas Education Service Center) IV.36: ‘Shaping Inquiry from Feedstock to Tailpipe’ to Promote a SHIFT in Science Instruction Claudia Bode (University of Kansas), Susan Stagg-­‐Williams (University of Kansas), Lisa Blair (Greenbush -­‐ Southeast Kansas Education Service Center) IV.37: Rutgers University Research Experience for Teachers in Engineering (RU RET-­‐E) Kimberly Cook-­‐Chennault (Rutgers, the State University), Evelyn Laffey (Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey) IV.38: SWEET -­‐ Summer at WSU -­‐ Engineering Expereinces for Teachers (RET Site) Richard Zollars (Washington State University) IV.39: On A Research Experience for Teachers in Manufacturing for Competitiveness in the US (RETainUS): Goals, Plans, Implementation and Lessons Learned Mohamed Abdelrahman (Texas A&M Uni.-­‐Kingsville), Holly Anthony (Tennessee Technological University) IV.40: Introducing Engineering into the Middle School Math Classroom Jackie Mitts (Stillwater Public Schools) IV.41: West Virginia Research Experience for Teachers Site Darran Cairns (West Virginia University), Nigel Clark (West Virginia University) IV.42: The Joule Fellows: Teachers in Sustainable Energies Research Laboratories Kazem Kazerounian (University of Connecticut), Aida Ghiaei (University of Connecticut), Zahra Shahbazi (University of Connecticut) IV.43: NUE: Interdisciplinary Course – Nanoscale Transport Phenomena for Manufacturing Nanodevices Zhiyong Gu (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Bridgette Budhlall (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Hongwei Sun (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Carol Barry (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Alfred Donatelli (University of Massachusetts Lowell) IV.44: Incorporating Ethical Decisions into Nanomanufacturing Research Carol Barry (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Jacqueline Isaacs (Northeastern University), Ronald Sandler (Northeastern University) IV.45: Evaluating E. coli at Potential Charles River Swimming Locations Kellie Burtch (Innovation Academy Charter Sch) IV.46: REU Site: Microscale Sensing, Actuation and Imaging (MoSAIc) Sriram Sundararajan (Iowa State University), Pranav Shrotriya (Iowa State University) IV.47: EEREU @ Penn State: Research Toward Applications Sven Bilen (Penn State), Kenneth Jenkins (Penn State) IV.48: Rutgers-­‐NSF REU in Cellular Bioengineering Charles Roth (Rutgers University) IV.49: Relative Effectiveness of Different Modes of Education Abroad Jan Helge Bøhn (Virginia Tech) IV.50: Sustainable Energy Alternatives and the Advanced Materials Sylvia Thomas (University of South Florida) IV.51: Education Activities at the Engineering Research Center for Mid-­‐InfraRed Technologies for Health and the Environment (MIRTHE) Roxanne Zellin (MIRTHE) IV.52: Investigating the Elevated Temperature Effect on Carbon Nanotube-­‐Superacid Solutions Rooservelt Akume (Rice University), Anson Ma (CBEN) IV.53: Biology on a Chip Internship Program (BioChIP) for Quantitative Biological Experiments and Molecular Diagnostics on Chip Luke Lee (UC Berkeley), Megan Dueck (UC Berkeley) IV.54: SUNFEST: A Dynamic REU Program in Sensor Technology Valerie Lundy-­‐Wagner (New York University), Jan Van der Spiegel (University of Pennsylvania) IV.55: Objectives, Approach, Benefits, Outcomes and Deliverables of Summer REU in Hybrid Electric and Plug-­‐In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Alireza Khaligh (Illinois Institute of Tech) IV.56: A Bi-­‐Directional, High Power Quality Grid Interface with a Novel Bi-­‐Directional Non-­‐Inverted Buck-­‐
Boost Converter for PHEVs Jonathan Kobayashi (Illinois Institute of Tech), Alireza Khaligh (Illinois Institute of Tech) IV.57: AERIM Automotive and Energy-­‐themed REU Program: Organization, Activities, Outcomes and Lessons Learned Laila Guessous (Oakland University), Qian Zou (Oakland University) IV.58: Scuffing Resistance of Surface Treated 8625 Alloy Steels Michael Krak (Ohio Northern University), Brooke Ropp (Oakland University), James Tilden (Rowan University), Gary Barber (Oakland University), Qian Zou (Oakland University), Laila Guessous (Oakland University) IV.59: REU Site in Robotics and Autonomous Systems Mohammad Noori (Cal Poly), Christopher Clark (Cal Poly) IV.60: Computational Model of Optical Coherence Tomography in Lung Tissue: A Need For Speed! Joseph Robinson (Northeastern University) IV.61: MOBILE ROBOTIC NAVIGATION AIDE FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED STUDENTS Wandalea Woods (Stone Memorial High School) IV.62: InTEL: Interactive Toolkit for Engineering Learning Contextualizing Statics Problems to Expand and Retain Women and URM Engineers Janet Murray (Georgia Tech), Sue Rosser (Georgia Tech), Laurence Jacobs (Georgia Tech), John Leonard (Georgia Tech), Wendy Newstetter (Georgia Tech), Christine Valle (Georgia Tech), Calvin Ashmore (Georgia Tech) IV.63: Connecting Rural Students to Authentic STEM Research Anthony Geist (TTU RET) Poster Session I: Monday, March 14, 11 a.m. -­‐ Noon I.1: Influence of Social Capital on Under-­‐Represented Engineering Students’ Academic and Career Decisions Julie Trenor (Clemson University) The United States faces an urgent need to increase the number and diversity of engineering students at the undergraduate level, and ultimately, in graduate studies and the workforce. Despite significant efforts over the last few decades to increase participation of under-­‐represented groups in engineering, progress has been disturbingly slow. The time has come to re-­‐conceptualize our theoretical approach to diversifying the field of engineering. The PI’s prior work suggests that students’ decisions to select engineering as a college major and to persist in undergraduate engineering studies are influenced by social capital, and that women, under-­‐represented minorities, and first generation college students—
the focus of this CAREER research—may utilize different mechanisms for developing, accessing, and activating social capital. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? These prior data-­‐driven studies strongly suggest that a well-­‐developed conceptual model for describing how engineering students utilize social capital in making academic and career decisions shows promise as a new paradigm for diversifying the field. The PI extends an established theoretical framework—social capital—to the field of engineering education. Social capital is defined in this work as “an additional pool of resources embedded in the social networks of individuals, which can help to achieve individual goals in conjunction with, or instead of, personal resources”. The PI is the first to apply the theoretical framework of social capital to explain engineering students’ academic and career choices, building on its extensive literature by researchers in many other fields. This research advances fundamental knowledge related to diversifying the field of engineering by elucidating ways that social capital influences decisions of under-­‐represented students in engineering, and perhaps contributes to their differential participation. The specific goals of this NSF CAREER project are to (1) build a conceptual model for understanding how engineering undergraduates develop, access and activate social capital in making academic and career decisions, (2) identify and characterize the potentially distinct mechanisms by which under-­‐represented students (especially female, African American, Hispanic and first generation college students) utilize social ties that link them to resources related to engineering studies and (3) implement an education plan that provides research-­‐to-­‐practice training for university engineering outreach, recruitment, and retention practitioners using webinars and workshops as learning forums. Data will be collected from a diverse sample of engineering undergraduates at seven public institutions, representing a variety of student body characteristics, Carnegie 2000 classifications, and locations. The PI has adapted quantitative techniques commonly used by social scientists for social network mapping and social capital measurement to the specific context of engineering students’ academic and career decisions. The adapted survey instrument is currently being administered to approximately 1,500 students. Group-­‐level patterns in survey data will be identified using descriptive statistics and cluster analysis. Interviews with at least 75 participants will deepen understanding of how these patterns relate to individual experience and will form the basis for development of the conceptual model. The PI will integrate research and education through research-­‐to-­‐practice learning forums for engineering outreach, recruitment and retention practitioners at the seven participating institutions, thereby building capacity for research-­‐based programming and practices for the thousands of females, under-­‐
represented minority, and first generation college students enrolled at those schools. As part of the education plan, the PI will deliver a series of conference workshops and nationally advertised webinars for personnel at institutions across the country. Webinars, hosted by the NSF-­‐funded WEPAN Knowledge Center, will provide interactive, affordable, archive-­‐able and synchronous training for participants in multiple geographic locations. Webinars will be archived on the Clemson webpage and project results will be catalogued and featured on the WEPAN Knowledge Center. I.2: Global Engineering Work Practices Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Hon Jie Teo (), Akshay Kota (Industrial Design, Virginia Tech) This project addresses the need to prepare engineers with requisite experiences and training to successfully engage with the global economy. Through this project several field studies of global engineering work are being undertaken to better understand how engineers work in a global environment. The field studies include data collection through qualitative and quantitative methods. The project will result in a better understanding of issues faced by engineers working in a global context. The target audiences are students, faculty, and engineering practitioners. So far, the project results have identified how technology can be successfully leveraged to create better working conditions in global engineering team work. Through field studies we have also identified the problems that occur due to problems in perspective-­‐taking across geographical locations. We are working on developing case studies using data collected as part of this research. So far we have developed drafts of five case studies that we plan to release online by the end of summer. These case studies will also be used in courses being taught as part of this project. I.3: Collaborative Research: Newcomer Participation in Online Learning Communities Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Vandana Singh (), Raktim Mitra (), Sheeji Kathuria () The increase of online learning is on the increase within engineering education but we know little about these environments, particularly from the perspective of newcomers. It is essential to design online learning environments that productively foster online learning. We are using a mixed methods approach that includes interviews, surveys, and online archival data to analysis online learning participation. For this project, our target research communities are open source software forums. This project will result in design and use guidelines for online learning and will target faculty as well as students. So far, our research explicates the relationship between experts and newcomers in online communities. We have developed a characterization of different kinds of newcomers and the different ways in which they need to be supported. We have published several papers in conference proceedings, which are available online. We are working on developing a set of guidelines based on our research that we plan to release when the project ends. I.4: Interactive Knowledge Networks for Engineering Education Research (iKNEER) Krishna Madhavan (Purdue University), Hanjun Xian (Purdue University), Aditya Johri (Virginia Tech), Mihaela Vorvoreanu (Purdue University), Brent Jesiek (Purdue University), Phil Wankat (Purdue University) The dramatic expansion of knowledge production within the engineering education research problem space calls for new methods and tools to synthesize and characterize the state of knowledge production in the problem space. We use a combination of ultra large-­‐scale data mining, social network analyses, user-­‐centered design, and field-­‐based research methods to build, test, and deploy an interactive knowledge platform called iKNEER. iKNEER provides a single point of synthesis for knowledge products produced within the engineering education problem space. This research will introduce new transformative techniques from the field of social networking analysis and large-­‐scale data mining to improve our understanding of the state of knowledge in the field of Engineering Education Research (EER). Emerging insights from the iKNEER projects are beginning to shed light into the nature and topology of the knowledge networks within the engineering education problem space. It is showing how capacity building is occurring and also how innovations can propagate within the problem space. iKNEER -­‐ which is a web-­‐based interactive knowledge platform -­‐ is itself the primary deliverable for this project. Research results are also important products emerging from this project. I.5: CAREER: Advancing engineering education through learner-­‐centric, adaptive cyber-­‐tools and cyber-­‐environments Krishna Madhavan (Purdue University) Engineering cyber-­‐environments focus generally on the underlying technologies, toolsets, and content. However, they are used heavily in the engineering curricula. This project examines how cyber-­‐
environments can be designed so that they are more learner-­‐centric than content-­‐centric. The theoretical framework for this work is a synthesis of situated learning theory and theories of semantic web (a new and evolving area of study in computing that has major implica-­‐tions for future cyber-­‐tools and cyber-­‐environments). This project will lead to engineering cyber-­‐environments that incorporate learners' needs as a core part of their design. It will also lead to better personalization of learning experiences when using cyber-­‐environments. This project will lead to new insights into cyber-­‐
environments can be designed such that they are more learner-­‐centric. It will also shed light into the decision processes (among faculty members) when using cyber-­‐environments for their curricular needs. This work will also lead to semantic descriptions of learner characteristics that can be translated to algorithms for facilitating learning. The primary deliverables for this project are insights into how learning can be facilitated within cyber-­‐environments. We also attempt to develop design requirements that can be utilized when building and deploying engineering cyber-­‐environments. I.6: Global Concepts to Action Roadmap: Engineering Education and Engineering Competency Yi Shen (Purdue University), Yating Chang (Purdue University), Brent Jesiek (Purdue University), Eckhard Groll (Purdue University), Dan Hirleman (Purdue University) The 2010 International Research and Education in Engineering (IREE) Program received more than 360 applicants and selected 58 students who spent 10-­‐12 weeks, during Summer 2010, working on frontier engineering research projects in university, industry, and government labs in China. The IREE Program was initiated by the National Science Foundation (ENG/EEC) in 2006 to promote enhancement of global competency of 21st century engineering professionals, development of collaborations with engineering researchers abroad, and providing students with opportunities to experience the life and culture of a another country. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of outcome assessments provided basis for further understanding of what contributed to a successful global engineering program. Subsequently, it also defines the need for engineering education reforms, including the development of global engineering programs that are effective and scalable. I.7: CAREER: An Exploration of Expert Teaching and Student Learning in Capstone Experiences Marie Paretti (Virginia Tech), James Pembridge (Virginia Tech) As the importance of design across the curriculum continues to grown, faculty and researchers alike need a deeper understanding of the nature of design teaching to insure effective student learning and support faculty development. To address this gap, this CAREER project, grant # 0846605, begins with the most well-­‐established domain of design teaching, the capstone course. It explores the question, “What constitutes expert teaching in the capstone environment?” By examining the epistemology of educators in this domain, the project provides a way to more effectively prepare current and future faculty to support student learning in design courses. The project uses a 3-­‐phase mixed methods approach to data collection and analysis. Phase 1 included the development and distribution of a quantitative national survey to capstone instructors. Survey items focused on the background and experience of the faculty, the topics covered in the course, and the types and frequency of faculty-­‐student interactions. Phase 2 involved qualitative interviewing of a sample of survey respondents using the Critical Decision Method to explore trends identified in the survey responses. This phase also involves the development and distribution of a survey to students in the interview participants’ capstone courses. The student surveys will triangulate with faculty responses with respect to classroom practices and will provide information about students’ self-­‐reported learning gains that will be correlated with faculty practices. The third and final phase will involve 5 qualitative case studies that combine intensive observation with interviews and focus groups. The CAREER grant is in Phase 2, with the distribution of student surveys in process. Findings from Phase 1 indicate that the typical course emphasizes ethics, project planning, and communication, with a growing emphasis on ethics, concept generation, and project planning. Moreover, faculty-­‐student interactions appear highly interpersonal and focused on activities typically associated with mentoring, suggesting key areas of development for future design faculty. Few capstone faculty, however, appear to be engaged in communities of practice around design education (conferences, workshops, publications). Preliminary findings from the interviews provide indicate that novice faculty use their own capstone and graduate experience to guide their pedagogy, whereas more experienced faculty use their numerous years of teaching to refine their pedagogy. In addition, issues surrounding collaboration tend to play a dominant role in faculty student-­‐interactions, and mentoring tends to center on team interactions. I.8: Lifting the Barriers: Understanding and Enhancing Approaches to Teaching Communication and Teamwork Among Engineering Faculty Holly Matusovich (Virginia Tech), Marie Paretti (Virginia Tech) Communication and teamwork skills remain top-­‐priority outcomes for engineering graduates in both academic and industry settings, however research that demonstrates effective strategies for the teaching and learning of these skills is limited. For example, despite increased focus on writing within engineering, few studies have examined faculty beliefs about writing and how they enact such beliefs in their teaching. Writing researchers have long known that standards, conventions, style, structure, and a host of other characteristics vary across disciplines, but even within even within a discipline, faculty often have different expectations regarding communication practices. Social interactions between faculty and students and legitimate peripheral participation play a significant role in shaping what students learn about communication (and likely about teamwork), yet we currently lack the mechanisms to understand how this happens in engineering curricula. We focus on communication and teamwork in tandem because the two are inextricably linked in both the classroom and the workplace. Moreover, effective teamwork requires effective communication at both formal and informal, interpersonal levels. Recent work in engineering education has investigated ways to characterize and assess teamwork skills, but does not address how students develop teamwork skills over time. Current studies are still far from providing the engineering education community with a robust, actionable understanding of the ways in which teamwork skills develop across a curriculum or how faculty beliefs and practices can influence that development. This study seeks to understand faculty and student beliefs regarding effective practice and transferable learning outcomes with respect to communication and teamwork and to articulate how well faculty and student beliefs are aligned. These data will allow us to enhance teaching by studying interventions that provide educators with both necessary knowledge and viable strategies for enacting that knowledge in the classroom. Our research explores faculty beliefs, the impacts of those beliefs on student development, and ultimately effective ways to influence these beliefs. However, to influence beliefs, we must first understand the current condition and identify both what changes are needed and how to best accomplish them. During Phase 1, we will use interviews, focus groups and surveys to generate new knowledge about faculty and student beliefs regarding communication and teamwork, and uncover gaps among faculty beliefs, student beliefs, and current research. In Phase 2, we will share the outcomes of Phase 1 with engineering education faculty and, considering their input, develop strategies for more effective teaching and learning of communication skills and knowledge dissemination approaches. In Phase 3 of the project, we will implement and study the strategies to better understand faculty transformation and compare relative effectiveness. Preliminary data analysis from Phase 1 interviews suggest that engineering faculty devise their teaching strategies based upon what they value within their own professional and academic experiences and that these experiences influence the types of projects, assessments and teaching methods used. We anticipate these data will provide insight into faculty beliefs regarding the teaching of teamwork and communication, and provide a foundation for developing strategies to improve those practices. I.9: Empirically-­‐based Instructional Tools for Fostering Engineering Problem Solving and Cognitive Flexibility in Pre-­‐college Students Martin Reisslein (Arizona State University), Roxana Moreno (Univ. of New Mexico), Amy Johnson (Univ. of Memphis), Gamze Ozogul (Arizona State University) 1. Need: What need are you addressing? This project addresses the need to develop, assess, and disseminate instructional techniques aimed at fostering pre-­‐college students’ problem solving skills and self-­‐efficacy in engineering. We systematically examine how pre-­‐college students’ learning and perceptions about learning are affected by the instructional design of engineering education. In particular, we examine the impact of abstract vs. contextualized representations, practice problem (fading) sequencing, feedback, and signaling using pedagogical agents. Unlike other State and Federal funded programs that focus primarily on curriculum development for pre-­‐college engineering education, our goal is to provide a set of guidelines for the design of engineering instruction that promotes problem solving skills and cognitive flexibility. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? We conduct clinical studies (randomized controlled trials) with pre-­‐college students in engineering outreach programs targeting young women and minorities in Arizona and New Mexico. We employ computer-­‐based learning modules in our experiments. Our evaluations' data sources are a combination of quantitative data collected from the paper and pencil instruments (such as pretests and posttests) and the computerized environments (such as log data of student practice performance and attitudinal questionnaires). 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? The main intellectual merit benefit of this project is to provide fundamental advances in the learning science of engineering through scientifically-­‐based instructional designs that foster engineering problem solving skills in pre-­‐college students. The main broader impact benefit is to expose and train underrepresented minorities in engineering principles through our experimental studies in middle and high schools in Arizona and New Mexico. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? From our experiments addressing the abstract vs. contextualized representation question, we found that abstract representation tends to foster problem solving skills more effectively than contextualized representation even at the middle and high school level. Regarding the fading and feedback strategies, we found that: (a) receiving feedback immediately after attempting each problem-­‐solving step fosters learning, and (b) students who learned with backward-­‐fading practice produced higher near-­‐ and far-­‐
transfer scores when feedback included the solution of a similar worked-­‐out problem. Initial data analysis for the signaling question revealed a significant agent effect in that signaling with the peer animated pedagogical agent resulted in significantly better posttest performance than the same signaling with an arrow. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? Our research has resulted in several conference presentations as well as two articles in the Journal of Engineering Education, one article in the Journal of Educational Psychology, and one article in the Journal of Media Psychology which all ensure wide distribution among education researchers. Our instructional module presentations have increased awareness of the area of electrical engineering for over 1200 middle and high school students, a large portion of them females and underrepresented minorities. The students have also acquired basic knowledge in electrical circuit analysis which helps in relating math and physics to real-­‐world technology and been exposed to the possibility of pursuing studies and careers in engineering. I.10: Instructional Sequences in Pre-­‐College Engineering Education Martin Reisslein (Arizona State University), Roxana Moreno (Univ. of New Mexico), Amy Johnson (Univ. of Memphis), Gamze Ozogul (Arizona State University) 1. Need: What need are you addressing? This project addresses the need for improved engineering education for middle and high school pre-­‐college students. While outreach programs have developed curricula and organizational structures for educating pre-­‐college students in engineering, there is a scarcity of research examining the cognitive aspects of instructional designs for pre-­‐college students who are novices in engineering. The focus of this research is on dynamic instructional sequences that serve the changing needs of learners as they advance in their skill acquisition from novice learner to competent problem solvers. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? We conduct clinical studies (randomized controlled trials) with pre-­‐college students in engineering outreach programs targeting young women and minorities in Arizona. We employ computer-­‐based learning modules in our experiments. Our evaluations' data sources are a combination of quantitative data collected from the paper and pencil instruments (such as pretests and posttests) and the computerized environments (such as log data of student practice performance and attitudinal questionnaires). 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? The main intellectual merit benefit of this project is to provide fundamental advances in the learning science of engineering through scientifically-­‐based instructional designs that foster engineering problem solving skills in pre-­‐college students. The main broader impact benefit is to expose and train underrepresented minorities in engineering principles through our experimental studies in middle and high schools in Arizona and New Mexico. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? We are in the first few months of this project and have so far completed extensive reviews of the existing research literature on the sequencing of representation types (such as abstract and contextualized), of worked and practice problems, and feedback strategies. We are in the process of refining our research questions and designing the corresponding instructional interventions. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? At this early stage in the project we have no concrete deliverables. As the project advances we plan to reach over 1000 pre-­‐college students through our instructional interventions and provide them with instruction on engineering principles. Through our research we plan to make significant contributions to the instructional design of dynamic engineering learning materials for novice learners. I.11: Online and Networked Education for Students in Transfer Engineering Programs Amelito Enriquez (Canada College) The California Community College system has been very successful in providing affordable and accessible education to diverse student populations by allowing them to complete all of their lower-­‐
division course work and then transfer to a four-­‐year institution to complete a bachelor’s degree. Recent developments, however, have threatened the viability of engineering programs in California community colleges, endangering this very important pipeline in the engineering educational system. The increasing divergence of the lower-­‐division requirements among different four-­‐year institutions and among the different fields of engineering, coupled with the recent State budget crisis has forced many community colleges to cancel low-­‐enrollment classes and high-­‐cost programs including those in engineering. In response to this situation, Cañada College, a federally designated Hispanic-­‐serving institution in the San Francisco Bay Area, has developed an innovative program entitled Online and Networked Education for Students in Transfer Engineering Programs (ONE-­‐STEP). Funded by the National Science Foundation Engineering Education and Centers through the Innovation in Engineering Education and Curriculum, and Infrastructure (IEECI) program, ONE-­‐STEP aims to improve community college engineering education through the use of Tablet-­‐PC and wireless network technologies. The program includes a Summer Engineering Teaching Institute that will assist community college engineering faculty in developing a Tablet-­‐PC-­‐enhanced interactive model of engineering instruction, and implementing online courses using CCC Confer—a videoconferencing platform that is available free of charge to all faculty and staff of the California Community College system. The project will also develop partnerships with community colleges currently without an engineering program or limited engineering course offerings to design and implement a Joint Engineering Program that is delivered through CCC Confer. The program has the potential to significantly increase the viability of engineering programs by increasing teaching efficiency and effectiveness with minimal additional costs. I.12: Virtual Reality Games Promoting Engineering Literacy and Problem Solving Ying Tang (Rowan University), Sachin Shetty (Tennessee State University), Xiufang Chen (Rowan University) There is an increasing awareness among engineering faculty that our students lack effective metacognitive and problem-­‐solving strategies, which poses significant barriers to their learning. The research basis of our work is that providing students with explicit strategy instructions improves their comprehension and learning. This project presents such a work that develops a virtual reality theme-­‐
based game system where circuit analysis an digital logic are the themes and engineers solving real-­‐life problems are the scenes. Deploying the games as a replacement for the traditional laboratory setting of the four target courses, this approach immerses students in actual engineering design challenges where a selection of metacognitive and problem-­‐solving strategies is unfolded. With no additional software and hardware required, the game system can be installed, configured, and run in any personal computer, making our development cost effective and easily transportable I.13: Integrating Professional Ethics into Graduate Engineering Courses Michael Davis (Illinois Institute of Technolo) We undertook (among other things) to integrate ethics into graduate engineering classes at three universities-­‐-­‐and to assess success in a way allowing comparison across classes (and institutions). My presentation describes the attempt to carry out that assessment. Standard methods of assessment turned out to demand too much class time. Under pressure from instructors, we developed an alternative method that is both specific in content to individual classes and allows comparison across classes. Results are statistically significant for ethical sensitivity and knowledge. They show measurable improvement in a single semester. I.14: Planting Seeds of Transformation: The faculty's process of rediscovering meaning Lizabeth Schlemer (California Polytechnic State University), Roger Burton (), Linda Vanasupa (California Polytechnic State U) Recent studies of engineering curricula indicate that the dominant engineering education pedagogy continues to be traditional lectures and cook-­‐book style laboratories, despite the evidence of a wide range of more effective alternatives. A study commissioned by the Nation Academies asserts that the resistance to change is caused by change initiatives that neglect the human part of the academic system, rather than a lack of scientific understanding of how people learn engineering. Our study addresses the need to discover new ways to grow transformational change in the human system of academia. Our approach has been to create a strong "social fabric" through the process of building capacity to understand, envision, enact and asses change. Through a series of workshops, we have initiated what is essentially a learning community on change. Rather than an abstracted intellectualization of change models, the emphasis of the workshops has been situated change experiments in ones' own lives. These workshops have been completely voluntary and without external motivators, such as stipends or meals. We hope our work will serve as a model of how others can initiate a sustainable transformation process within their institutions. The audience for the work is anyone interested in initiating change in an academic setting. To date, over 40 people have participated in change workshops and reported an overall greater experience of well-­‐being, citing increased ability for reflection, greater personal development as a change agent, and experiencing a sense of community. In short, participants report an experiencing a greater degree of the psychological needs that traditionally fall within the growth or relationship dimensions of Alderfer's model of human needs or the higher-­‐order of needs in Maslov's hierarchy of needs. These intrinsic benefits, as reported by the participants, are serving as the motivation for continued involvement in the learning community on change. The products of our research are the personal narratives of change experienced by the participants. We are leveraging the impact through having established (a priori) the support structure for enacting and measuring change across campus. The form of these change initiatives are cross-­‐disciplinary faculty and community collaborations on community-­‐based projects, cross-­‐disciplinary international research collaborations on sustainable community design, several course-­‐level field tests on new pedagogies, and personal leadership initiatives. I.15: Enable Project-­‐Based Learning of Ecodesign Method Development and Curriculum Reform Fu Zhao (Purdue University) Increasing environmental concerns, coupled with public pressure and stricter regulations are fundamentally impacting the way companies design and launch new products across the world. As a result, companies are confronted with the responsibility of designing/re-­‐designing products for environmental friendliness. This requires the next generation of engineers to be trained in the context of sustainability with an international perspective in order to solve complex problems at both local and global scales. Due to already extensive undergraduate traditional engineering curricula, it is essential to embed relevant ecodesign education initiatives within existing engineering courses. This involves incorporating streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) techniques specifically related to product design. In previous work, the function impact method (FIM) was presented as a novel eco-­‐design methodology that facilitates the use of LCA data to support the integration of sustainability concepts during the early design phase to support ecodesign. The core idea behind the FIM is to distribute the life cycle environmental impacts across product functions. The method of introduction of FIM and other available ecodesign tools to engineering students has been two-­‐fold: (1) a week course module (i.e. three one-­‐
hour lectures) on ecodesign tools within ME597 (Sustainable Design & Manufacturing) and (2) a design critique module with a focus on sustainability within ME553 (Product & Process Design). I.16: From Defense to Degree: Accelerating Engineering Degree Opportunities for Military Veterans David Soldan (Kansas State University), Noel Schulz (Kansas State University), Don Gruenbacher (Kansas State University), Blythe Vogt (Kansas State University), Rekha Natarajan (Kansas State University) This paper addresses curricular issues involved in integrating post-­‐9/11 veterans into the engineering workforce. A 2009 NSF Workshop on Enhancing the Post-­‐9/11 Veterans Educational Benefit indicates that new, more generous veterans’ educational benefits create an opportunity to expand the technical workforce while benefitng those who have served our country. The workshop further indicates that the veterans include a diverse and qualified pool of future talent for the nation’s engineering and science employers. There are two main aspects to this project: (1) an accelerated track for veterans into engineering bachelor’s degrees in engineering for those with no bachelor’s degree or with a non-­‐
technical degree and (2) bridging to engineering master’s degrees for those with bachelor’s degrees in technical non-­‐engineering areas. The initial focus will be in the renewable energy and energy distribution systems areas. Energy has been identified as a critical area where there is a large projected shortage of trained technical personnel. A 2008 NSF Workshop on the Future Power Engineering Workforce indicated “a serious need is emerging for more power and energy engineers.” The IEEE Power and Energy Society has also indicated that “Immediate action must be taken to avoid letting a growing shortage of well-­‐qualified electric power engineers slow progress in meeting critical national objectives.” This paper will focus on the accelerated track for military veterans into bachelor’s degrees in engineering. It is important to have contact with the military veteran prior to their arriving on campus to begin their schooling. An initial thorough evaluation of the veterans’ training, experiences, and expertise will be conducted with the option of granting academic credit where appropriate. Current policies give little credit for military experience or training. The development of on-­‐line pre and post assessments and subject based tutorials will be used to accelerate the veteran’s entry into the traditional math sequence. The creation of accelerated courses specifically for veterans enrolled in the program will be another aspect used to accelerate degree completion. Veterans may have a base of technical knowledge acquired through the technical nature of their service posts. Assigning them to introductory level courses with traditional freshman and sophomore students does not respect their technical expertise nor challenge their capabilities and accustomed pace. Another aspect of this project is the inclusion of summer internships for participants. Student success in the accelerated courses and follow-­‐on courses will be the primary evaluation metric. This evaluation will take place when a significant number of students are in the program. There are many additional support structures that may or may not be available on any given campus. Key components of this program include the development of strategies to inform veterans of engineering workforce opportunities and the recruitment activities, and coordination with campus military veteran support staff and personnel at nearby military installations. I.17: The Role of International Students in Domestic Engineering Graduate Student Recruitment and Retention Erin Crede (Virginia Tech), Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) The purpose of this sequential exploratory mixed methods research study is to develop a clearer understanding of the role that international students play in establishing the culture of a graduate engineering community, such as a department or research group, with particular emphasis on how this community affects domestic student recruitment and retention. This will be accomplished by addressing two major issues: 1) How international students effect graduate research group culture, and 2) how does this impact the undergraduate students decision to enroll in graduate school? The aim of the current presentation will be to discuss the results of the ethnographic observations and interviews, along with the development of the multi-­‐institution survey. The first phase of the study was an ethnographically guided exploration of graduate research groups at one university, along with undergraduate student interviews. This data was used to inform the second phase of the study: development and subsequent use of a pair of survey instruments at four additional universities. Detailed information will be presented regarding both phases of the study, including participants, types of data collected, data analysis techniques, and how the data was mixed. The current status of the project, as well as preliminary findings will also be presented. I.18: Collaborative Research: Use and Knowledge of Research-­‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) As engineering education research expands in quality and quantity, broad adoption of Research-­‐Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) such as collaborative learning, just-­‐in-­‐time teaching, and problem-­‐based learning may now be a rate-­‐limiting step to improving engineering education. Stakeholders speculate that core engineering courses, still taught in passive, large lecture formats, are a critical issue, but data is lacking. We focus specifically on engineering science courses (specifically: circuits, electronics, fluid mechanics, introductory digital logic and/or digital design, thermodynamics, and transport (heat/mass transfer)), because they appear to be the most resistant to change. We are continuing our previous IEECI research with a mixed method study (survey and case studies) of engineering faculty members’ knowledge and use of RBIS. Approximately 1500 engineering sciences faculty members in U.S. chemical and electrical/computer engineering departments will be surveyed about instructional behaviors and knowledge and use of specific RBIS. Then, we will use survey results to identify two institutions for case studies. These case studies, employing interviews and observations, will capture the complex reasoning behind decisions to use various RBIS in engineering sciences. Characterizing knowledge and use of RBIS will help to increase adoption of the RBIS under study as well as inform future dissemination efforts. Survey results will help to identify bottlenecks or rate limiting steps, and theory can inform targeted interventions. Our partnership with AIChE and IEEE engineering professional society leaders will help increase our response rate, as well as broadly disseminate our findings (which will necessarily reference the research base supporting RBIS). We hope our partnerships with leaders from these disciplinary societies will serve as a model for future efforts across more engineering and STEM disciplines. Additionally, this project is also a joint venture between physics education and engineering education, which, given the parallel lines of research, is likely to promote a long-­‐term collaboration. Further, in a time of tightening economic constraints on government spending, this research may ultimately influence funding levels for engineering education research and curriculum innovation projects. I.19: Student Socialization in Interdisciplinary Doctoral Education Stephanie Cutler (Virginia Tech), Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech) Interdisciplinary approaches are often seen as necessary for attacking the most critical challenges facing the world today, and doctoral students and their training programs are recognized as central to increasing interdisciplinary research capacity. However, the traditional culture and organization of higher education are ill-­‐equipped to facilitate interdisciplinary work. This study employs a lens of socialization to study the process through which students learn the norms, values, and culture of both traditional disciplines and integrated knowledge production. It concludes that many of the processes of socialization are similar, but that special attention should be paid to overcoming organizational barriers to interdisciplinarity related to policies, space, engagement with future employers, and open discussion of the politics of interdisciplinarity. I.20: Transitioning America’s Veterans to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Academic Programs Julia Narvaez (University of Washington), Barbara Endicott-­‐Popovsky (University of Washington) Considering the nation’s reliance on engineering fields of expertise and the shortage of graduates from these disciplines, transitioning veterans and active service personnel, with the proper encouragement and facilitative environments, could impact the numbers of engineering graduates. Many military occupations fall into the science and technology areas, however veterans’ experience in these jobs does not always translate into a desire to pursue Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields of study or related vocations. America has significant numbers of military personnel transitioning from military service and returning to the workforce. Some 2.1M of today’s veterans are eligible for the GI bill which expands educational benefits. Coordinated by the University of Washington (UW), this grant focuses on assisting and encouraging transitioning veterans and personnel in the military with entering into academic programs, particularly those in STEM fields of study. Our approach is the implementation of a pilot of a multi-­‐pronged support program. The pilot comprises recruitment, preparation, and mentorship of an initial cohort of veterans who wish to transition from the military into academic programs, including STEM disciplines. To assist students with proper mathematics background to fulfill enrollment requirements of a program, math boot camps are offered through Highline Community College (HCC). Cohort recruiting is accomplished through the Washington National Guard (NGWA) Employment Transition Services team, which interfaces with every branch of the military, and is linked to all of the Transition Assistance Programs throughout the State. Career decision-­‐making and educational readiness assessments, as well as employment transition coaches for those in the pilot program, are provided by the NGWA. Plans for accommodation of students with disabilities are coordinated with Veterans Offices of UW and HCC. Plans include feedback from UW Accessible Technology. The end objective of this grant is to define strategies for attracting America’s transitioning veterans to academic programs, particularly to STEM disciplines. Expected benefits include (a) Growth of the numbers of veterans in engineering fields of study, helping to address the issue of shortage of graduates from such disciplines. (b) Increased numbers of students from historically underrepresented groups such as females and persons with disabilities. (c) Math boot camps that provide veterans with the necessary math background to be competitive in the academic environment. (d) Cultural orientation to assist students in transitioning from a structured military environment to the far less structured environment of academia. (e) Development of industry partnerships to provide summer internships for veterans, (f) Participants in grant #0951441 can gain lessons learned and improve their overall planning effort. The following are outcomes in different fronts of the grant: Math boot camp: HCC has one of the most innovative developmental educational programs for math in the US, which has streamlined the design of the math boot camps. This has enabled the grant to dedicate more resources towards tuition, resulting in a greater number of available spots in the boot camps. Identification of students, mentoring and counseling: NGWA has identified a methodology to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the soldiers, including current math level, skills, learning style, interests, and temperament. HCC uses the COMPASS test to measure the current math knowledge. During the project development, the need to support the preparation of students for advanced degrees, as well as students who wish to pursue studies in trades and apprenticeships have been perceived. It is paramount to provide the potential students with tools to help them make informed decisions regarding which career path they wish to pursue. The math boot camps will be a legacy of this grant. The grant has adopted the HCC’s math curriculum for the boot camps. Several boot camps will be held, with capacity for approx 70 students. Recruiting of potential students has started in January, 2011. A comprehensive evaluation to determine employment and educational readiness of the soldiers is being conducted by NGWA. Other products of this research include: A Job Outcomes Model/Math Requirements model to facilitate to put in perspective the student’s current math level with his/her desired career goal. A process to help potential students make informed decisions of career paths they can pursue. Such process has been documented to allow repeatability and its use by NGWA for training purposes. In addition, a select group of soldiers interested in using their GI bill benefits are being tracked through an information assurance certificate program as graduate-­‐nonmatriculated students. Each will be developed in a case study to allow us to study obstacles they face. I.21: A Collaborative Research Project: Using RoboBooks To Build Scalable K12-­‐Engineering Partnerships David Crismond (City College, CUNY), Morgan Hynes (Tufts University) This project adapted NSF-­‐funded instructional unit developed at Tufts to create a new RoboCart curriculum that operates on the Tufts’ RoboBook software platform. The RoboBook delivery system enables project leaders and teachers to customize materials to specific contexts and instructional needs. The RoboCart challenge had students design a LEGO robotic wheelchair/shopping cart system that would travel to the supermarket, shop there, and return with a cart full of groceries. The curriculum supported students in learning basic programming, strength of structures, modeling, interpreting distance-­‐time graphs, and engineering design. The project also collaboratively developed a new software tool, the Design Compass, which students use to record design steps they or others take. Teachers use Compass Logs to monitor students’ progress in learning to design; students use the histogram function to reflect upon the strategies they use as they perform their design work. The project ran two one-­‐week summer teacher workshops in 2009 for teachers in Boston and New York, where customized versions of the Robocart curriculum that addressed teachers’ interests and local Standards were introduced. In Boston, teachers focused on the Massachusetts Framework’s version of the engineering design process. The New York workshop addressed elements of a Design Strategies Matrix that was introduced to them: reasoning about tradeoffs, optimization, and troubleshooting. Teachers did pilot testing of materials in their classrooms the following fall. In 2010, a new Robobook curriculum that was based on the shopping cart challenge was developed and involved designing a Mars rover. A second summer workshop was run in 2010 in Syosset, NY, where project staff introduced still other revised curriculum and tools based on teacher feedback and observations. The focus here was on an improved version of the Design Compass software, and the introduction of a challenge to build a model skyscraper within given materials and within a budget that is tall, strong and stable. Finally, a Manual was created that supports other groups in building sustainable partnerships (faculty, teacher trainers and teachers) that use project materials to improve engineering education in their local contexts. I.22: The Role of Intentional Self-­‐regulation in Achievement for Engineering Morgan Hynes (Tufts University), Richard Lerner (Tufts University), Ann McKenna (Arizona State University), Megan Kiely (Tufts University), Chris Rogers (Tufts University) Life, or “soft,” skills are an important, but often overlooked, component of engineering education. The acquisition of such skills has been linked in adolescence to greater success in high school and in later life pursuits. Based on this research, we investigated the processes of intentional self-­‐regulation as indicative of positive, healthy or, more generally, adaptive behavior and development. Self-­‐regulation was measured as the selection [S] of positive goals (e.g., graduation from college with good grades in one’s chosen major); the optimization [O] of one’s chances of attaining one’s goals (e.g., executive functioning, planning, strategy formation, or resources recruitment); and the ability to compensate [C] effectively when, for instance, strategies fail or when initial goals are blocked. These “SOC” skills involve also loss-­‐based selection [LBS], which involves making a new selection after initial failure or loss and thus the continued manifestation of adaptive intentional self-­‐regulations. These four SOC skills (S< LBS< O, and C) align closely with engineering design process activities, such as selecting the best possible solutions to pursue, optimizing based on the constraints of the problem, and compensating for the challenges that arise in implementing a solution. Accordingly, the goal of the present research was to apply the existing methods developed for measuring these SOC skills among university undergraduate engineering students. Our underlying question was: Are such skills of particular importance to engineers as they develop their knowledge base and launch their careers? To answer this question, we conducted a cross-­‐sectional study at two universities (labeled A and B) with sophomore, junior, and senior engineering students. Surveying approximately 400 students at each institution (about 50% engineering student and the remaining students from Arts & Sciences backgrounds), we measured students’ GPAs, extracurricular activities (major and non-­‐major related), and SOC skills. Using multiple regression analysis, there appears to be a direct and positive relation between these intentional self-­‐
regulations skill sets (i.e., S, O, C, or LBS) and the GPAs of engineers. For all groups of students there was also a relationship between participating in out-­‐of-­‐classroom “professional” (academic major-­‐related) activities and GPA. Greater activities participation predicted higher GPA among both the engineering and liberal arts students. I.23: Exploring the Role of Computational Adaptive Expertise in Design and Innovation Ann McKenna (Arizona State University), Robert Linsenmeier (Northwestern University), Adam Carberry (Arizona State University), Jennifer Cole (Northwestern University), Matthew Glucksberg () This project seeks to advance both basic and applied understanding of how to prepare engineering graduates to effectively contribute to America’s leadership in technological innovation. Society’s most pressing technological needs such as national security, public health, and environmental sustainability, to name a few require substantial subject matter knowledge to develop realistic solutions to meet these needs. Specifically, engineering solutions to modern technological needs require foundational analytic and modeling skills and facility with modern computational tools and methods. As educators/researchers we are compelled to better understand how learners can effectively bring this complex knowledge to bear in the process of innovation. We are applying the learning framework of adaptive expertise to focus our work and guide the research. Adaptive expertise is an emerging area of research on learning that has shown promise in providing enhanced understanding of transfer of knowledge issues. It is a critical area of research that directly relates to U.S. global competitiveness through improving understanding of what is required to train innovative and effective problem solvers who can transcend narrow disciplinary fields. The framework of adaptive expertise has been presented as a way of thinking about how to prepare learners to flexibly respond to new learning situations, which is precisely what students are expected to do in the context of innovation. We focus on “computational adaptive expertise,” which we abbreviate CADEX, since a major portion of an engineering curriculum focuses on developing fluency in knowledge associated with analytical, computational, and modeling abilities. Yet, students often struggle with applying or transferring this knowledge in the context of design and innovation. We have collected data from several studies, over several years from introductory, intermediate and capstone design courses. Throughout our data collection we have focused on various aspects of CADEX including decision making in design, mathematical modeling competency, and conceptions of modeling for design and innovation. We will provide an overview of our findings our previous studies and will focus specifically on our recent data relating to conceptions of modeling. We focus on modeling since this is a core skill for engineering students and one activity that students are expected to perform throughout the curriculum, not just in design or project focused courses, but also in fundamental engineering disciplinary courses and foundational math and sciences courses. However, “modeling” is a nuanced and complex activity and our research indicates that even by senior year students often do have not fully developed conceptions of modeling capabilities and uses. I.24: Implementation, Dissemination, Barrier Identification and Faculty Training for Project-­‐Enhanced Learning in Gateway Engineering Courses Razi Nalim (IUPUI), Robert Helfenbein (IUPUI) Project Summary A major challenge in engineering education is early drop out of engineering students, multiplied in urban research institutions by the very diverse demographic profiles of the students. A proven approach to improve student learning, self-­‐efficacy, and motivation is the use of projects. A particular model called project-­‐enhanced learning (PEL) has been developed at Indiana University-­‐ Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) for ‘gateway’ engineering science courses. Currently, it is implemented in introductory thermodynamics in the undergraduate sophomore year of the mechanical engineering program. The requisite characteristics of project implementation evolved from experience over years. Instructor willingness to add a project component in addition to traditional methods depends on project attributes that must be carefully constructed to minimize additional workload to the instructor as well as the student. A project component of analysis courses at the sophomore and junior levels cannot be as open-­‐ended as a senior level design project. The project resulted in enhanced peer-­‐
to-­‐peer interactions, revealed student misconceptions, improved student motivation and learning, as reported in a previous study. The current grant activity aims to expand a successful PEL model to multiple undergraduate ‘gateway’ courses at IUPUI as well as at two other institutions. Intellectual Merit Retention of students in engineering is connected to self-­‐efficacy in key sophomore and junior-­‐
level courses that are seen by many students as abstract, challenging, and not meaningfully connected to their professional aspirations. Many researchers and engineering educators report that project assignments, if designed appropriately and if widely adopted by faculty have significant impact on enhancing student learning and ultimately retention and graduation. The goal of this activity is to sustain, expand, and disseminate a PEL model over multiple courses, departments and institutions by learning from prior difficulties, replicating best practices, identifying barriers, and providing adequate resources and training to faculty for the expansion. The experience of project implementation (over the past ten years) and assessment studies (over the past four years) make the team well equipped to conduct this effort. The proposed work, while being rooted in results from current educational research, is unique in the details of its characteristics, planning and implementation. The organization, planning and implementation are modeled on past successes and resources available from past educators. Broader Impact The current proposal aims to implement good teaching practices while providing the resources for successful expansion and dissemination through sharing of prior experiences in a systematic manner, mentoring as well as forming of partnerships across disciplines and among urban research universities. This will help create a new culture of engineering educational practices. Such a culture is likely to be sustained when the critical mass of educators in a department or larger unit have adopted these successful practices. The project will have direct impact at both the primary institution (IUPUI) and two other urban universities, University of Illinois Chicago and Virginia Commonwealth University. Growing rapidly, urban universities attract students from very diverse communities and socioeconomic backgrounds. Two courses in two separate departments will expand the model of PEL, with seminars and a workshop planned to invite all engineering faculty to consider PEL in early work in the major. A doctoral student and a post-­‐doctoral researcher will be trained in PEL and sensitized to the need for innovation in teaching. Outreach to sister urban schools of the ‘Great Cities Coalition’ will spread the model nationwide among these growing schools with diverse student populations. Sessions or workshops at regional, national, global engineering education conferences, and journal publications will disseminate results further. I.25: E-­‐book Dissemination of Curricular and Pedagogical Innovations in Engineering Thermodynamics Donna Riley (Smith College) Making the changes necessary to educate the engineer of 2020 requires bridging the gap between innovative findings in engineering education research and everyday practice among engineering educators. Educators need research results made tangible and readily incorporated into their settings. A number of factors conspire to inhibit adoption of curricular and pedagogical innovations including faculty roles and reward structures, status hierarchies and professional norms, and structure and behavior of institutions and professional organizations. This project explores the effectiveness of e-­‐
books as a dissemination tool using the case of innovations from the Liberative Pedagogies Project (NSF CAREER 0448240). The goals of the project are to: (1) develop an e-­‐book dissemination tool for curricular and pedagogical innovations in engineering thermodynamics; (2) implement and evaluate a dissemination plan for adoption of the e-­‐book; and (3) identify salient factors in decision-­‐making about adopting innovations among both adopters and non-­‐adopters of the e-­‐book. The dissemination tool is a proposed e-­‐book building on five years of engineering education research that takes a fresh look at the engineering knowledge and skills required for current and emerging energy challenges. The e-­‐book operationalizes curricular and pedagogical innovations that previous research has shown to stimulate critical thinking; enhances student capacity for intentional, independent and lifelong learning; incorporates contributions of women and non-­‐Western thermodynamicists; and grounds future engineers in the social and policy context, communication skills, and ethical reflection required to move forward on today’s energy problems. As a textbook companion, the e-­‐book works with existing thermodynamics curricula, paralleling the structure and sequence of traditional texts and complementing delivered curriculum with targeted ABET outcomes in a modular fashion so adoption can occur incrementally. E-­‐books’ low cost and agile format allows prompt incorporation of feedback from adopters. The dissemination plan would recruit adopters with a strategy that counters the factors identified above as obstacles to adoption. The strategy employs social networks, opinion leaders, and similarly placed central actors; works within existing faculty reward structures; draws on professional norms and outside social movements for support of the innovations; and creates adopter buy-­‐in. Some adopters will be recruited as consultants who incorporate a module into their thermodynamics courses, elicit student feedback, and propose changes to the module, which will be incorporated in revisions of the e-­‐book. Identifying salient factors in faculty decision-­‐making about adoption employs a mixed methods study design. Quantitative analysis of electronic survey data of adopters and non-­‐adopters will determine the relative importance of factors in faculty adoption decisions, and identify any differences between adopters and non-­‐adopters in factors they find salient. Qualitative interviews with a subset of this population will provide thicker descriptions of circumstances affecting adoption. Information about institutional characteristics will further inform the analysis. The findings of this study will assist engineering education researchers and practitioners nationwide in bridging the gap between research and practice. By identifying the relative importance of factors affecting faculty adoption of innovations, and by assessing the effectiveness of e-­‐books as a dissemination tool, we will add significant new information to our understanding of how to facilitate (or of what may hinder) dissemination of findings. Additionally, engineering thermodynamics instructors will have increased access to curricular and pedagogical innovations that evolved from the Liberative Pedagogies Project, advancing a broader spectrum of students in engineering while addressing key twenty-­‐first century energy problems and critical skill sets required of the engineer of 2020. E-­‐books promise wider dissemination due to low cost and compatibility with e-­‐reader assistive devices. I.26: Toward Expert Problem Solving: Blending Conceptual and Symbolic Reasoning Andrew Elby (Univ. of Maryland College Park), Ayush Gupta (Univ. of Maryland College Park) Helping students learn to solve problems is a goal of many science and engineering courses taken by engineering majors. But what constitutes expert problem solving, and hence, what should be the long-­‐
term target of instruction aimed at developing problem solving skills? Among researchers addressing this question, a consensus has formed about the ways in which conceptual, largely qualitative reasoning should “speak to” mathematical/symbolic manipulations. Most problem-­‐solving strategies and rubrics depict the mathematical/symbolic manipulation step of problem solving as separate from conceptual, qualitative reasoning, which is supposed to happen (i) right before the symbolic manipulation step, in order to translate the physical situation into equations, and (ii) right after the symbolic manipulation step, to check the plausibility of the answer. In our poster, we question this consensus about “good” problem solving. By doing so, we hope to contribute to debates about how problem solving should be taught. We interviewed engineering majors taking 1st-­‐semester physics. We first asked about a velocity equation from their course: “How would you explain the equation v = v0 + at to a friend?” Then we asked the two rocks problem: “You are standing with two rocks high up on a tall building. You throw one rock down with an initial speed of 2 m/s; you just let go of the other rock. What’s the difference in the speeds of the two rocks after 5 seconds – is it less than, more than, or equal to 2 m/s?” We looked for patterns relating how students explained the equation to whether they found a shortcut to the two rocks problem. The shortcut involves blending conceptual and symbolic reasoning, something like this: According to the equation, a rock’s final speed is its initial speed plus the speed it gains from accelerating, in this case due to gravity. Since the thrown and dropped rock speed up at the same rate (acceleration) while falling, the difference in their speeds does not change. We found patterns in students’ reasoning. Students who gave a formulaic explanation of the velocity equation tended not to find the shortcut. By contrast, students who explained the equation by attaching intuitive physical meaning to the equation as a whole, not just to the individual variables, tended to find the shortcut. Our poster focuses on “Alex,” who exemplifies the first pattern, and “Pat,” who exemplifies the second. We argue that Pat displays greater problem-­‐solving expertise than Alex, even though Alex’s reasoning more closely follows the “expert” problem-­‐solving steps suggested in the literature. The feature of Pat’s reasoning that’s missing from standard accounts of expert problem solving is his blending of equation-­‐
based symbolic reasoning with conceptual reasoning in a single step. From these results, we argue that such blending should be included, when appropriate, in researchers’ and instructors’ conceptualizations of expert problem solving. This research can inform the work of engineering education researchers investigating the nature and development of problem solving expertise. It also informs instructors seeking to help students become better problem solvers, by identifying and illustrating a particular kind of thinking -­‐-­‐ the blending of conceptual and symbolic reasoning -­‐-­‐ that contributes to expert problem solving in many circumstances. So far, this work has spawned further research on the cognitive dynamics of when and why students blend conceptual with symbolic reasoning. It has also informed instructional strategies we use in teaching physics to engineering majors. I.27: Improving Learning in Engineering Classrooms by Coupling Interactive Simulations and Real-­‐
Time Formative Assessment via Pen-­‐Enabled Mobile Technology Frank Kowalski (Colorado School of Mines), Susan Kowalski (Colorado School of Mines), Tracy Gardner (Colorado School of Mines) In efforts to improve learning in engineering classrooms, this project couples two active learning strategies, both research-­‐based and grounded in constructivist theories of learning: a. using interactive simulations to help actively engaged students increase their understanding of abstract concepts or phenomena which are not directly or easily observable, and b. gathering real-­‐time formative assessment of student understanding and misconceptions, enabling increased student metacognition and data-­‐
driven instruction on the most immediate of time scales. This project explores seamlessly integrating these two cornerstones by utilizing pen-­‐enabled mobile computer technology (in our case, Tablet PCs). The instructor can guide student explorations of free, online interactive simulations by posing probing questions. By using digital ink to provide real-­‐time responses in class via words, equations, drawings, diagrams, proofs, etc., students provide a revealing glimpse into their understandings and misconceptions as they investigate the simulations. This extension of the Socratic method to chemical engineering (37-­‐42% female) and engineering physics sections with 30-­‐60 students, as well as under-­‐
represented minority pre-­‐college engineering students, will yield conclusions easily transportable to other fields of engineering, as well as other disciplines. We hope to refine a teaching model that uses increasingly available and affordable pen-­‐enabled mobile computer technology to invigorate learning in STEM classrooms (K-­‐16+). Spring 2011 is our first of 3 semesters of data collection. For each participating course, we are collecting sets of data points for targeted concepts. Each set includes 1.) a pre-­‐course assessment of mastery of the concept, 2.) an assessment after students have engaged with the interactive simulation as part of their course assignments, but prior to guided questioning and real-­‐
time formative assessment in class, and 3.) a summative assessment of student mastery of the concept. Comparison of these 3 data points within each data set will reflect learning gains. Additionally, we will be evaluating changes in student attitudes and behaviors, as well as how learning gains achieved using this teaching model correlate with differences in learning style. Our anticipated products include a project website and a 5-­‐minute video demonstrating best practices associated with this teaching model. Anticipated publications will share our answers to the following research questions: 1. Can learning gains achieved with interactive simulations be increased by coupling the simulations with open-­‐format questions used with Tablet PCs for real-­‐time formative assessment? 2. Are learning gains achieved with this Coupled Model greater for certain types of learners in the engineering classroom? I.28: Creating Industry-­‐Ready Engineering PhDs Jed Lyons (USC -­‐ Columbia) NEED: Engineering PhD programs should continuously evolve to meet the needs of all constituencies. This research seeks to identify skills and attributes that are important for PhDs who work in industry, where the majority of engineering PhD graduates are employed. APPROACH: A combination of quantitative, qualitative, and quasi-­‐experimental research is used. Surveys, interviews and focus groups are being conducted for participants at different levels within industry and academia. These include recent Ph.D. graduates, research group managers, faculty, current PhD candidates, undergraduates, and practicing bachelor-­‐degreed engineers. A written protocol analysis is conducted using publically-­‐
available job announcements for research engineering positions. BENEFIT: This study is important because the number of U.S. Citizens graduating with a Ph.D. is declining. Innovation comes through research that is conducted and directed through Ph.D.s in industry and academia, thus the U.S. is losing ground in technical innovation. It will enable the development of a best methods approach to educate Ph.D. students that want to go. OUTCOMES: This research supports the transformation of doctoral engineering education from an artifact of the Cold War, with an emphasis on engineering science and narrowly defined research topics, to an intentional process that produces outcomes which are valued by modern constituencies. This research could have a significant effect on strategies which will enable the United States to maintain its economic leadership and sustain its share of high-­‐technology jobs. Ph.D. research programs that address societal and industrial needs will have increased value and potential to increase diversity of doctoral degree populations. DELIVERABLES: This exploratory research project will result in an improved understanding of: what industry needs from Ph.D. engineers, the current alignment of current Ph.D. programs with industry needs, potential strategies to better align Ph.D. programs with industry needs, and how various stakeholders perceive the intent of Ph.D. programs. This project also supports the longer-­‐term goal of: establishing Ph.D. programs with effective strategies to align student preparation with industry needs I.29: A Comparative Study of Engineering Matriculation Practices Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Catherine Brawner (Research Triangle Educational Associates) This project is an explanatory study of how engineering major selection and graduation outcomes are affected by the mode of matriculation into engineering and the manner in which students are advised. First-­‐year engineering programs and other first-­‐year structures intend to guide students to making informed decisions and achieving better alignment with their choice of discipline, but there is no base of evidence on how students respond to those structures and no practical way to conduct an experiment directly comparing different matriculation approaches. I.30: The Effect of Academic Policies on the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Achieving Student Outcomes Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Catherine Brawner (Research Triangle Educational Associates) The research team proposes to investigate a potential model for the evaluation of how an institution’s instructional culture and institutional infrastructure affect student outcomes. We will examine instructional culture and institutional infrastructure as manifested in academic policies (grade forgiveness, probation, suspension, etc.) and structure (process of articulating to engineering, credit loads, student-­‐faculty ratio). In addition to the study of retention and graduation as outcomes, we will also explore time-­‐to-­‐graduation and rates of course repetition as measures of academic efficiency. While this study will be valuable on its own, the research and documentation of institutional policies will lay a foundation for expanded study of institutional differences identified in earlier work. I.31: Socioeconomic Factors in Engineering Pathways Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Marisa Orr (Purdue University), Valerie Lundy-­‐Wagner (New York University), Russell Long (Purdue University), Cindy Veenstra (Veenstra Consulting), Nichole Ramirez (Purdue University) The Multiple-­‐Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) has a legacy of exploring questions of great interest in the engineering education community and particularly in challenging long-­‐held beliefs with studies of a large-­‐population longitudinal dataset. The original design of the database included home zip code at matriculation, county of residence, and high school code—fields that have the potential to serve as indicators of socioeconomic status. Using a crosswalk produced by the Mellon Foundation, the high school codes in MIDFIELD have been associated with high school codes in US Department of Education databases to attach socioeconomic information about the high school a student attended to that student's record in MIDFIELD. Ongoing work is validating those predictors in the MIDFIELD population and exploring the role of socioeconomic status in matriculation, persistence, graduation, performance, disciplinary selection, institutional choice, and other variables of interest. A major milestone was recently completed when the new Peer Socioeconomic Status variable was created for a significant number of students. When complete, this study will represent the most comprehensive study of socioeconomic status that has ever been conducted in engineering education. The study of socioeconomic status within engineering education aims to understand the culture of engineering learning systems. I.32: Minor in Nanoscale Science and Engineering at Washington University in St. Louis Dong Qin (Washington University) Advances in nanotechnology – the ability to engineer, manipulate, and manufacture materials at the nanoscale – has enabled the industry to produce and use engineered nanomaterials in a wide variety of consumer products. As the applications of nanotechnology proliferate, there is an increasing demand for scientists and engineers who can think, measure, and process on the nanometer scale. We should meet this demand by educating our students at all levels with an increased understanding and appreciation of the potential of nanotechnology. The goal of our NSF-­‐NUE program is to attract and engage undergraduate students to the study of nanoscale science, engineering, and technology. Specifically, we aim to i) establish a Minor in Nanoscale Science and Engineering for undergraduate students at Washington University (WU); ii) develop a Certificate Program to train undergraduate students in use of the state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art research tools in the Nano Research Facility (NRF) – a site of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) at WU; iii) create the Nano Research Experience for Undergraduate (Nano-­‐REU) program that will engage undergraduates to develop the Process Orientated Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) modules for K-­‐12 education outreach; and iv) encourage students to impart and promote a conceptual understanding of nanotechnology in the Saint Louis Science Center. I.33: NUE: NanoScience and Molecular Engineering Option Programs in Engineering and Science Rene Overney (University of Washington), Ethan Allen (University of Washington) The NUE NME program addresses the need of integrating Nanoscience and Molecular Engineering (NME) education into existing science and engineering undergraduate curricula with hands-­‐on experience and strong interdisciplinarity. It is a campus wide effort involving departments from both the College of Engineering and the College of Arts and Sciences. Linked through a network, each NME Option program (i) has a home in a participating department, (ii) is integrated in departmental undergraduate majors through NME enhanced existing laboratories, capstone design projects and/or independent research, and (iii) is connected to other disciplinary NME Option programs through seminars and NME elective courses. The target audiences for NME Options are students in Engineering and Arts and Sciences, from sophomores to seniors. They learn about the relevance of NME in general and for their field of study, encounter synergetic approaches between disciplines and extensions of their field, and gain hands-­‐on experience leading to products. This program has raised great interest from both students and faculty by building on the existing infrastructure, sharing resources responsibly and sensitively, operating in parallel with curricula developments, lowering barriers between departments, and offering credit friendly programs. NUE NME has been engaged in a variety of course and lab developments. ChemE and MSE have initiated NME Options. ChemE will graduate its first NME students this year. BioE, EE and ME will implement programs by Spring 2011. About 70-­‐100 students are expected to enroll in NME Option programs this year. The NME Option approach also serves as a model for further interdisciplinary developments on campus, such as the Ph.D. degree program in Molecular Engineering and Science, which is under development in the newly formed Institute of Molecular Engineering and Science (iMolES). iMolES will be taking over from ChemE that is currently carrying the administrative oversight of the NME Option network. I.34: NUE: Development of the Nano Engineering Minor Option (NEMO) Program at the Cullen College of Engineering at the University of Houston Dmitri Litvinov (University of Houston) We have developed Nano Engineering Minor Option (NEMO) program, an integrated sequence of electives and research opportunities for the undergraduate students of the College of Engineering of the University of Houston. The NEMO program is a collaborative effort between three departments: Electrical & Computer Engineering, Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering. The program has integrated and expanded the existing nanotechnology courses offered by the three departments into a comprehensive nanoengineering program. The NEMO program reaches out to a significantly larger group of undergraduate students in a coordinated manner than the efforts of individual faculty members would have ever allowed. Our team capitalizes on the synergy between the extensive undergraduate education infrastructure and the state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art nanotechnology research programs at the College of Engineering. The carefully tailored nanoengineering curriculum targets undergraduate students across different departments and enables in-­‐depth training beyond what can practically be achieved with conventional stand-­‐alone senior electives. Facilities not only include faculty member’s individual labs, but also shared resources such as the 10,000 sq. ft. Center for Integrated Nano and Bio Systems are also available. As nanomaterials, devices, and systems enter the markets and begin to affect US and world economies, nanoengineering will inevitably be incorporated into standard undergraduate curricula. The NEMO program is expected to have the lasting transformative impact on the undergraduate education at the Cullen College of Engineering by providing the NEMO participants the opportunities to conduct research under nationally recognized experts in the field of nanotechnology. It provides the leadership to incorporate research-­‐intensive undergraduate curricula into other undergraduate programs within the College of Engineering and the University of Houston as a whole. UH is the most ethnically diverse research institution in the country. It is from this diverse student body that we draw our NEMO scholars. We expect that exposure to the new frontier that reaches out beyond classical in-­‐discipline training will directly impact the number of qualified graduates from underrepresented groups entering the workforce and graduate school. I.35: Assessing Students' Consideration of Context in Engineering Design Deborah Kilgore (University of Washington), Ken Yasuhara (University of Washington), Cynthia Atman (University of Washington) 1. Need: The increasingly global character of engineering work requires engineers to consider individuals and communities; natural environment; economies; and other contextual factors in designing for a better world. Some research has resulted in more concrete knowledge of contextual competence. Resource intensive, our research instruments cannot practically be used for assessment. 2. Approach: Our research questions are as follows: RQ1: How can engineering faculty and students assess students’ ability to consider specific aspects of context in engineering design? RQ2: What learning experiences (formal and otherwise) help students develop the ability to consider specific aspects of context in engineering design? Activity 1: Develop assessment techniques for considering context through workshops with faculty and students, and literature review. Activity 2: Conduct assessment validity testing in lab-­‐based research. Activity 3: Field-­‐test assessment techniques in engineering classes. Activity 4: Analyze qualitative and other data for the purpose of furthering understanding of how students can develop contextual competence. Activity 5: Distribute techniques and research findings to engineering education community. 3. Benefit: Assessment techniques are designed for use by three audiences: -­‐ Students, for formative self-­‐assessment -­‐ Instructors, for evaluating student learning, or the effectiveness of course curricula -­‐ Program planners, for evaluating programs 4. Anticipated outcomes: -­‐ Operationalized definitions of specific aspects of context relevant to engineering design, in the following areas: temporal and social context -­‐ Validated and Field-­‐tested assessment techniques for gauging student ability to consider specific aspects of context when engaged in open-­‐ended engineering design problem-­‐solving. This will include questions, rubrics for interpreting responses, and plans for integration into existing teaching practice. -­‐ Greater understanding of the kinds of learning experiences that help students develop the ability to consider specific kinds of context in engineering design. 5. Anticipated deliverables: We will publish the assessment techniques developed in this project via the Center for Engineering Learning & Teaching (CELT) web site, the National Science Digital Library (NSDL), and the Engineering Pathway Digital Library, thus facilitating free and easy access to members of the engineering education community and the public at large. We will also report our ongoing efforts at regional, national, and international conferences, and in peer-­‐reviewed journals. I.36: Preparing for the Grand Challenges: When and how do engineering students learn broad thinking? Cynthia Atman (University of Washington), Sheri Sheppard (Stanford University), Deborah Kilgore (University of Washington), Ken Yasuhara (University of Washington) NEED The grand challenges and opportunities for engineering in the 21st century are broad in scope, complexity, and impact. Therefore, engineers of tomorrow must be broad thinkers. Broad thinking includes situating engineering problems in their environmental, global, economic, and political contexts. Broad thinking also includes taking a wide perspective on what it means to be an engineer and the range of skills and knowledge that engineering practice demands. Our project extends prior analyses of a group of extensive data sets on undergraduate engineering students, with a focus on understanding the kinds of educational experiences that facilitate development of broad thinkers in engineering. APPROACH In engineering, broad thinking requires many different areas of skills and knowledge. This study focuses on two critical areas: design and professional skills, with the latter including leadership, communication, teamwork, and business ability, as well as social self-­‐confidence. We are analyzing selected data on design and professional skills from the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education’s Academic Pathways Study (APS). APS includes longitudinal and cross-­‐sectional, multi-­‐
institutional data on undergraduate engineering education experiences collected using quantitative and qualitative methods. Initial analyses examine the development of broad thinking over the undergraduate years, with follow-­‐up analyses concerning the educational experiences that contribute to this development. An important component of our work relates broad thinking to post-­‐graduation plans, i.e., intention to pursue engineering after graduating. BENEFIT The diversity of the ABET learning outcomes provides a mandate to examine educational practices as they relate to the development of broad thinking. However, there is relatively little large-­‐scale research tracing the development of broad thinking ability throughout undergraduates’ four years of study, or identifying where thinking broadly could be associated with persistence in engineering. Our large, national data sets—both longitudinal and cross-­‐sectional—provide a unique opportunity to explore broad thinking for a wide variety of students, including those from underrepresented groups. We plan to disseminate our methods and findings extensively to researchers and educational practitioners. As a result, we anticipate that the benefits of this study will be significant for society overall, as engineers who think broadly will be critical players in confronting the 21st century’s engineering grand challenges. OUTCOMES Preliminary findings include the following, with each being examined further in ongoing analyses: • Some student attributes related to design and professional skills appear to vary with major, within engineering. Among these attributes are confidence in professional skills and perceived importance of non-­‐engineering extra-­‐curricular activities, as well as motivation to study engineering (e.g., financial, social good). Other attributes appearing to vary with major are not as directly tied to broad thinking but are generally important, e.g., satisfaction with instructors. • Below-­‐average confidence in professional skills appears to predict post-­‐
graduation plans to pursue engineering work or graduate study. • Four-­‐year longitudinal analysis of student conceptions of engineering design suggest that the activities and vocabulary students associate with design shift considerably during the junior and senior years, possibly reflecting the common timing of capstone and co-­‐op/internship experiences. DELIVERABLES Anticipated deliverables include articles discussing the development of broad thinking over the undergraduate years, as well as the educational experiences that contribute to this development. We also intend to share findings in local and national interactive workshops, as has been done with prior APS work. Potential target audiences include engineering educators, policy makers, and industry representatives. I.37: Stanford Engineering Research Experience for Teachers (SERET) Kaye Storm (Stanford University), Sheri Sheppard (Stanford University), Beth Pruitt (Stanford University) The Stanford Engineering Research Experience for Teachers (SERET) program was launched in 2010, an integrated center of excellence at Stanford University to expose 30 teachers, and indirectly their students, to engineering disciplines and the ways basic engineering concepts relate to science and math curricula. The goal of SERET is to increase the interest and proficiency in science and engineering among middle school, high school and community college students by providing: 1) 8-­‐week in-­‐depth research experiences for STEM teachers in grades 6-­‐14 in Stanford engineering labs and centers under the direct supervision of graduate student mentors; 2) Exposure to a diversity of engineering disciplines and applications through seminars and tours at Stanford and in industry; 3) Curriculum development assistance through one-­‐on-­‐one coaching, workshops and seminars delivered weekly during the summer and on weekends during the academic year; and 4) Follow up and assessment of the program’s effectiveness through surveys, follow-­‐on workshops, and an external evaluation. The intellectual merit of this program lies in the unique experiences provided to teachers as they carry out an independent research project. The new knowledge and perspectives gained guides the development of standards-­‐
based curricular activities and the integration of the research experience into math and science lessons and labs. Engineering is absent from the required curriculum of most middle and high schools and students lack formal exposure to engineering and its applications. By focusing on teachers working with educationally disadvantaged students typically under-­‐represented in STEM fields, SERET provides influential role models for our next generation of engineers and scientists and instills in them excitement about engineering study and research. The SERET model has broad impact on science, engineering, and education. Real research problems driven by host labs are addressed through individual hands-­‐on projects and teachers use these experiences as the basis for developing new lessons and curricular materials that are disseminated at the regional and national level. Teachers develop ongoing partnerships with their Stanford faculty host and graduate student mentors that result in classroom visits by Stanford faculty, equipment loans, student visits to campus, etc. At least half of SERET’s participants teach in schools that serve predominantly educationally disadvantaged students historically under-­‐represented in STEM fields. Over half of the teacher participants are also female or under-­‐represented minorities themselves, providing a powerful role model for their students. Although SERET considers qualified teachers from throughout the Bay Area, the project focuses on teachers from the four largest school districts within commute distance to Stanford (San Francisco USD, San Jose USD, Oakland USD and East Side Union HSD in East San Jose). These districts serve almost 160,000 students; 53% are eligible for free or reduced price lunch and 28% are English Language Learners. The students in these districts are diverse: 36% are Hispanic and 16% are African American. Special recruitment efforts also focus on high school teachers teaching introductory engineering classes through the Project Lead the Way program model. SERET brings together the Schools of Engineering, Education and the Office of Science Outreach to leverage and strengthen several other existing K-­‐14 education efforts on campus and provide an enhanced infrastructure to nucleate additional RET supplements on campus, extending the program’s impact even further. Stanford is uniquely positioned to undertake this project, having establishing a similar program serving predominantly chemistry and biology teachers in 2005. An RET Site award allows us to strengthen and expand the existing program, focus on engineering experiences for teachers, and work with an independent external evaluator to measure the impact of research experiences on teachers, their attitudes, content knowledge and classroom practices. I.38: NanoCORE at the FAMU-­‐FSU College of Engineering Ongi Englander (Florida State University), Aaron Kim (Florida State University), Amy Chan Hilton (Florida State University), Mei Zhang (Florida State University), Rufina Alamo (Florida State University), Petru Andrei (Florida State University) The NanoCORE program at the FAMU-­‐FSU College of Engineering is designed to introduce undergraduate students to concepts in nanoscale science and engineering and is further designed to provide recurring exposure to these concepts throughout the undergraduate curriculum. We are focused on providing students with technical knowledge, fostering positive attitudes towards emerging technologies and introducing students to research and future opportunities in the field. The program is focused on the integration of nanomodules (focused learning units) into existing core courses, the development of technical electives and the establishment of an undergraduate research program. More specifically, nanomodules have been implemented within core courses in each major, along with an introductory nanomodule presented to incoming freshman implemented through our First Year Engineering course. Additionally, two technical electives have been developed and presented to seniors. In general, the nanomodules are integrated within a required course, lasting 2-­‐3 weeks, and introduce topics in nanoscale science and engineering through lecture and lecture materials. The technical electives are semester long courses with a laboratory component. We have also established the NanoCORE Undergraduate Research Program at the FAMU-­‐FSU College of Engineering – a first of its kind. The program is open to all majors and all levels and features research opportunities across the College of Engineering. Students who are selected to participate in the program are awarded the NanoCORE Research Fellowship. Our program exclusively targets undergraduate students from across the College of Engineering. The FAMU-­‐FSU College of Engineering is home to a large under-­‐represented student population (~40%). The benefits of the NanoCORE program include developing and fostering student interest and positive attitude toward nanotechnology. Additionally, we are interested in highlighting novel technologies and illustrating the contributions of research activities to nascent fields. Ultimately, we seek to develop student interest in exploring graduate opportunities in the field by providing technical resources, research experience opportunities, and information about graduate education. To date, over 800 students have been exposed to various aspects of nanoscale science and engineering through course work developed for this project, with some students experiencing multiple exposures. Women make up 22.5% of this group and students from under-­‐represented groups make up 35% of this group. Additionally, the undergraduate research program has provided 20 students with the opportunity to conduct research in our labs. Two of these students have graduated and are currently attending graduate school. Our course surveys and student feedback indicate a strong preference for hands-­‐on and lab activities and so current efforts are focused on extending laboratory and hands-­‐on activities associated with NanoCORE. We have developed a survey instrument to gauge students’ awareness of, attitude toward, and interest in nanotechnology and thus to assess the effectiveness of this program. The survey is administered to students in of the each participating courses prior to and following the nano-­‐related content (pre and post measures). Based on well over one thousand survey responses, we have implemented statistical methods to identify correlations among the various variables. We find that awareness of or familiarity with nanotechnology to most significantly affect the attitude toward and interest in nanotechnology. I.39: Applications of Renewable Energy Sources, Emphasizing Hybrid Technology with Advanced Nanosensors for Safety and Efficiency, An International Workshop at the Arab Academy Science and Technology and Maritime Transport in Alexandria, Egypt Ahmed Elantably (General Machines Corp., LLC), Yasser Dessouky (Arab Academy of Egypt), Maher Rizkalla (IUPUI) An international workshop was conducted at the Arab Academy Science and Technology and Maritime Transport in Alexandria, Egypt in January 2011. Subjects covered in the workshop included renewable energy, hybrid technology, and advanced nanosensors for future vehicle safety. The renewable energy included solar energy, wind energy, and ocean/wave energy. Examples were given from various locations in Europe, Egypt, and USA. Hybrid technology incorporates advanced drive motor designs for commercial available hybrid vehicles in US, Europe, and Japan. The employment of advanced nanotechnology sensors were covered to provide safety and high system efficiency. The presentations presented in the workshop will be posted in a website that belongs to IUPUI/Arab Academy. These materials will support research programs among institutional researches in US and elsewhere. This paper details the objectives of the workshop including future collaboration between international institutions, including IUPUI and the Arab Academy of Egypt. These outcomes will include joint research proposals between the two institutions, joint graduate research supervision, affiliation programs between the two schools, new course development within the electrical and computer engineering programs, and the dissemination of these activities using the existing dissemination programs of the school. The workshop was successful and its program can serve as a model for future workshops. I.40: Workshop for Conversations Related to Motivating Interest in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering among Oklahoma K-­‐12 Students Susan Walden (University of Oklahoma) A pair of workshops was held at the University of Oklahoma (OU) to connect OU College of Engineering (CoE) faculty and administrators with those from public school districts around the state in conversations to understand the obstacles to mathematical and scientific literacy that inhibit incoming college student’s interest in and ability to pursue engineering majors. Through these conversations, CoE faculty and staff sought to enhance public school administrators’ awareness of engineering as a discipline and to establish how the OU CoE can optimally utilize its resources and expertise to support and increase student participation and engagement with engineering. In the first workshop, superintendents from rural schools districts participated. The second workshop included superintendents, principals, curriculum directors, and lead teachers from urban and suburban school districts in Oklahoma. The objectives of the workshops were to (a) increase awareness in Oklahoma’s K-­‐
12 superintendents and principals of the importance of encouraging K-­‐12 students to prepare to study engineering at the university level, (b) develop a plan through which OU College of Engineering, K-­‐12 superintendents, principals, and teachers and professional and industrial partners can cooperatively facilitate and implement appropriate engineering education programs and activities for K-­‐12 students and their parents to enhance interest and motivation in science and mathematics, and (c) identify potential strategic partners for the College of Engineering Sooner Engineering Education (SEED) Center from Oklahoma K-­‐12 superintendents and principals and professional organizations and industrial donors. In the workshop summary evaluations, the superintendents from the small districts reported having learned more about engineering than those from the larger districts. We will offer several reasons we believe this to have occurred. From these workshops, 88 recommended actions emerged, which cluster into nine categories. The individual recommendations and the clusters were similar between the two groups of school administrators, yet contained some significant differences in scope and priority. SEED Center and OU CoE administrators are using the recommendations to shape a prioritized action plan for our outreach to students, families and schools in Oklahoma to increase awareness of and participation with engineering. Finally, several districts have expressed interest in partnering with CoE and SEED Center to further STEM literacy with their students. I.41: (RET) site at the University of Houston (UH): “Innovations in Nanotechnology” Frank Claydon (University of Houston), Stuart Long (University of Houston), Madeline Landon (Friendswood High School) The six week program is designed to infuse 12 bright teachers each year with enthusiasm for the field of engineering and knowledge about nanotechnology research and will be subsequently shared with their respective high school classes. Recruitment will be focused on high school STEM teachers in the greater Houston area, with the goal of having teachers from schools who serve students from backgrounds historically under-­‐represented in engineering. Our goal is to select at least 50% from applicants teaching in the Houston Independent School District (HISD), a district consisting of 39 high schools serving an ethnically diverse student population that is reflective of the rich diversity of the Houston metro area. Each teacher will undertake a research project under the guidance of a UH faculty mentor and graduate student mentor. Participating graduate student mentors will be trained in mentoring prior to program implementation. An essential element of the program will be expert training in the development of a “Legacy Cycle” nanotechnology teaching module. The program will also emphasize professional development of the teachers through weekly seminars and discussions. Sustained follow-­‐up will be achieved through a series of activities during the following academic year, including visits to the classroom by the programs’ PI’s, visits by faculty mentors during the implementation of the Legacy Cycle modules, and field trips to the UH campus. The proposed RET program represents the culmination of feedback and experiences from our previous RET grant cycle, as well as the application of best practices learned by the team from colleagues at numerous national meetings and conferences. I.42: REU Site: Innovations in Nanotechnology at the University of Houston Frank Claydon (University of Houston), Gila Stein (University of Houston), Stuart Long (University of Houston), Audra Patterson (University of Houston) The purpose of the 2010-­‐2012 REU Site at the University of Houston (UH) is to infuse participants with the necessary enthusiasm and experience to proceed confidently into graduate studies and research careers. Student participants will be paired with a faculty mentor from the Cullen College of Engineering in order to undertake a 10 week project in the field of nanotechnology. In addition to laboratory work, a weekly Professional Development Seminar is integral to the program’s philosophy of creating well-­‐
rounded future researchers. This training will emphasize the development of skills necessary for success in graduate school and research careers, such as technical communication, navigating scientific literature, laboratory documentation, and research ethics. The program also recognizes the need for a strong professional camaraderie among student participants, as well as between students and faculty, and includes an organized social component as well as clustered housing in university apartments. The program’s recruitment strategy will draw participants from a variety of institutions across the country, particularly those with historically minority student bodies, and non-­‐research institutions. Program information will be available on both the NSF REU website and our program’s specific web address. Kirkpatrick’s method of program evaluation will be employed. I.43: A Biomedical Engineering Course of Study at the Secondary School Level Joseph Cocozza (University of Southern Califor) In an effort to increase awareness of and offer support in science and engineering among pre-­‐college students the Biomimetic MicroElectronic Systems Engineering Research Center (BMES ERC) at the University of Southern California (USC) has partnered with a Los Angeles high school to establish the Engineering for Health Academy (EHA). The Academy offers students in grades 10 through 12 a new and innovative course of study comprised of 4 integrated classes focused on biomedical engineering. Biomedical engineering curriculum has been developed and embedded in the EHA core classes including chemistry, physiology, computer sciences, and physics. In partnership with USC, EHA students are exposed to and learn about the field of biomedical engineering, develop technical and communication skills, and conduct investigatory projects that are presented at the annual Bravo/USC science and engineering fair. As seniors, EHA students enroll in the Research Experience capstone class where they become integral members of a research team at USC. This capstone class enables students to utilize the factual information and practical skills they have accumulated in the EHA core courses and put them into practice in a research environment. EHA students on average outscore their non-­‐EHA high school peers on district and state science assessment measurements, self-­‐report keen interest in science and engineering, elect to participate in summer enrichment programs, and apply to 4-­‐year colleges and universities in the STEM fields. The EHA program longitudinally follows the students as they progress through the high school program and graduate onto college. I.44: UT Arlington RET Site on Hazard Mitigation Nur Yazdani (UT Arlington) Need: What need are you addressing? The University of Texas at Arlington’s RET Site on Hazard Mitigation is designed to (1) increase opportunities for engineering faculty and high school teachers to collaborate in engineering research and pre-­‐college STEM education, (2) provide teachers with an extensive summer research experience and (3) provide teachers with the opportunity and resources to develop new curriculum modules consistent with school district, state and federal standards for classroom implementation. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? The program has provided stipends and other support for 10 high school STEM teachers in Years 2008-­‐2009, 12 additional teachers in 2009-­‐2010, and three more in 2010-­‐2011 to engage in research with Colleges of Engineering and Education. To maximize impact, STEM teachers are participating in two consecutive summers. Follow-­‐up is being achieved via two workshops in which teachers share their lesson plans and challenges and successes. Workshops are open to STEM teachers from the participating school districts (a total of six) and beyond. An ethics component includes a workshop and built-­‐in ethics tasks in the research project. With the heightened awareness of issues related to natural disasters, homeland security and information security/identity theft, the research projects being conducted at the RET site are designed to advance knowledge within and across the fields of computer science, electrical, industrial and civil engineering. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? The target population for the project, in terms of both teacher participants and their students, are groups that are typically underrepresented in STEM, namely females, ethnic minorities and people with disabilities. The participating school districts have significant female teacher populations (over 70%), and large minority student enrollments (most are over 65%). Classroom observations of relevant STEM students at high schools are continuing. Additionally, it is expected that the classroom implementation of the lesson plans/curriculum innovations will foster student interest in engineering, thereby increasing the number of engineers available and equipped to solve problems in the near future. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? We have learned that our RET project is having a lasting impact on participating STEM teachers and their students about the fields of engineering, research on hazard mitigation issues and how these impact the career decision of students and the classroom teaching. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? To date, we have implemented the enhanced lesson plans for the participating STEM teachers in a total of 18 high school classrooms. A total of 12 high school classes have visited the College of Engineering to learn about engineering as a career and gain engineering research knowledge. STEM teachers have held RET related workshops at a total of six workshops at their own schools. A total of seven teachers have presented their RET findings at state and national conferences on interest. Three journal articles have been submitted for publication. The RET web site at UT Arlington has been revamped, and is linked to the national RET site. The RET site contains the enhanced lesson plans, teacher posters, presentation slides and other important information. I.45: RET-­‐PLUS (Partners Linking Urban Schools) Claire Duggan (Northeastern University) RET-­‐PLUS (Partners Linking Urban Schools) Northeastern University Michael B. Silevitch P.I. Claire J. Duggan (Co-­‐PI Project Director) Northeastern University’s Center for STEM Education in collaboration with the Bernard M. Gordon Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (Gordon-­‐CenSSIS) and The Center for High Rate Nanomanufacturing, has built an RET program that supports STEM change agents throughout partner schools and Community Colleges. Participants are recruited primarily from local Massachusett's K-­‐12 school districts and partner community colleges. Additional RET participants supported through funding provided by the Department of Homeland Security are included in all supporting professional development. Participants and mentor faculty engage in collaborative inquiry through shared research experiences, strengthening the content knowledge of teachers, building understanding and professional respect, and providing opportunities for leadership and professional development for all members of the RET team. Project Goals and Objectives • Implement a comprehensive RET program for participants that includes engineering research and supporting professional development. • Develop curriculum material as an effective professional development strategy and integrate research experiences into classroom instruction. • Create a comprehensive model for K-­‐14 STEM classroom support that can be replicated by other universities and ERCs nationwide. • Build and support a K-­‐16 STEM community: a dynamic partnership between RET participants, undergraduate and graduate STEM students, higher education faculty and private industry. IMPACT: Northeastern University's RET program seeks raise awareness for the RET program nationwide, to support the development of a cohort of STEM RET Teacher leaders, to build collaboration across funded programs, and to share lessons developed for classroom implementation. Participants have assisted in the coordination and delivery of the RET/National Science Teachers Association National Networking Meeting since 2004. (www.ret.neu.edu). Previous RET Networking Meetings and Poster Sessions coordinated by the Northeastern University RET Program include • NSTA 2011 San Francisco March 9th • NSTA 2010 Philadelphia March 10th • NSTA 2009 New Orleans March 19th • NSTA 2008 Boston March 29th • NSTA 2007 -­‐ St. Louis, MO March • NSTA Regional Meeting 2006 Baltimore, MD November • NSTA 2006 Anaheim, CA; • NSTA 2005 Dallas, TX • NSTA 2004 Atlanta, GA • 95 teachers to date have spent their summers conducting research at Northeastern University • Over 7000 students • 32 public school districts • spanning six states Lessons Developed have been shared at Regional and National Meetings and used in the delivery of Engineering concepts both in the classroom and in summer and after-­‐school programs. NU RET alumni have also assisted with Professional Development at new RET sites. Lessons are available through the Northeastern University RET web site and also now through individual teacher web pages developed over the course of the summer program. (http://www.stem.neu.edu/ret/retlessondatabase.html) Media Coverage of Summer 2010 RET Poster Session http://www.northeastern.edu/news/multimedia/video.html?contentID=KqK2tq56FUChOkj7Jsw8Rg August 10, 2010 -­‐ For six weeks this summer, Boston-­‐area high school students and educators ventured into Northeastern University’s engineering and science laboratories for the opportunity to collaborate with leading faculty on innovative research projects. I.46: Vanderbilt University Bioengineering Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) Stacy Klein-­‐Gardner (Vanderbilt University) The Vanderbilt University Bioengineering RET Site Project was created through the National Science Foundation's Research Experience for Teachers program with the goals of giving teachers a broad overview of bioengineering, engaging the teachers in meaningful research experiences, establishing meaningful relationships between the teachers and the university, and helping teachers to take their research experiences back to the their high school science classrooms. Over the last seven years, eighty-­‐two teachers participated in a twenty-­‐four to twenty-­‐nine day summer program with academic year follow-­‐up. The summer program begins with a three-­‐day workshop in which the teachers are exposed to the broad field of bioengineering. The teachers also participate as a student in a Legacy Cycle based module from the VIBES K12 curriculum and prepare for their research placement. The teachers then spend twenty-­‐three days in their assigned research laboratory completing the project with which they were paired. The last three days of the RET program are spent in a workshop format with the goal being the creation of a curriculum unit that is based on the teacher’s research experience but appropriate for the standards-­‐based high school classroom. Each of these units is designed using the Legacy Cycle format and is ultimately submitted to the TeachEngineering.org website. The teachers benefit by developing last ties with Vanderbilt researchers and learning about engineering first-­‐hand. Their students benefit by participating in a curriculum unit that is built upon their teacher’s research experiences, giving them real engineering experience while still meeting the classroom standards. Students may also benefit from increased motivation to participate in the classroom activities. The Vanderbilt graduate students and professors also benefit from having mentoring experiences and by making ties within the K-­‐12 school systems. A motivational impact survey was created and administered to students participating in the RET teachers’ classrooms and control classrooms. This survey indicated an increased student ability to relate what they were learning to real life (p<0.04) and an increased enjoyment of the curriculum topics (p=0.002) in the RET classrooms. A qualitative study indicated that teachers used real world contexts within their Legacy Cycle curricula and began to teach in interdisciplinary ways, exposing students to the engineering in the process. Students enjoyed the learning with the Legacy Cycle, according to their teachers. They took a more active role in the classroom, leading them to be able to apply their new knowledge better. Using the Legacy Cycle as a pedagogical approach in an RET program leads to instructional materials that integrate teachers’ research while maintaining use of standards. Teachers perceived that student enjoyment of and engagement in the material increased, while exposing them to engineering. To date, eight Legacy cycle units have been published on TeachEngineering.org and another twenty modules are in review. These materials are now available to teachers around the country for use in their classrooms. One research paper has been published on the impacts of the first three years of the program, and two manuscripts are in review now addressing the impact the program has had on the teachers’ understanding of the Nature of Science and the aforementioned results from the teacher interviews conducted. Additionally, three teachers now have peer-­‐reviewed scientific publications, four are published in teacher journals, and numerous teachers have given presentations at professional conferences. I.47: PREPARES: Partnering Researchers and Educators to Create Problem-­‐based Curricula that Adapt Research in Engineering for Students Susan Parry (Kenan Fellows Program) The State of North Carolina has a two-­‐fold challenge related to the instruction of science, math, and technology in its public schools: a variable statewide shortage of well prepared teachers and a need for more relevant, meaningful curriculum. In order to address this challenge, the Kenan Fellows Program seeks to enhance teacher instructional and leadership skills in an extended program of mentored research and professional development. The Kenan Fellows Program for Curriculum and Leadership Development (KFP) at NC State University joined with North Carolina’s New Schools Project (NCNSP) to extend the KFP’s model RET program to four of NC’s most economically disadvantaged school districts Bertie, Durham, Surry and Wayne. Participants developed novel instructional resources that emphasize inquiry-­‐based learning and help students apply academic knowledge to authentic, real-­‐world problems in collaboration with distinguished scientists and university faculty. High school teachers and students in and beyond these four districts will benefit from the project during and after the award period. This grant achieves three objectives: promoting STEM teacher leadership and retention; enhancing student learning and interest in STEM areas; and sustaining and disseminating successful project outcomes. Program evaluation indicates that Kenan Fellows make significant gains in their leadership skills and the extent to which they are involved in leadership activities, as evidenced by pre-­‐ and post-­‐test data. The areas of professional development most significantly impacted have been mentoring and coaching fellow teachers, conducting classroom action research, and understanding educational policy issues, which are all key program target areas. Each summer for two consecutive years, teachers from four high-­‐needs “STEM High Schools” being redesigned by the NCNSP participated in a seven-­‐week Summer Institute. Two weeks were dedicated to professional and curriculum development, while the remaining weeks were dedicated to a research experience for teachers in collaboration with a university faculty Mentor. Fellows worked with researchers advancing discovery in fields as diverse as paleontology, aquatic ecology, and the biochemistry of solvents. However, each Mentor’s work also had an explicit or potential focus on an engineering application that Fellows could introduce to high school students in grade appropriate ways. Fellows continued this collaboration during the academic year, developing and piloting materials and participating in KFP activities such as fireside chats, poster sessions and conference presentations. In Year 3, participants served as Advisors to an incoming cohort of teachers entering the program. The six PREPARES Advisors supported novice Fellows by visiting them at their externship sites, corresponding weekly with them, meeting with their Mentors and reviewing and critiquing lessons and projects. This Program differs significantly from many existing programs in its emphasis on developing leaders in the classroom. The Kenan Fellows Program for Curriculum and Leadership Development provides just such an opportunity. Teacher Fellows have opportunities to learn science content and inquiry-­‐based teaching strategies in collegial environments that allow for sharing of knowledge. They are encouraged to connect their learning directly to the context of their own classrooms, as well as to advocate for and model best practice in the field. Almost all Kenan Fellows report significant improvement in their teaching skills, including the use of classroom technology, presentation skills, content knowledge, and research skills. Fellows have provided very highly rated presentations of their curriculum projects at conferences attended by teachers from more than 50 NC counties, the nation and the world. Kenan Fellows not only improve their teaching through program participation, they motivate colleagues to improve; 86% of former Fellows believe their colleagues have experienced benefits from their participation. This RET award has enabled KFP to refine and communicate best practices during the pilot phase of its statewide expansion. I.48: Transitioning Engineering Research to Middle Schools (TERMS) Karen High (Oklahoma State University) TERMS (Transitioning Engineering Research to Middle Schools) targets the middle school teachers who teach the students most at risk for losing interest in science, engineering, and mathematics. As most students advance through middle school science classes, their attitudes toward science become more negative and their interests decrease most in the seventh grade. The middle grades are a critical period for students, representing the period most beneficial to provide engaging academic opportunities. While there are several programs focusing on students and teachers in high school, there are few designed for lower grades. This program develops curriculum and experiences for this level of student. TERMS additionally focuses efforts on student populations who can add diversity to Oklahoma State University engineering program. This project involves 6th-­‐9th grade teachers, undergraduate students and REU students in combined research and K-­‐12 content development. The program consists of pre-­‐
visit preparation, six (teachers) and ten (REU students) week summer research experience, and follow up academic interactions between RET teachers, OSU faculty, REU students, and middle schools students. The undergraduate students and the teachers form a team to allow for appropriate translation of the laboratory experiments to the classroom. Additionally, curriculum is being developed for these middle level classrooms. The teachers for the program are math, science and technology teachers from rural and Native America districts in Oklahoma. Locally this project expands the pool of outstanding students who enter OSU in future years. Many target students are economically disadvantaged and will be first generation college students. TERMS addresses needed development of human resources in the state of Oklahoma by creating a network of teachers across the state who engage students in technical subjects. This aspect of professional development is critically needed in middle schools since national standards are moving away from a teacher-­‐oriented format focused on topics towards inquiry oriented science learning. TERMS will create, test, and disseminate age-­‐
appropriate, inquiry-­‐based course materials aimed at middle school audiences. These course materials will focus both on transitioning research into the classroom, the engineering design cycle and emergent phenomena. After refinements (improved research and professional development experiences) in our program from 2009, our teachers in 2010 had an improved experience. This is evidenced by a survey that was adapted from one available to the RET network. The 2010 cohort ranked the 62 Likert items more highly on 59 of the items. The survey looks at the satisfaction with the RET experience, the extent that the faculty mentor met RET expectation, the success of the RET experience, the impact of the RET program on the RET personally, level of engagement, and learning experiences. Upon examination of the individual items, we plan to work on orientation both before the program and one they begin the RET 6 week program. Additionally, we plan to enrich the research experience. The 2010 REU students had a valuable experience as well. The products so far of our work are 14 engineering design curriculum units focused on translating research to the classroom, the design cycle and emergent phenomena. Additionally, we have narrative stories that describe the teacher experience in the summer research experience as well as during the implementation of the curriculum units in the academic year. Our teachers have been presenting their modules to national audiences (National Science Teacher Association). We also have developed a website and will place the curriculum units on line for dissemination. I.49: Active Learning about Active Learning: Nanotechnology for Teachers Carolyn Nichol (Rice University), Carrie Cloonan (Rice University), John Hutchinson (Rice University) Developed through the National Science Foundation (NSF) Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN) and a Research Experience for Teachers (RET) program, Nanotechnology for Teachers at Rice University consists of 3 components: a graduate level course, a one month internship, and followup workshops. The course, CHEM 570 Nanotechnology for Teachers, provides a format to disseminate research findings to the public and importantly addresses the need to improve k-­‐12 science education. This spring semester course uses a novel approach to introduce teachers to inquiry learning while refreshing their understanding of fundamental chemical concepts and exposing them to cutting edge research. After taking the course, teachers can apply to participate in a one month research internship in our nanotechnology laboratories. Following their research experience, teachers host workshops to share program outcomes, including course materials and lesson plans, with other teachers. The goals of this program are to provide teachers with high quality professional development, to demonstrate how inductive reasoning and inquiry learning can be used to provide a deeper understanding of chemical concepts and the process of discovery, and to show how active learning and research in Science and Engineering can be used to engage students and develop critical thinking skills. Throughout the course, we model an interactive “Socratic” lecture style and use the Concept Development Studies (CDS) approach that was developed for general chemistry classes at Rice University. The benefits and the target audience of this program are high school science teachers and their students. During the last 5 years, we have taught over 200 teachers and on average each of these teachers teaches 130 students per year. Therefore, this program has reached over 25,000 students. In addition, teachers are hosting their own workshops at their schools or with their district science specialist to teach their peers what they have learned in Nanotechnology for Teachers. Using a Socratic approach and data to build conceptual understanding, we fortify teachers' knowledge and provide them with resources to use in their classes. Outcomes from this program include self reported surveys that indicate that the program helps teachers improve their teaching. The teachers report that they have a greater understanding of chemistry after completing the course, more knowledge about nanotechnology, that they use the course materials and pedagogy in their classes, and that this program improves their ability to teach science. However, we also learned that it is difficult for teachers to change their teaching practice for many reasons including content knowledge limitations, issues with confidence, lack of inquiry-­‐based pedagogy training, limited classroom management skills, lack of administrative support, and/or required use of a scripted curriculum. Nanotechnology for Teachers is designed to provide content and pedagogy support. With the current size of our class (approximately 50 teachers per year) we now have entire science teams from schools attending our program and anticipate that further studies will show school wide change in teaching practices. This program was supported by The Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology, NSF RET site proposal and the Texas Regional Collaboratives. I.50: Summer Undergraduate Research in Engineering/Science Program at the Georgia Institute of Technology Leyla Conrad (Georgia Institute of Technology), Gary May (Georgia Institute of Technology) The Summer Undergraduate Research in Engineering/Science (SURE)* program, initiated in 1992, is a ten-­‐week summer program for junior and senior level undergraduates from U.S. institutions. The overall goal of the program is to expose underrepresented students to electrical and computer engineering research, and as a direct consequence, interest them in opportunities available through graduate study. Participating students are paired with faculty and graduate student social mentors. During their stay, students attend weekly seminars on emerging research in the electrical and computer engineering field, enrichment and academic development activities, and social events. Students conclude the program with research presentations to their peers and faculty and graduate student mentors. During the past year, a total of 31 participants were selected from a pool of 182 applicants. A comprehensive assessment program for SURE has been developed and implemented. The pre-­‐ and post-­‐program surveys include a series of questions about participants’ perceived impact of SURE on planned graduate school attendance and research interests. Highlights from the 2010 pre-­‐program survey indicate that the participants’ primary reasons for attending the SURE program were to (i) learn new skills (77%), (ii) pursue particular research interest (61%), and (iii) decide whether to attend grad school at GT (58%). During their stay on campus one third of the participants wrote or co-­‐wrote a paper to be submitted to an academic journal. Highlights from the 2010 post-­‐program survey indicate that participants observed significant gains in understanding the theory and concepts that guided their research (74%), and using problem solving skills in the research process (71%). The survey also include the noteworthy finding that 85% of the participants indicated that SURE experience increased their desire to attend graduate school. An overall measure of satisfaction with the experience is evidenced by the 93% who said they would strongly recommend SURE to other students. When asked if the SURE experience enhanced their understanding of graduate student life, 67% said significantly enhanced and 30% indicated moderate enhancement. Another noteworthy finding was that 85% of the participants responded that SURE significantly strengthened their desire to attend grad school at Georgia Tech. * Supported by the NSF award EEC-­‐0851643 I.51: NUE: An Integrated Approach to Environmentally Responsible Nanotechnology Education Mira Olson (Drexel University), Patrick Gurian (Drexel University), Alisa Morss Clyne (Drexel University), Peter Lelkes (Drexel University), Wan Shih (Drexel University), Wei-­‐Heng Shih (Drexel University) This NUE program at Drexel University addresses the need for environmentally responsible nanotechnology education. Nanotechnology is entering a phase of accelerated product development; although these products have the potential to provide significant benefits, their impact on human health and the environment remains largely unknown. The challenge for nanotechnology development is to ensure that as nanomaterials are fabricated and used, unintended consequences to humans and ecosystems are minimized. The goal of this NUE program is to develop a risk assessment framework to predict the potential impact of manufactured nanomaterisl on the environment and to train environmentally conscious engineers, decided to understanding the potential risks and minimizing unintended consequences to humans and ecosystems. This NUE program introduces an integrated educational and research program focused on the environmental and health impacts of nanotechnology into the undergraduate curriculum of Drexel University. The technical focus is to educate students in nanomaterial fabrication and application, sources in the environment, environmental fate and transport, detection, exposure routes, toxicity and risk. The educational focus is on training undergraduates through integrated coursework, seminars and focused research opportunities, to adopt an environmentally responsible approach to the life cycle of nanomaterials. Program elements include developing an interdisciplinary undergraduate course on the Environmental and Health Impacts of Nanotechnology, and creating 6-­‐month research co-­‐op opportunities for students examining the environmental and health impacts of nanotechnology. Central to this NUE program is the development of an interdisciplinary educational program for introducing students to the health and environmental impacts of nanotechnology using an integrated teaching and research platform. Direct benefits at Drexel include a new university-­‐wide undergraduate course and intensive research opportunities for 12 students in the College of Engineering and School of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems. This NUE program develops a framework to evaluate the health and environmental risks of nanotechnology. This framework includes a catalogue of risk assessment inputs for a range of nanomaterials, including physical constants (partition coefficients, decay rates), biological parameters (dose-­‐response information), and societal information (production rates). It presents a new approach to integrate interdisciplinary learning and research opportunities into the undergraduate curriculum and addresses a timely and important issue at the forefront of nanotechnology. Students have been trained to evaluate the risks of nanomaterials throughout the nanomaterial life cycle. Surveys from the newly developed course designed to assess the success of our educational activities have been collected but not yet evaluated. PIs are currently interviewing students for the 6-­‐month research positions. A new course entitled 'Nanotechnology: Environmental and Health Implications' (http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~mso28/courses/Nano/Fall10/home.html) was developed and combined weekly lectures with lab sessions, tours and seminars to introduce students to the health and environmental impacts of nanotechnology. Five labs were developed for this course and are described below. Lab 1 -­‐ Risk Assessment Lab -­‐ students develop a mathematical model for evaluating environmental partitioning of nanoparticles and learn how to evaluate risk associated with different exposure routes. Lab 2 -­‐ Nanoparticle Fabrication Lab -­‐ students experiment with different methods to fabricate quantum dots Lab 3 -­‐ Nanoparticle Detection Lab -­‐ students learn how to quantitatively measure concentrations of quantum dots in aqueous media Lab 4 -­‐ Nanoparticle Transport Lab -­‐ students study the transport of quantum dots through sand columns designed to mimic natural soil Lab 5 -­‐ Nanoparticle Cytotoxicity Lab -­‐ students study the toxicity of quantum dots to human cells and tissues I.52: REU Site: Engineering Cities Mira Olson (Drexel University), Patrick Gurian (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University), Katie Morrison (Drexel University) The Engineering Cities REU site at Drexel University addresses the need for qualified and broadly trained engineers who can address the complex challenges of urban growth. Rapid growth of cities poses a raft of new challenges to those who engineer the urban environment, including accommodating population growth in cities with previously abandoned land and aging infrastructure, and ensuring sustainable and resilient urban habitats. The goal of this REU site is to provide an interdisciplinary research experience to students from institutions that do not typically offer research experiences to undergraduate students, and to develop highly qualified candidates for our nation’s cutting-­‐edge graduate programs in science and engineering fields. The Engineering Cities REU site consists primarily of an intensive research experience in which each student works closely with a selected faculty mentor and his/her research group on a specific research project. Students work as integral members of a faculty mentors’ research team. In addition to the research experience, the following activities are included: field trips to Washington DC and New York City, a 4-­‐week ethics component focusing on the ethical challenges associated with urban economic development policies, historical walking tours of Philadelphia, seminars focused on career development, and social events. Benefits of this project include increasing the participation of women and minorities in engineering, raising awareness of the complex challenges associated with engineering and managing the urban environment, and encouraging students to pursue careers serving the urban community after completion of their studies. In addition to providing a meaningful research experience, Engineering Cities includes a variety of enrichment and professional development activities that allow students to better appreciate the inherent complexities of urban engineering and to explore the broader social, ethical and political implications of their work. We have completed a formative evaluation of Year 1 of Engineering Cities and identified both the high-­‐rated and the low-­‐rated learning outcome gains by program participants. Overall, 38% of the learning outcomes were rated highly in the post-­‐survey in comparison to 15% of the learning outcomes being highly in the pre-­‐survey. This is more than a two-­‐fold increase in highly rated outcomes and is indicative of a great learning experience. Products from the student research include poster presentations of their work, which were presented to the greater Drexel community at the conclusion of the program. Further publications are in development. In addition, we have completed a substantive formative evaluation of the program site, with a thorough assessment of its strengths and suggestions for improvements in future years. Results from this report are being carefully evaluated by the project team as we plan years 2 and 3 of the site. I.53: Life Cycle Assessment of Algae Biodiesel Production Easar Forghany (UC Berkeley), Mira Olson (Drexel University), Sabrina Spatari (Drexel University) Algae-­‐based biofuel is a next generation renewable fuel which has the potential to replace petroleum diesel and may reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. This research examines a life-­‐cycle assessment of the global warming potential (GWP) and energy requirement of algae-­‐based biofuels produced from Chlorella vulgaris, produced on-­‐site using landfill gas (LFG) and landfill leachate (LFL) from a municipal solid waste landfill. A literature-­‐based life cycle assessment was created and adjusted to take all of the fossil-­‐energy requirements to be derived from waste sources (i.e. LFG and LFL). The material and energy requirements for this LCA process were also compiled for future input into SimaPro software, however this analysis was not competed during the study period. Energy and GWP requirements were based off of literature values and adjusted according to this study. It was found that an on-­‐site landfill algae-­‐oil production plant could ultimately be self-­‐sustaining in terms of energy, and that the cost of the plant would be very low compared to the other LCA models created. I.54: iREU: Interdisciplinary Research Experience for Undergraduates in Medicine, Energy, and Advanced Manufacturing Anne Hanna (Drexel University), Geri Kneller (Drexel University), Colleen Rzucidlo (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University), Alisa Clyne (Drexel University), Surya Kalidindi (Drexel University) The NSF/DoD-­‐sponsored REU site iREU: Interdisciplinary Research Experience for Undergraduates in Medicine, Energy, and Advanced Manufacturing at Drexel University recruits students from local colleges and universities, particularly from groups underrepresented in STEM disciplines, and provides them a rich summer research experience in cutting-­‐edge research focus areas. During summer 2010 (our first year of the award), six undergraduate students from different backgrounds worked with Drexel faculty and graduate students and interacted with other summer program participants during a nine week summer research experience. Participants also benefited from technical communications training, field trips, career-­‐related mentorship, and social and cultural activities. The program culminated in a final poster session and white paper competition. Lessons learned from our first year will be applied over the next two years to provide future participants with an even more educational and rewarding experience. The participant group will also be expanded to twelve students per year. 1. Need Many bright students at local colleges, universities, and community colleges with small graduate programs may not have research opportunities at their home institutions, and therefore these students may not consider graduate school or science and engineering research careers. Given the increasing need for talented STEM researchers, particularly in the critical areas of medicine, energy, and advanced manufacturing, we offer a taste of engineering research to those local students whose potential in STEM fields might otherwise go untapped. Since we understand the value of diverse perspectives in addressing today's engineering challenges, we included students from groups underrepresented in STEM in our recruitment. 2. Approach We identified local partner schools with limited graduate programs. Our faculty visited these schools to advertise our program and encourage students to apply. Accepted participants worked on multidisciplinary, intergenerational research teams consisting of a faculty advisor, a graduate student mentor, and when possible, a high school teacher from Drexel's RET-­‐
Nano program, a high school student from Drexel’s Summer Mentorship program, or a Drexel freshmen from the STAR summer research program. iREU participants joined students in three other Drexel College of Engineering REU programs to enjoy technical communications seminars, field trips, career-­‐
related mentorship, and social and cultural activities. All students presented their work in a final joint poster session and white paper competition, and some will go on to present their research at professional conferences. Participants were also asked to identify a faculty mentor at their home school to share iREU program benefits with their fellow students. 3. Benefit The potential beneficiaries of the iREU program include: 1) the participants themselves, who will be inspired and enabled by their experience to pursue careers in STEM research, 2) the participants' classmates at their home institutions and other members of their home communities, who will learn about STEM research career options, 3) the Drexel graduate mentors, who will gain valuable experience in mentorship and a new perspective on their own research, and 4) the STEM research communities in medicine, energy, and advanced manufacturing that will be advanced by the research these students accomplish both in the iREU program and in their future careers. 4. Outcomes One excellent student was selected to participate from each of our five local partner schools, along with one additional participant who was recruited by other means. All of the students did excellent research over the course of the summer on topics ranging from printable solar cells to injury prevention sensors for helmets. Other program highlights included field trips to Atlantic County Utilities Authority facilities and the Synthes medical device factory. One challenge we encountered was that even the bright undergraduate students in our program often had difficulty understanding the rigorous schedule required to accomplish significant research objectives during a single summer. In future years, weekly reports will be used to help students assess their research progress, as well as to allow mentors and program directors to effectively track student progress and intervene in cases of difficulty. 5. Deliverables In addition to students' research outcomes, we established relationships with several local schools for program recruitment and collaboration among faculty members. We will continue these relationships and expand them further in coming years. As we have completed only one program year, we do not yet have long-­‐term tracking data for participants. We will maintain contact with program alumni to provide support for future graduate school applications and to evaluate long-­‐term program outcomes. I.55: Undergraduate Research and Real World Sensor Applications Caroline Schauer (Drexel University), Jin Wen (), Keiko Nakazawa (Drexel University), Dorilona Rose (Drexel University), David Urias (Drexel University) The NSF-­‐sponsored REU Site SENSORS: From Design to Implementation provides REU participants with a unique research opportunity, exposing them to the entire exploration process of creating a viable sensor and sensor network for various real-­‐life applications. Hands-­‐on research activities, a multi-­‐disciplinary laboratory environment, systematic research education, strong industrial connections, and comprehensive ethics activities serve to increase the participants’ knowledge and interest in research and sensor technology from design to implementation, as well as instill a strong desire to continue with research at the graduate level. The REU students work closely with select faculty and graduate mentors on a specific research problem that falls within the “design to implementation” theme. To enhance the research experience and to better prepare them to be future researchers, a variety of additional activities are incorporated. These include: research workshops covering various sensor and network related research topics, educational workshops that provide a systematic introduction to research and technical communications, ethics workshops run by the Chemical Heritage Foundation to educate students about the social responsibilities of engineering, field trips to demonstrate how research findings are transformed into industrial products, a poster session with two other Drexel REU programs, and a mini-­‐proposal writing and current NSF fellows panel session for reviewing the projects. SENSORS is imbued with an ethics component to systematically establish the concept of performing research combined with hands-­‐on experience across all aspects of the “design to implementation” spectrum. Targeted student participants are sophomores and juniors who are in the process of pursuing a science or engineering undergraduate degree and have not necessarily chosen to go to graduate school. The first three years of the SENSORS program, thirty SENSORS students have hailed from 22 different colleges and universities (36% of them did not offer graduate degrees) and are 50% female and 20% underrepresented racial minorities. Based on our recent surveys, 70% of them are in graduate school or will attend in the near future. This REU site proposal focuses on encouraging students to pursue a career in research through laboratory experience and the writing of an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship based original research topic exercise with the participation of current NSF Fellows acting as a review panel. Now completing its fourth year, SENSORS participants have already co-­‐authored twelve accepted journal papers. Additionally, participants have returned to their home institutions to present their research posters and have applied for graduate programs and NSF Graduate Research Fellowships. I.56: Novel Advanced Materials and Processing with Applications in Biomedical, Electrical and Chemical Engineering Christos Takoudis (University of illinois-­‐chicago), Gregory Jursich (University of Illinois-­‐Chicago) The goal is a stronger and diverse U.S. workforce of scientists, engineers, and technologists as well as discovery across the frontier of science and engineering. This requires significant efforts to attract and prepare U.S. students to be highly qualified members in the global technical workforce, to support innovative research thereby enabling people at the forefront of discovery to make important and significant contributions to science and engineering knowledge, and to increase opportunities for underrepresented individuals to conduct high quality, competitive research activities. Objectives of this Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site include development and enhancement of the students' creativity and ethics in science and engineering, safety training in research laboratories, fostering the understanding of the research process and intellectual property, giving the students experience at writing and presenting their work, and uniquely preparing them for interdisciplinary collaborations in their future careers. In 2010, our REU program included 11 undergraduates from the U.S. with a wide spectrum of scientific backgrounds. It supported research in areas such as atomic layer deposition of novel multifunctional nanostructures, broad dissemination of BioMEMS devices, biomedical pressure sensors, nanofluidics, hydrogen storage, atomic scale characterization of functional oxide materials, engineering green technologies, protein engineering, and multiferroic oxide thin film growth. (http://www.uic.edu/labs/AMReL/NSFREU2010/index.htm ). Outcomes, benefits and deliverables of our REU program included professional training on safety in the laboratory along with certificates of laboratory safety and waste management, tutorials on making oral presentations and writing technical papers, one-­‐on-­‐one interactions of the REU students with faculty and graduate students from several disciplines in an exciting scientific environment in novel research in emerging technologies and cutting-­‐edge research, literature study on their research topic, hands on experimentation or modeling, weekly presentations on motivation, objective, status, and future planning of research, intermediate and final reports on research, visits of other research labs in the area, acquired confidence in working independently, application of the students’ own ideas to state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art research, planning and carrying out experiments in laboratories, submission of final reports/papers to the Journal of Undergraduate Research (JUR) at the University of Illinois at Chicago (http://jur.phy.uic.edu/ ) that are anonymously reviewed by faculty, and submission of additional research manuscripts to other refereed journals. Another important unique aspect of the REU Program was the continuous and intense cross-­‐fertilization of ideas among undergraduates with very rich and diverse (academic, cultural, socioeconomic) backgrounds. I.57: REU Site for Increasing Diversity In Engineering at the Pratt School of Engineering of Duke University Martha Absher (Duke University) The Pratt Research Experiences for Undergraduates Program for Increasing Diversity in Engineering for summer 2010 provided interdisciplinary and interdepartmental research opportunities involving all departments of the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University: Biomedical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering. This REU Program has as its intellectual focus opening the whole field of engineering for the full inclusion of all underrepresented populations—women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities. Eleven REU Fellows participated for summer 2008. Pratt’s Biomedical Engineering Department consistently ranks in the top 2 in the nation. Due to the strength of this area, the Pratt REU Program provides approximately half of its projects in biomedical engineering and bioengineering areas, ranging from biomedical cardiovascular engineering to biochemical engineering, biomechanics of cells and hard and soft tissues, cellular and biosurface engineering, and electrical activity of the heart and brain. Multiple projects in the areas of materials science including the focus on biologically inspired materials and material systems, mechanical, electrical, computer, civil, and environmental engineering are also offered. Students participated in research team meetings as well as special REU group meetings and training in communications, professional writing, and career preparation as well as in professional scientific presentation of research. Based on prior experience and success, this REU Site Program aims to have over 75% of its students from underrepresented groups and that goal was surpassed for summer 2010. All students were from outside Duke. Based on the Program’s prior unique experience of the past 21years in recruiting, mentoring, and supporting outreach students with disabilities, this proposal aims to have an REU Site Program which will include at least 25% disabled students each year. Again based on prior successes, this program will recruit students who may not have had such research opportunities and whose lives can be can be changed by the opportunities, training, and follow up the Program provides in encouraging them into higher engineering and science education and careers. I.58: One Day's Pay: Educating K-­‐16 Engineers to Create Affordable Innovations Lauren Rockenbaugh (University of Colorado Boulder), Malinda Zarske (University of Colorado at Boulder), Derek Reamon (University of Colorado at Boulder), Daria Kotys-­‐Schwartz (University of Colorado at Boulder) Current engineering education practices are not keeping pace with the learning styles of today’s student population or with advances in our understanding of learning theory. Even though ABET criteria establishes guidelines for universities to teach about the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context, and the National Academy of Engineering’s Engineer of 2020 recommends graduating engineers well-­‐trained in communication, leadership, and the ability to work in multicultural settings, many engineering college graduates find that their first or second post-­‐
graduation engineering job requires a set of skills different than what they learned during their undergraduate engineering career. The One Day’s Pay research initiative and its affiliated Engineering for American Communities (EFAC) organization were conceived to address several prominent issues in engineering education. The motivation behind EFAC is to provide engineering students with academic opportunities to participate in altruistic engineering design projects to develop their technical and non-­‐
technical skills while also discovering the social context around their creative innovations. EFAC sends students into urban Denver and targeted rural Colorado locations to interview community clients and create innovative, low-­‐cost products to meet the clients’ needs. The purpose of the innovative products is to improve clients’ quality of life in some meaningful way. Key personnel in our college and our partner institutions have identified opportunities for integration of altruistic design curricula into courses, workshops, and programs that focus on students ranging from sixth graders to college senior engineering undergraduates. The One Day’s Pay research program will analyze the effects of the social context supplied by EFAC, and draw comparisons with conventional curricula. The infusion of altruistic design experiences into myriad academic student learning venues concurrently provides an ideal opportunity to conduct rigorous engineering education research on engineering learning mechanisms and engineering diversity and inclusiveness. During the last year we completed EFAC projects in both the high school and first-­‐year undergraduate level. Overall, the results are promising with self-­‐reported survey data suggesting that students who participate in altruistic engineering design have an increase in confidence of technical and professional skills as well as interest in engineering. Our EFAC student organization has also completed one project and is underway to complete two more projects this spring semester. EFAC student organization members who participated in the first project reported an encouraging degree of satisfaction with the program. They also expressed a desire for more complex projects, discovered the difficulties of working on multidisciplinary teams and were satisfied with the flexibility and resources associated with the project. Our first community client was most satisfied with the professionalism of EFAC student members, quality of the completed project, and the creativity of the final project. She would definitely recommend EFAC to another organization like her own. We still have areas to improve, and we will focus on improving our client communication and timely completion of the project in our next efforts. We have submitted papers on the EFAC student organization, the EFAC first year undergraduate projects course, and the EFAC junior-­‐level Mechanical Engineering course. We hope to disseminate our results widely to inform the engineering community of the potential benefits of integrating entrepreneurial altruistic design across the curriculum and to provide a replicable model for other engineering institutions. Internally, the results of our research are being used to refine our program to maximize the impact in our target courses and to increase participation by students and local community clients. I.59: Using Digital Pens for Fine-­‐Grained Examination of Skill Acquisition in Engineering Statics Tom Stahovich (UC Riverside) Instructors are often perplexed by the fact that students struggle to solve problems that differ only superficially from ones they have already solved. For example, a Statics student who has successfully analyzed a toggle clamp may be unable to analyze vise grip pliers, which are conceptually identical. Similarly, students are often able to demonstrate concepts in isolation, but then struggle to apply them in combination. These findings suggest that students often have only a superficial understanding of the subject. They behave like novices, seeing the individual elements in a problem, but working without a coherent perspective of the larger whole. This project seeks to understand the causes of this state of affairs and develop new instructional techniques to remedy it. Here we will report the results of a study we conducted to examine the process by which students acquire skills in a ten-­‐week Statics course. The study included over 100 students, each of whom was assigned seven homework assignments comprised of a total of 41 problems, seven quiz problems, two midterm exams comprised of a total of five problems, and a final exam with six problems. Each student was provided with a “smartpen” which recorded their problem solutions as time-­‐stamped pen strokes. Software we developed enables us to replay recorded solutions and measure solution time and other properties of problem-­‐solving performance. The homework assignments contained problems organized into groups, such that the problems within each group entailed the same concepts and differed only superficially. For example, in one group, the problems were the analysis of a crane's boom, the analysis of a cantilevered arm supported at mid-­‐span by a cable, and the analysis of a foot-­‐operated control lever. While the problems differed superficially (the shapes of the parts were different) the solutions were conceptually identical. Examination of the progression in performance within the group provides a measure of skill acquisition and transfer within that class of problems. Subsequent questions on quizzes and exams were designed to measure retention and transfer. Data collection with smartpens enables a fine-­‐grained examination of a student’s solution process, which is not possible given only the final ink on paper. Our analysis of the solution process will include a variety of measures such as: total solution time, time spent on the various steps in a solution (e.g., free body diagram and equilibrium equations), the sequence in which the steps are performed (e.g., was the free body diagram drawn first or last), the amount of crossed-­‐out work, the point in the solution at which mistakes are detected and crossed out, and so on. We will examine how the performance measures vary over the course of instruction. A particular focus will be how performance evolves within a problem group and the related quiz/exam problems. Problem-­‐solving performance will also be correlated with the results of Steif’s Statics Concept Inventory, which was administered at both the beginning and end of the course. I.60: Developing Adaptive Expertise in Engineering Taylor Martin (Univ. of Texas at Austin) Engineering is an adaptive field, not an exact science. The problems of the 21st century, such as those in medicine, population growth, environment, and energy, are difficult and global. We need engineers and scientists who understand more deeply, think more creatively, and innovate on a larger scale than in the past. This need is reflected in the recent popularization of high school engineering, and is creating a demand to train both new and in-­‐service teachers to teach engineering. In Texas for example, the goal is to have one teacher in every high school prepared to teach engineering by 2011. In just one state, this goal will require nearly 2000 teachers equipped to teach engineering. These issues are compounded by the presence of multiple course options, varying teacher content expertise and the open-­‐endedness of design-­‐based courses. As researchers involved in the preparation of these teachers, we conceptualize the competencies they need as Adaptive Expertise (AE). Adaptive experts are innovative: they adapt to perform well in novel and fluid situations. They are also efficient: they apply core knowledge appropriately and expeditiously. Challenge-­‐based instruction (CBI) combines common engineering educational methods, those that develop efficiency (e.g., traditional lecture-­‐based instruction) with those that develop innovation (e.g., problem-­‐based instruction). CBI has been shown to develop AE in problem solving contexts. To investigate whether and how design-­‐centered CBI (or Design-­‐Based Instruction, DBI) develops AE, we utilized a cycle adapted for the design-­‐based engineering course in our 6-­‐week summer institute. We explored whether DBI increased engineering innovation and efficiency in 33 experienced mathematics and science teachers by administering pre-­‐ and posttests for each of three design challenge units. Some questions required innovative thinking and others required efficiency to measure overall growth in AE. Additionally, we used two different instruments to survey the teachers’ adaptive beliefs about engineering and learning at the beginning and end of the summer institute. The results of this research show that DBI can improve teachers’ AE in the space of one course. In the three design challenge units, the teachers’ efficiency increased significantly. Their innovativeness showed increases and were significant in two of the units. At times, teachers showed greater efficiency while, in other instances, they demonstrated more innovation. In one particular unit, the teachers’ innovation was significantly higher and showed significant increases over time. Efficiency also increased significantly and was close to innovation by the posttest. In the survey about design beliefs, teachers significantly improved on AE and innovation averages were significantly higher than efficiency averages. In a survey measuring constructs of AE, teachers exhibited adaptive beliefs about learning science and engineering both before and after the institute. However, teachers rated two of the constructs, Epistemology and Metacognitive Self-­‐Assessment, significantly higher than the other two: Goals and Beliefs and Multiple Perspectives. The potential of DBI is promising. The summer institute has expanded to multiple cities, and we have observed and collected data from many of the participating teachers. In addition, we have helped write a high school level engineering course that uses DBI. Several of our teachers are piloting the course this year. We are currently researching effects of the program on the teachers’ classes and studying the differences between the pilot teachers and other engineering, science, and math teachers in the program as well as the students of all participating teachers. Throughout this process, our research instruments have been refined to more accurately measure the development of innovation and efficiency and increases have already likewise been documented in the students’ development of AE. Studying pathways to foster the growth of AE will inform curriculum developers, school districts and policy makers of best practices. Ultimately, development of AE in both teachers and students is the goal and researching these avenues provides a way to attain this goal. I.61: Bridge to the Future for GIs: GI Bill Survey Information & Results Sue Rosser (Georgia Tech), Don Giddens (Georgia Tech), Laurence Jacobs (Georgia Tech), Julia Melkers (Georgia Tech), Adjo Amekudzi (Georgia Tech), William Long (Georgia Tech), Deepak Divan (Georgia Tech) The Post-­‐9/11 GI Bill has led universities to seek to understand the educational needs and skills of veterans and to design multidisciplinary curriculum to address those needs and skills. This planning grant engaged a diverse set of faculty, military affiliated individuals and other stakeholders to develop a creative approach to meeting the needs of returning GI's. In addition, the project involved a preliminary study to address veteran's interests in multidisciplinary graduate engineering education. The results show definite interest, particularly at the master's level, that blends traditional engineering with international studies, management, and public policy. I.62: ASPIRE (American Student Placements in Rehabilitation Engineering) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Alicia Koontz (University of Pittsburgh), Rory Cooper (University of Pittsburgh) ASPIRE (American Student Placements in Rehabilitation Engineering) focuses its 10 week Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program on research in the rehabilitation engineering and assistive technology fields. Rehabilitation engineering employs a systematic approach to the design, modification, customization and/or fabrication of assistive technology for persons with disabilities. Research efforts in rehabilitation engineering are focused on identifying and addressing problems critical to achieving and maintaining the highest possible level of function in areas related to mobility, communications, sensory (e.g., hearing, tactile, vision), and cognition and in activities associated with employment, independent living, and education. The primary objective of the ASPIRE REU program is to provide an exemplary mentoring and resourceful environment that enables undergraduate students to 1) transition from dependent to independent thinkers, 2) develop a sense of excitement about entering an engineering or technical field and 3) be well prepared for their future careers. Recruitment initiatives emphasize minorities and students with disabilities, as well as those students who have limited research opportunities at their home institutions. Seminars, workshops and field trips supplement the educational experience outside of the laboratories. Students in this REU Site are an active participant of a multi-­‐disciplinary research team and acquire ownership of part of a larger-­‐scale or pilot research project. A unique quality of this REU is that students have the opportunity to experience first hand the application of technology to real people in both a clinical and research setting. All students go to the Center for Assistive Technology, an outpatient community-­‐based clinic, to observe the process of providing assistive devices for mobility, hearing, speech, and other essential everyday needs to individuals with disabilities. Over the course of the 3 year program, ASPIRE has provided a REU experience to 39 students. Our aggressive recruitment efforts have more than doubled the number of student applications compared to the internship facilitated before this REU Site was awarded and 24% of these applications have been received from minority students. As a result, 23% of the students who have participated in our REU Site thus far have been African-­‐American, Hispanic or students with disabilities. The successes of our undergraduate interns have led to 10 peer-­‐reviewed conference proceedings and two prestigious student paper awards. From our post-­‐internship follow-­‐up efforts we learned that 69% of those who have graduated and kept in touch with us are pursuing advanced degrees, two of which are female engineers who are concentrating in rehabilitation engineering directly. Of those students that are working post-­‐baccalaureate, 50% are engineers working in healthcare companies. According to exit surveys, ASPIRE empowers undergraduate students with the confidence, experience and skills necessary to excel in graduate studies and in their future careers as engineers or scientists. Moreover, ASPIRE provides opportunities for students to work on projects that have direct application to the betterment of society. Having this experience early in their academic careers not only raises awareness to the social obligations of being an engineer, but also provides a “beyond the classroom experience” that brings purpose and meaning to an engineering curriculum. I.63: Quality of Life Technology Center (QoLT) Engineering Research Center (ERC) Research Experience for Undergraduates Program (REU) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Dan Ding (University of Pittsburgh) The vision of the QoLT ERC is to transform lives of people with reduced functional capabilities due to aging or disability through intelligent devices and systems. The QoLT ERC is a unique partnership between Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) and the University of Pittsburgh, integrating CMU’s strength in the design, implementation, and technology transfer of intelligent systems, and Pitt’s strength in rehabilitation, health sciences and aging research. The primary objectives of the QoLT REU program are to excite undergraduate students about technology and engineering, engage them in cross-­‐disciplinary research in QoLT to gain understanding of how to relate human functions (physiological, physical, and cognitive) to the design of intelligent devices and systems that aid and interact with people, expand their knowledge of emerging technologies in QoLT, and prepare them for graduate studies or professional careers in QoLT. The QoLT REU program is designed to actively engage students in research, product development, and evaluation of QoLT, while advising them on proper research conduct, workplace ethics, and human subjects testing. The students learn about QoLT research in a friendly, nurturing, and structured environment, and work closely with faculty and graduate student mentors and other team members on a QoLT research project. Additionally, the students are exposed to many other aspects of research: medical and social aspects of aging and disability, design and research practices, scientific writing, and research presentation. Through field trips to our local partners and a career workshop with the QoLT faculty and industry partners, students are able to explore career options in this field. At a REU research symposium held at the end of the internship, the students showcase their research findings to QoLT faculty, student peers, and industry representatives. Students who exhibit a strong interest in pursuing advanced education in QoLT are encouraged to work further with their mentors after the internship to submit research papers to related professional conferences and they will be supported to attend the conferences that have accepted their papers. Two of the students from the first year’s program have submitted papers thus far. Altogether, 46 students have participated through a one-­‐year NSF REU supplement in 2007 and a three-­‐year REU Site awarded in 2008. Targeted recruitment efforts have resulted in a high representation of minority participants including 41% female students, 35% African-­‐American and Hispanic students, and 20% of students with disabilities. Post-­‐internship follow-­‐up efforts showed that 60% of 20 students who have graduated are pursuing advanced degrees, four of whom are currently pursuing graduate programs at Pitt and CMU. We believe that research internships are an effective way to encourage outstanding students to consider careers or advanced education in QoLT. We believe participation will also enlighten those who choose not to pursue advanced education to consider issues related to individuals with disabilities and older adults in their future careers. I.64: Experiential Learning for Veterans in Assistive Technology and Engineering (ELeVATE) Mary Goldberg (University of Pittsburgh), Rory Cooper (University of Pittsburgh) The goal of ELeVATE is to increase the enrollment and retention of wounded, injured, and ill (WII) veterans in engineering programs at the college level. It will do so through multiple interventions based on social cognitive theory, needs assessments, and other model programs. Through a three phased program, coordinated by the QoLT ERC, which is composed of University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University, along with support from the Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) and several veterans’ service organizations, participants will engage in experiential learning, rehabilitation counseling and supports, mentoring, academic preparation and career exposure activities. The activities are designed to increase self-­‐efficacy and outcome expectations which will encourage participants to apply to engineering programs. Once enrolled, support activities will help participants achieve their performance sub-­‐goals and persist through engineering degree programs which will ultimately result in enrolling in graduate school or obtaining a full time job in engineering. Though ELeVATE will only begin in the summer of 2011, its foundations are deep rooted in the success of QoLT’s REU program which has advanced underrepresented students through the STEM pipeline and delivered a promising model. Assessment efforts developed through the REU program will be adapted to evaluate this cohort with the goal of contributing towards the bodies of literature surrounding experiential learning, veterans in STEM education, and retention and promotion of underrepresented students in STEM. Session II: Monday, March 14, 1:30 – 2:30 p.m. II.1: CAREER: Characterization of Cognitive Models of Conceptual Understanding in Practicing Civil Engineers and Development of Situated Curricular Materials Shane Brown (Washington State University) Progress in conceptual change research relies on developing target models of experts’ understandings of phenomena. Cognitive models can engage both individual and socially shared cognitive processes and knowledge of both processes is necessary to characterize knowledge in a field. An immediate need exists to develop individual and shared cognitive models of conceptual understanding in practicing engineers, and the role of epistemology in these models. An educational need exists to better integrate engineering students within the context of engineering practice and to develop and implement curricular materials that represent this integration. The lack of a target cognitive model and associated situated and research-­‐based curricular materials impedes students’ abilities to be prepared to be productive and innovative engineers in the workforce. The first step will be to implement concept inventory questions that are relevant to civil engineering to practicing civil engineers throughout the country. Clinical demonstration interviews with practicing engineers will then be conducted about their understandings of select concepts from concept inventories. A graduate student will then spend one year conducting ethnographic research at a civil engineering firm to understand the shared knowledge of select concepts of an engineering design community. The final effort will be to develop curricular materials based on existing best practices that represent the ways of knowing present in engineering practice. Development of a cognitive model of practicing civil engineers will provide a basis for future research on conceptual change from novices to experts in the field of engineering by providing a detailed description of the cognitive structures of experts. Research on practicing engineers will yield a dramatic impact on engineering educators and researchers by prioritizing the importance of certain concepts and evidence of how they support/interfere with civil engineering design. This study’s education contribution is significant because it will provide broad dissemination of the first research-­‐
based curricular materials designed to inspire conceptual changes of particular importance to engineering practice, and thereby provide a framework for similar research and curricular materials development in other disciplines. The expected outcomes of research efforts are a rich and detailed discipline specific cognitive model of conceptual understanding in civil engineering, including the role of epistemology, and a generalized approach for conducting this approach in other engineering disciplines. The expected outcomes of educational efforts are a tested and easily implementable set of curricular materials and assessment instruments that can enact conceptual changes of value to the field of engineering and be used in multiple courses by civil engineering courses nationally. Together, these outcomes build a vital and solid foundation for a lifetime of research on conceptual change of engineers and associated curricular development. The expected deliverables are multiple conference proceedings, conference workshops and archival journal publications that describe the findings of this research. Curricular materials will be published with a major publishing company, facilitating broad dissemination and usage. II.2: What is Engineering Knowledge: A Longitudinal Study of Conceptual Change and Epistemology of Engineering Students and Practitioners Shane Brown (Washington State University), Devlin Montfort (Washington State University) A large body of research has shown that many students do not possess the understanding of fundamental scientific concepts in fields like physics, mathematics and engineering that would allow them this flexibility. Recent research into “intentional” conceptual change has again highlighted the central importance of epistemological issues in learning by showing that some learning cannot occur before the changes in motivation, goals and skills that accompany epistemological development occur. Studies investigating longitudinal conceptual change that explicitly include epistemological aspects are rare in any field, and absent in engineering. Longitudinal studies of conceptual change that account for epistemological factors and include practicing engineers as participants are required to develop domain and discipline specific theories of conceptual change and to determine what kinds of epistemological and conceptual change engineering education programs should encourage, and the best ways of doing so. The purpose of this project is to determine how and when conceptual and epistemological changes occur for undergraduate engineers on the path from students to early-­‐career practicing engineers, including the sociocultural mechanisms that may influence these changes. Students will be tracked between their sophomore year in college and their second year as a practicing engineer. The first aim is to model the development of student and early-­‐career engineers epistemology and conceptual understanding of civil design concepts. Interviews and written surveys will be collected and analyzed repeatedly to present a thorough a picture of how students’ conceptual understanding and epistemologies develop. The second aim is to identify key conceptual and epistemological challenges for students and early-­‐career engineers. Examining how and when engineers learn engineering fundamentals will identify concepts and epistemological beliefs that are particularly helpful or problematic for students and early-­‐career engineers. Matching the predicted changes in the field of engineering to a more competent and innovative workforce requires fundamental changes to our approach to engineering education; the research described in this proposal will not only help educators by identifying some of the significant learning challenges their students face, but by laying the groundwork for a better understanding of the unique processes through which students become engineers. It is unclear why and how conceptual and epistemological changes occur in some cases and not in others, and how these changes or lack thereof relate to particular problems engineering students face. This research will provide engineering educators and practitioners with road maps of students’ conceptual and epistemological changes through their second year as practicing engineers, allowing them to more efficiently and effectively prepare students by targeting concepts and epistemological beliefs of key importance. Expected outcomes are narrative accounts of conceptual and epistemological change of the first two years of practicing engineers; a catalog of civil engineering content present in reported problems of engineers in their first 2 years of practice; catalog of problem-­‐solving techniques and approaches to ill-­‐structured problems of practicing engineers; a comparison of undergraduate and new student conceptual and epistemological changes; and examples of changes that help and those that hinder engineering practice. II.3: On Complex Problem Solving: From Relevance to Research to Practice Olga Pierrakos (James Madison University), Anna Zilberberg (James Madison University), Kelli Samonte (James Madison University), Jacquelyn Nagel (James Madison University) There has been much criticism about undergraduate engineering education not focusing on authentic real-­‐world contexts which are most often associated to ill-­‐structured domains (i.e. complex problem solving). Rather, undergraduate engineering education mainly focuses on problems that are well-­‐
defined and well-­‐structured. To improve engineering education, it is essential that curricula bring students to high levels of cognitive development by exposing them to real-­‐world problem solving. Our overarching goal is to characterize and understand complex problem solving in real-­‐world engineering settings as a means of integrating these essential problem solving skills in engineering education settings. Undergraduate research and industry experiences provide a strong basis for our students to learn these essential, problem-­‐based, and globally competitive skills. Yet, although such experiences offer many benefits and enable engineering students to begin the practice of solving real-­‐world complex problems, there is a lack of research and empirical studies on understanding the nature of these experiences and students’ learning outcomes. Research on complex problem solving and learning can provide a strong framework on promoting and fostering adaptive expertise, cognitive flexibility, creativity, and innovation. Herein, we employ a mixed-­‐methods approach, guided by six research questions. It is anticipated that this project will lead to: (a) characterization (complexity and structuredness) of research and industry problems will lead to translation of complex problem solving in the classroom using PBL pedagogies, (b) students’ learning outcomes will be assessed in order to understand how different problems enable different outcomes and cognitive abilities, (c) innovative instruments and assessment tools will be developed, and (d) strategies for implementing complex problem solving in engineering education will be investigated. II.4: Understanding the Development of the Engineer Identity: From Identifying with Engineering to Becoming an Engineer Olga Pierrakos (James Madison University), Kathleen Casto (James Madison University), Bryant Chase (James Madison University), Jacquelyn Nagel (James Madison University), Heather Watson (James Madison University), Robin Anderson (James Madison University) Despite a significant increase in initiatives, interventions, and efforts to recruit and retain more engineering students (certainly students underrepresented in engineering), the decline in engineering enrollment continues and there is a clear need to diversify the engineering student population. Recent research and some of our previous work suggest that students’ identification with engineering plays a critical role in their decision to pursue engineering and to persist in engineering. During this effort, we examine the role of identity (i.e. the process of identifying with engineering, developing an engineer identity, and becoming an engineer) among engineering students through the lens of identity theory. More specifically, we are using a mixed-­‐methods research approach (using surveys, questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, observations, etc.) to aid us in ultimately developing a valid and reliable instrument, Engineer Identity Survey (EIS), to measure the engineer identity across different contexts, settings, student populations, etc. In providing insight into students’ engineer identity formation and evolution, not only will we better understand how our engineering students develop their engineer identity and how this identity is shaped over time, but we will also gain insight into improving recruitment and retention strategies and practices. This is particularly important for engineering students who are underrepresented in engineering such as women and minorities. To date, we have gained insight into how the engineer identity begins to form (i.e. via influences such as experiences and individuals), how the engineer identity transforms over time (i.e. strength and growth of the engineer identity over time), how the engineer identity differs across various student populations (i.e. persisters vs switchers, men vs women, students of varying academic levels, etc.). Key implications for improving recruitment and retention can be made from the findings of this effort. Future research directions will also be presented, as well as how the methods used can be expanded and transferred to engineering programs nationwide. II.5: Technology-­‐based Evaluation of Classroom Learning Peter Beling (University of Virginia), Qifeng Qiao (University of Virginia), Barry Horowitz (University of Virginia), Jianping Wang (University of Virginia), Robert Pianta (University of Virginia) Classroom assessment is a topic of increasing interest among education practitioners, researchers, and policy makers. Recent years have seen a number of observation and assessment protocols developed, fielded, and tested as part of large-­‐scale effectiveness experiments. The Measure of Effective Teaching (MET) project, for example, is designed to help educators and policy makers identify and support good teaching by improving the quality of information about teacher practice. MET has used approximately 500 assessment experts, known as coders, to rate more than 23,000 hours of videotaped lessons using standard classroom observation protocols. Recent years also have seen advances in the fields of computer vision and machine learning, to the point where it is reasonable to consider a role in the classroom assessment process for automatic interpretation of video, audio, and other sensor information. In the near-­‐term, this role is likely to be one of supporting, rather than supplanting, human coders by providing filtering or pre-­‐screening services to distill large volumes of video down to those portions that are likely to be most productive or informative for assessment. We assert that content-­‐
based video retrieval is a core technical problem for the development of filtering schemes. The aim in content-­‐based retrieval is to use training interaction with a human user to gain an understanding of the media content that is of interest to the user. Content-­‐based image retrieval has been widely studied, and recently there has been some extension of this work to video, with focus on entertainment media like television programs and feature films. Classroom videos have a number of idiosyncratic properties that present both challenges and opportunities in retrieval. Difficulties in interpretation arise from the complicated and dynamic nature of classroom events, occlusion among students, and pragmatic aspects of human communication. On the other hand, the structured environment of a classroom means that, within the context of a particular assessment methodology, it may be possible to decompose dynamic events into a set of simpler components that are amenable to machine measurement. We propose the Classroom Evaluation and Video Retrieval (CLEVER) system, which is a multiple instance learning (MIL) approach to content-­‐based retrieval of classroom video for the purpose of supporting human assessing the learning environment. The learning aspects of CLEVER are similar to MIL approaches that have been used for content-­‐based image and video retrieval, but differ in that instances and the feature space are defined in ways that exploit the structure of classroom learning and the nature of the assessment system. The key element in CLEVER is a mapping between the semantic concepts of the assessment system and features of the video that can be measured using techniques from the fields of computer vision and speech analysis. We work with a single assessment methodology, the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). CLASS is a theoretically-­‐driven and empirically-­‐supported conceptualization of classroom interactions in which trained coders produce assessment scores on the basis of observation of the classroom, either in person or from a video recording or broadcast. The framework encompasses a consultive process in which teachers used annotated video, produced by the coders using a structured process, as the basis for a self-­‐improvement effort. CLASS has been widely adopted, earning places in both Head Start and MET assessment projects. The CLASS methodology centers on observation of teacher and student actions and interactions, a behavioral orientation that tends to align well with machine interpretation of video, particularly in comparison with assessment approaches that focus on instructional content. CLEVER fuses state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art machine learning algorithms with advanced assessment concepts from the education community. The results of formative experiments on CLASS coders are encouraging. Accuracy in label prediction is substantially greater than would be expected from random performance and would be sufficient to support filters that would reduce human viewing load by a factor of 2 or more. It is also worth noting that other users, such as teachers themselves, might benefit from the content-­‐based retrieval capability of CLEVER as part of a self-­‐improvement or reflective process. II.6: Accelerated Masters Program for Returning Veterans Barry Horowitz (UVA) This project deals with the establishment of a Masters program in Systems Engineering that will attract returning veterans, with the hope that the net result will be an increase in STEM workforce and advanced career opportunities for the veterans. the poster will describe the features of the new program offering and highlight those aspects of the program that are most attractive to veterans and the problems that have emerged as the effort has progressed. II.7: CAREER: Learning from Small Numbers: Using personal narratives by underrepresented undergraduate students to promote institutional change in engineering education Alice Pawley (Purdue University) Engineering educators have made massive efforts to increase the numbers of women and people of color in engineering undergraduate programs, but while numbers have improved, they have stalled at dispiritingly low levels. This project argues that most previous studies and interventions have been hampered by three challenges: (1) they tend to depend on statistical methods of generalization to understand the experiences of underrepresented people, despite the fact that the numbers of such people are usually too low to make analysis of them statistically significant; (2) these studies tend to result in interventions not in the structure of institutions, but in the behavior of students themselves, and in their adaptation to their institutions; and (3) such studies and interventions usually examine women and people of color at predominantly white educational institutions (PWIs), and thus fail to focus on institutions which have showed relatively better success. This research will use personal narratives about engineering education contributed by white women and students of color in undergraduate programs in order to understand how the structure of their educational institution assists and hinders their educational success. These narratives will be analyzed both deductively (informed by sociological theories of institutional structure and critical intersectional theories of gender and race) and inductively (deploying feminist and decolonizing methodological strategies and theories) to propose a new theoretical framework of ‘gendered’ and ‘raced’ institutions in the context of engineering education that can be incorporated into researchers’ and practitioners’ ways of understanding ‘underrepresentation.’ The educational goal is to design, develop and evaluate a workshop with engineering education leaders using tools borrowed from design research (personas’ and informance) that prompts them to imagine what an engineering education institution would look like if it were intentionally designed around the lives of diverse students. This workshop will put the results of the research into practice by targeting those most able to influence engineering undergraduate institutions, including deans, department chairs, and senior faculty. The workshop will enable leaders to develop innovative approaches to addressing the persisting problem of undergraduate engineering student body homogeneity. This project will begin in Fall 2011. There will be traditional dissemination products of conference papers and workshops published with the American Society for Engineering Education conference, Frontiers in Education conference, and American Educational Research Association conference, archival journal publications in the Journal of Engineering Education, and the Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. I will present findings at the national conferences for the organizations from which participants came (including AISES, SWE, and NSBE). Personas will be published online in a workbook, and the workshop online in a guidebook. II.8: IEECI-­‐ASK: Assessing Sustainability Knowledge Alice Pawley (Purdue University), Ranjani Rao (Purdue University), Stephen Hoffmann (), Monica Cardella (Purdue University), Matthew Ohland (Purdue University) Engineering students will need to have expertise in sustainability to become effective engineering professionals. However, most engineering faculty have little professional training in sustainability, and may lack a common understanding of what should constitute sustainability education for engineers. This research proposes a framework to structure and assess sustainability knowledge in undergraduate engineering students. We are using a composite of four data sources to develop the framework: published statements of sustainability principles and peer-­‐reviewed literature; a survey of engineering course titles and descriptions that explicitly mention sustainability; interviews with undergraduate engineering students about sustainability; and conversations with experts in the sustainability education, environmental studies, and engineering education areas. The target audience includes traditionally-­‐trained engineering faculty teaching traditional core engineering courses. We hope our work will help these faculty develop a sense about how to incorporate sustainability (including what to incorporate, and how to assess it) into non-­‐environmentally focused courses, to help all engineering students develop a basic familiarity with sustainability-­‐related technical content. We are working to create an initial synthesized framework that can guide faculty untrained in sustainability how to assess sustainability knowledge in their traditional undergraduate engineering courses. Our initial findings indicate that our framework will be less content-­‐oriented and more epistemological in focus than we had expected. It may be less important for students learn particular technical tools and skills, and more important they have a shift in mindset towards seeing all aspects of sustainability as core to their work, and begin to problematize their association of engineering with the production of new "things." We have presented at 2010 FIE conference, have a paper in review for 2011 ASEE, and will present at the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology. We are preparing manuscripts for JEE, one using ecofeminism as a theoretical framework for understanding existing sustainability education efforts, and a second comparing published principles of sustainability with current course material. We will also prepare a discussion of our overall framework after our May workshop, and in partnership with our workshop participants. II.9: REU Site: Tackling Some of the Grand Challenges of Engineering Inez Hua (Purdue University), Michael Harris (Purdue University), Stephen Hoffmann () 1. What need does your project address? The increased need for engineers who are skilled in addressing a broad range of engineering issues with environmental implications has been identified in some of the National Academy of Engineering’s “Grand Challenges of Engineering.” These needs are reflected in the global job market, and professional opportunities abound for workers who can utilize their technical skills to perform “green jobs.” 2. What approach are you using to address this need? We have developed an REU Site with research themes built upon four of the Grand Challenges of Engineering: 1) Provide access to clean water; 2) Restore and improve urban infrastructure; 3) Manage the nitrogen cycle; 4) Develop carbon sequestration methods. We will also provide professional development and cohort-­‐building activities for the students throughout the summer. 3. What are the potential benefits of your project, and who are the target audiences? The potential benefits are to foster student knowledge of the environmental impacts of their professional activities, ignite student interest in advanced studies in environmental engineering and related fields, and prepare students to enter the global green economy. The target audience is students from 2-­‐ and 4-­‐ year colleges who are studying the natural sciences or engineering. The benefits to society are substantial, as there will be progress made towards solving long-­‐term challenges such as clean water and climate change, and better understanding the impacts of rapid urbanization. 4. What have you learned so far (i.e. findings to date)? The first cohort of 10 REU researchers will begin in June 2011. Preparation so far has included development of recruiting materials and a website, and evaluating the applicant pool. In addition, we have developed a program of additional activities, including professional development and cohort-­‐building for the entire summer. We will provide the students with a series of special activities, in addition to their work and engagement within a research group. These will take three forms: a weekly two-­‐hour REU Cohort session, a series of planned interactions with engineering professionals, and support for social and community-­‐building activities. 5. What are the products of your research so far? How are you insuring they will have an impact? We anticipate research products (publications co-­‐authored between REU researchers and their advisors) after the first cohort complete the program. II.10: A Holistic Assessment of the Ethical Development of Engineering Undergraduates Cynthia Finelli (University of Michigan), Donald Carpenter (Lawrence Technological University), Trevor Harding (California Polytechnic University) II.11: Comprehending Systems with Graphical Representations Sean Brophy (Purdue University) This project explores how undergraduate engineering students learn to reason with graphical representations to comprehend the behavior of complex systems. Undergraduate engineering students are eager to engage in authentic engineering problem solving activities including, design, troubleshooting, and analysis (of system process and performance). However, students have difficulty approaching the problem and could use assistance in learning the skills and tools necessary to identify what they know and refine this thinking as the learn more. The aims of the project include developing a framework to describe the form and function of representational tools, to investigating how tools can support students’ reasoning, and to identify when and what kind of feedback will support their learning. These activities inform the ultimate aim to develop a formative assessment system that can diagnose student diagrams and provide them personalized feedback. II.12: Support of Innovative Design Decisions Sean Brophy (Purdue University) This project explores technological development of interactive models and simulations that enhance learning in a virtual world (VW) for engineering conceptual design couched in a gaming metaphor. Research will uncover how recent advances in 3-­‐D VW environments and virtual organizations based on “hub” technologies enable students’ self-­‐regulated, but expert guided, exploration of conceptual design spaces and development of engineering literacy skills. II.13: Gender Differences in Engineering Education: Is What's Good for the Goose Good for the Gander? Jennifer Walter (Bucknell University), Candice Stefanou (Bucknell University), Susan Lord (University of San Diego), Katharyn Nottis (Bucknell University), Michael Prince (Bucknell University), John Chen (California Polytechnic State University), Jon Engineering educators recognize that, in addition to content knowledge, students need to develop lifelong learning skills so they can adapt to today’s global and rapidly changing engineering environment. Students who display lifelong learning skills are self-­‐motivated, autonomous, flexible, self-­‐directed, and able to self-­‐monitor and self-­‐evaluate their own learning processes. Much of the emphasis in engineering education is on assessing students’ lifelong learning abilities. By comparison, less is known about the relationship between instructor practices and students’ development of those abilities. Our study examines different learning environments to understand their contributions to the development of these skills. One aspect of the study is to investigate the interaction of the gender of the student and the instructor on these skills. Quantitative and qualitative approaches were used to examine differences in the development of lifelong learning skills depending on learning environment and gender. Ninety students and 4 instructors from 4 courses 4 institutions participated in the study. Courses varied in their emphasis on content (Nmale student =39; Nfemale student=16) and process goals (Nmale student=16; Nfemale student=19). Relative emphasis of content and process was determined on the basis of instructor course descriptions. Lifelong learning was operationalized through the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), which students completed pre and post-­‐semester. A within groups analysis was conducted on student responses on the MSLQ pre to post-­‐semester; and between groups analyses on males and females at post-­‐test and on the interaction of faculty and student gender at post-­‐
test. Four class/group work sessions per course were audio-­‐recorded and coded and examined for emerging patterns and recurring themes. Our work will contribute to our understanding of the effect of instructional environments on the development of skills associated with lifelong learning. Student responses to surveys and analyses of the discourse patterns of students and instructors will inform our understanding of the pedagogical effects on the cognitions, motivations and behaviors of male and female engineering students. The findings of our study should be useful for engineering educators in particular, but also broadly applicable to all educators. By examining the similarities and differences in the way that male and female students respond to these environments, we may gain a better understanding of how to better serve the educational needs of male and female engineering students. Broader benefits to student learning in higher education in general are also potential outcomes from this work. Quantitative data from the first year showed differences in the ways male and female students responded to the gender of the instructor and pedagogical environment. Male students in the process oriented courses showed higher levels in their valuations of tasks associated with the course than did female students at post-­‐test. In the content oriented courses, female students reported higher levels of peer learning than male students at post-­‐test. Female students instructed by a female faculty member reported higher levels of organization than the male students; male students reported higher levels of self-­‐efficacy than the female students. Male students, when instructed by a male faculty member, reported higher levels of elaboration than female students. Qualitative data will be studied for potential differences in ways male and female students communicate over course-­‐related topics with each other and with their instructors. Portions of this study have been presented at the following annual conferences: • Active Learning in Engineering Education (Santiago, Chile; January, 2011) • Northeastern Educational Research Association (Rocky Hill, Connecticut; October, 2010) • American Society for Engineering Education/IEEE Frontiers in Education (Alexandria, Virginia; October 2010) • IEEE EDUCON Annual Global Engineering Conference (Madrid, Spain; April, 2010) • American Education Research Association (Denver, Colorado; April, 2010) • National Science Foundation Awardee Conference (Reston, Virginia; January, 2010) • ASEE/IEE Frontiers in Education (San Antonio, Texas; October, 2009) • Awardees Conference of Innovation in Engineering Education, Curriculum and Infrastructure (Reston, Virginia; 2008) Manuscripts are in various stages of preparation and will be submitted as the study progresses. Workshops are also being prepared as an alternate means of dissemination of knowledge. II.14: Making the Connection: Improving Engineering Education for Veterans at the University of San Diego Kathleen Kramer (University of San Diego), Susan Lord (University of San Diego), Rick Olson (University of San Diego) There is an unmet demand in the US workforce for engineers and scientists. At the same time, the recent changes in educational benefits for veterans make it possible for more veterans attend colleges and universities. Many of these veterans have experience in planning, implementing, and leading teams along with applied technical skills, but may not be aware of the opportunities available in engineering. This project seeks to improve veterans’ ability to successfully join the engineering workforce by creating customized engineering education opportunities for our returning veterans. All phases of the transition are addressed including the recruitment/admission process, on-­‐campus support, development of internship opportunities, and placement after graduation. The overarching approach was to identify areas where veterans seeking engineering degrees need support, and then develop necessary processes and materials. Six main areas were addressed: strategies and materials directed at attracting veterans to studying engineering at USD were developed; admissions processes were changed to enhance the identification of active duty military prior to transition and in the processing of their applications; online math modules to prepare incoming veteran students were developed; academic advising and support by engineering faculty, and the Office of the Registrar, was revised to provide appropriate transfer credit and recognition for military experiences and education; campus support services to assure veteran student success were identified, and publicized; and, an advisory board of employers in the region who have a commitment to supporting and hiring veterans was established. We have learned may be that many schools are uncertain about how they can best identify and address veterans’ needs. Faculty from 19 schools who participated in a workshop supported by this work identified major challenges including 1) identifying prospective veteran students, 2) the lack of understanding of veteran student needs by engineering faculty, 3) need of transitioning military for information about the career opportunities in engineering, 4) difficulties awarding credit for military service and training, and 5) the need for a campus climate that is supportive of veterans and military students. Our work directly addresses several of these challenges. Historically very few veteran students enrolled in engineering at the University of San Diego. Since the grant began, over 1/3 of our new transfer students to engineering are veterans and the university’s veteran student population has increased by more than 300%. II.15: Finding Personal Meaning and Societal Connections in Engineering Education: A Case Study in Integrated Course Transfer Robert Martello (Olin College), Jonathan Stolk (), Lynne Slivovsky (), Thomas Trice () In order to prepare students to address increasingly complex challenges at the interface of technology and society, engineering educators must help students explore the relationships between technical studies and human needs. Too often, engineering studies are presented in a decontextualized manner. As a result, students have difficulty identifying value or personal relevance in their learning tasks, student intrinsic motivation and engagement decline, and learning outcomes and moral development may suffer. One approach to preparing students to address the world’s complex challenges is the adoption of integrated (or interdisciplinary), socially relevant learning experiences that reflect the highly interconnected nature of our modern world. The engineering community must build a clearer understanding of how various factors may promote or hinder the adoption of this new approach. This study seeks to advance the engineering community’s understanding in two areas. First, using an existing integrated course at a small private college as a model, a multi-­‐institutional and multi-­‐disciplinary team will collaboratively design new courses that integrate technical studies (e.g., materials science or computer/electrical engineering) with human concerns (e.g., historical context, ethical frameworks, sustainable design practices), and implement these integrated, socially relevant courses in diverse educational environments. The team will leverage existing educational, organizational, and social change literature to characterize the challenges associated with transferring a successful curricular innovation across diverse institutional settings. Second, the team will measure students’ motivational, cognitive, behavioral, and moral development outcomes; and investigate the similarities and differences in student responses to the innovative course approach at the two institutions. This project includes two major analyses that will impact educators who are interested in developing or learning about courses that enable students to examine technology in the broader societal context. First, we will report the characterization and comparison of transfer challenges via hands-­‐on workshops in order to help faculty gain awareness of the numerous stimulants and barriers to integrated course design and implementation, and the impacts of institutional differences on change efforts. Second, we will evaluate a broad array of student outcomes and examine cross-­‐institutional similarities and differences in student motivation and learning responses in order to aid the development of faculty expertise in best pedagogical practices in integrated learning, and help all instructors reflect on their own role in promoting a more holistic, socially-­‐connected approach to technical education. The multidisciplinary team is currently engaged in new integrated course design at a large public university, and integrated course revision at a small engineering college. At the large public university faculty are designing a project-­‐based course that examines embedded systems in the context of modern global social movements. At the small engineering college, faculty are modifying an existing project-­‐based history-­‐
materials science course to improve cross-­‐institutional transferability. Examination of the barriers to change during the course design phase highlights key differences in the organizational and administrative structures at the two institutions. Preliminary discussions at both institutions reveal challenges associated with faculty ownership of courses, student choice in courses, and the budgetary and physical space requirements for larger-­‐scale implementation of project-­‐based integrated courses. This study will build upon and benefit from the PIs' prior research and outreach activities. In particular, the PIs have already facilitated a series of workshops for national and international faculty interested in developing their own integrated course offerings. These faculty participants are drawn to the student motivation benefits offered by an integrated approach, and are often concerned with the higher startup costs, the need for institutional (departmental) permission, and the uncertainty present when attempting integrated offerings. The PIs research on a prior NSF grant indicates that interdisciplinary integration does indeed appear to increase students' intrinsic motivation while decreasing their amotivation and extrinsic motivation in comparison with students in non-­‐integrated courses. II.16: Veterans@VT: A Program for Recruiting, Transitioning, and Supporting Veterans to Graduate Programs in Engineering and Beyond to Civilian Careers (NSF Award Number:EEC-­‐0949209) Ennis McCrery (Virginia Tech), Mary Kasarda (Virginia Tech), Eugene Brown (Virginia Tech), Mark Pierson (Virginia Tech), Karen DePauw (Virginia Tech) Veterans@VT addresses the improvement of resources designed to assist veterans in their transition from military to academic life. While the focus is on recruitment and retention of veterans at the graduate level in engineering programs, our research found that this focus was hindered by a lack of infrastructure for veterans at the university level. Our project involves building a framework of physical and online resources to assist veterans in their transition to and from the university. The potential benefits include increased enrollment and retention of veterans, a more diverse and inclusive on-­‐
campus environment, and a better understanding of the issues veterans encounter when transitioning out of military life. We have found that there are a variety of issues veterans deal with in academia, most of which can be improved by providing basic assistance with navigating an academically structured environment, access to information on expectations and requirements, and social support. We have developed an extensive, research-­‐based website, Veterans@VT (www.veterans.vt.edu), as a central resource for student veterans, faculty and staff veterans, and the community. Informed by a review of best practices and a campus needs assessment, including a survey and interviews with current Virginia Tech student veterans, the site provides links to admissions and financial information, relevant forms (e.g., G.I. Bill), veterans’ events, and a directory of contacts to serve veterans’ needs. Site enhancements continue: it will provide resources useful for students beyond the veteran population, including multimedia to help prospective students understand the components and expectations of an academic community. In addition to the website, work is ongoing to disseminate our results, thus providing university administrators with a level of “literacy” on student-­‐veterans’ issues. These efforts began with a presentation at the 2010 ASME Winter Annual meeting, and additional plans are in process. II.17: Investigation of Hands-­‐On Ability for Mechanical and Electrical Engineers Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), Leonard Bohmann (Michigan Technological University), Chris VanArsdale (Michigan Technological University), Anna Pereira (University of California, Berkeley), Ben Mitchell (Michigan Technological University) Even as technology becomes more sophisticated, practical ingenuity is an important attribute of graduating engineers. Students come to engineering programs with a wide variation in hands-­‐on experience and ability. Design project and lab classes help to teach practical skills but may not effectively accommodate student variability. For example, the student who is already expert at machining may take on that role on a design team. Hands-­‐on ability also has gender implications. Researchers have identified a tinkering deficit that puts women at a disadvantage in the workplace. Our project aims to determine the importance of hands-­‐on ability, to understand where it comes from, to determine its effect on interest in engineering, and to test several interventions for improving it. The project has made use of several new and existing instruments: • Industry survey on the importance of hands-­‐on ability • Previous experience inventory • Engineering attitudes survey • Mechanical aptitude test • Electrical aptitude test • Easy and hard hands-­‐on skills tests • Short stress-­‐state questionnaire A better understanding of hands-­‐on ability will serve as the basis of new educational experiences designed to improve hands-­‐on ability. Mechanical and electrical engineering curricula will produce graduates with better skills for solving problems. Prospective students with few prior hands-­‐on experiences will gain practical skills that lead to greater enjoyment of engineering and more success in the workplace. More explicit teaching of hands-­‐on ability will make the male dominated majors of mechanical and electrical engineering more attractive to women. Surveys about the relative importance of hands-­‐on ability show that it is highly valued by employers, ranking just behind communication skill and teaming ability but ahead of academic ability and prior work experience. Based on survey and test results thus far, hands-­‐on ability does not correlate with GPA for the mechanical engineers but does correlate with GPA for the electrical engineers. For both groups, hands-­‐on ability correlates with ACT science score. For the mechanical engineers, three sets of prior experiences correlate most highly with hands-­‐on ability: tool usage, outdoors skills, and post high school occupational training. Also, we observed large gender differences in the participation levels of these prior experiences. For the electrical engineers, several prior experiences had negative correlations with ability and only one (mechanical drawing) had a positive correlation. Thus far, project results have been disseminated in six conference papers. Three graduate students have been supported by the project and gained valuable experience in engineering education research. II.18: Weaving Threads of Sustainability into the Fabric of the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum: Impacting the Fundamental Manner in which Students Solve Problems Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), John Gershenson (Michigan Technological University), Chuck Margraves (Michigan Technological University), Ibrahim Miskioglu (Michigan Technological University), Gordon Parker (Michigan Technological University) Because of their prominent role in the design and manufacture of products, mechanical engineers have a huge role to play in producing products more sustainably and in developing new products that stem environmental degradation. When sustainability is introduced to mechanical engineers, it is usually done in an interdisciplinary course open to all engineers or to all students. As a result, mechanical engineering students do not draw on the complex analytical tools that they learn in mechanical engineering science courses to solve sustainability related problems. Moreover, for the mechanical engineering students of today to be relevant in a more socially conscious engineering world of tomorrow, they need an improved skill set. The primary tasks in the project are to: • produce problem based learning curricular materials on sustainability that can be incorporated into three mechanical engineering science courses (mechanics of materials, thermodynamics, and dynamic systems and controls); • assess the effects of integrated content on student learning; and • provide a roadmap for the development of additional curricular modules that would integrate sustainability applications and principles into mechanical engineering science courses. The curricular materials will be developed through the collaboration of sustainability experts and faculty who teach mechanical engineering fundamentals. For each of the three targeted courses, one or two problem based learning (PBL) modules are being developed along with supporting lecture and reading materials. The project impacts faculty, students and curricula. It will: increase faculty knowledge of sustainability (and therefore impact courses and research across the country); increase student knowledge of sustainability and their systems-­‐level problem solving skills (and therefore impact the mechanical engineers of tomorrow, yielding more sustainable products and improved solutions to sustainability problems); and realize a mechanical engineering curriculum that appeals to a broader range of students, including those that want to have both technical and social impact in their careers. Measurable outcomes for the project are: (1) student knowledge of sustainability principles; (2) student skill at solving design problems with realistic constraints; (3) student attitudes about mechanical engineering fundamentals, mechanical engineering as a profession, and the importance of sustainability considerations. Based on the first implementation of new problems in Dynamic Systems and Controls, we can conclude that students’ ability to solve open-­‐ended problems improved. However, their consideration of sustainability issues did not increase. In this first implementation, we asked students to explore sustainability issues on their own (we gave no explicit instruction on sustainability topics). In future offerings, we will experiment with greater levels of guidance and explicit instruction. The baseline assessment of junior level design projects leads to a similar finding: one group out of fourteen mentioned energy and/or the environment in their list of design constraints and objectives. It is clear that our current curriculum has not prepared students to consider broader impacts besides product performance. First versions of curricular materials (including problem descriptions and supplementary notes) have been developed for the three courses. They have been piloted in two of the courses thus far, with the third course seeing implementation in the spring 2011 semester. Based on assessment results, the materials will be modified and deployed again in the fall 2011 semester. II.19: Meeting the NAE Grand Challenge: Personalized Learning for Engineering Students through Instruction on Metacognition and Motivation Strategies Michele Miller (Michigan Technological Univ.), Sheryl Sorby (Michigan Technological University), Jim De Clerck (Michigan Technological University), Bill Endres (Michigan Technological University) The rate of change in today’s society is increasingly fast. In one hundred years, we went from horse and buggies to space travel; from cross-­‐country mail that required weeks to instantaneous communication by electronic means; from outhouses and hand-­‐pumped wells to sophisticated sanitation and water systems, nationwide. Predictions for the coming decades do not see this trend slowing down, and in fact the pace of change may be accelerating. One thing is certain—engineering graduates of today must be prepared for a lifetime of learning and adaptation. This project aims to advance personalized learning by helping students to understand and regulate their own learning. The project is designed to equip our students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of self-­‐directed lifelong learning. Earlier research on learning styles, motivation, self-­‐regulated learning, and lifelong learning serves as the foundation for this project. Strategies for achieving the intended student learning outcomes include: • Develop online learning modules that i) give students first hand experience of the influence of learning style and motivation on learning; ii) present tutorials on metacognition and motivation; • Implement a course construction activity in which students create learning materials appropriate for their preferred learning style on a relevant course topic of their choosing; • Implement a research design that deploys the modules and course construction activity in selected sections of two courses such that the effect of multiple versus single exposures is assessed. Students will learn about learning styles and motivation sources. They will learn strategies for improving their motivation and learning. They will become independent, lifelong learners that will be able to adapt to new jobs and tackle new problems. II.20: Research Intervention to Improve Engineering Self-­‐Efficacy of Minority Students at Predominantly White Institutions Sheryl Sorby (Michigan Technological University), Kari Jordan (Michigan Technological University), Susan Amato-­‐Henderson (Michigan Technological University), Tammy Haut Donahue (Michigan Technological University) Background Recruitment and retention interventions are often a “one size fits all” approach. Approaches that have proven effective for one demographic group are applied indiscriminately to people of all demographic groups. Through this project, we will determine the factors that are significant in predicting minority student persistence in engineering and develop a research-­‐based intervention to improve minority student success, career satisfaction, and retention. Self-­‐Efficacy Self-­‐
efficacy refers to a person’s belief that he or she is capable of taking action to achieve a certain goal, such as completion of a college degree. Engineering self-­‐efficacy is a person’s belief that they can successfully navigate the engineering curriculum and eventually become a practicing engineer. Numerous studies examining the role of self-­‐ efficacy in students’ pursuit of engineering careers have generally found a positive correlation between self-­‐efficacy and academic achievement in engineering disciplines. Self-­‐Efficacy Studies with Minority Students Most of the engineering self-­‐efficacy studies conducted in the recent past have been concerned with differences between men and women, with very little work done that focused on engineering self-­‐efficacy for minority students. There are many unanswered questions regarding the development of engineering self-­‐efficacy for minority students. Do the findings obtained for majority males accurately portray factors in the development of self-­‐efficacy for minority males? Are there differences between the development of self-­‐efficacy for majority women compared to that of minority women? Many of the self-­‐efficacy studies conducted with minority students were conducted at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Are there differences in the development of engineering self-­‐efficacy for minority students who are attending HBCUs compared to those attending Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs)? The research proposed here aims to answer, or begin to answer, these questions. Intervention for Improving Sense of Belonging among Minority Students Walton and Cohen (2007) studied the impact of social belonging on the performance of African American computer science students at Yale University. In this study, the researchers observed a relatively large impact for a small (1 hour) intervention. It is unknown if this type of an intervention will be effective for engineering students at public universities. The proposed study will be designed to utilize this “belongingness” intervention as it contributes to the effect of vicarious experiences and social persuasions. We believe that this type of intervention would be relatively easy for other universities to adapt, if it can be shown to be effective. It represents a relatively low resource activity that could bear significant fruit. Project Goals The study has two primary goals: ● Determination of the important factors for the development of engineering self-­‐efficacy of underrepresented minority students (URMs) at predominantly white institutions (PWIs). ● Development and implementation of a research-­‐based intervention that helps to improve URM engineering self-­‐efficacy. Project Activities The Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-­‐Efficacy (LAESE) instrument (Marra et al., 2005) will be used to measure engineering self-­‐efficacy, and the Academic Pathways of People Learning Engineering Survey (APPLES2, developed by Stanford University researchers) will be used to measure persistence in engineering (among other factors). The LAESE and APPLES2 instruments will be administered to the minority students at three institutions. At the same time, the instrument will be administered to select classes in the engineering programs at each institution ranging from first-­‐year courses through to senior-­‐
level courses. Through analysis of this data, we will be able to investigate the temporal aspects of engineering self-­‐efficacy for all students. Based on the findings from the survey results we will create and pilot an intervention and a formative assessment of the intervention at Michigan Tech as appropriate. The intervention will then be tested at our two partnering institutions in the final year of the project. II.21: Engineering Veteran Pathways Ingrid St. Omer (University of Kentucky), Anthony Dotson (University of Kentucky), Richard Sweigard (University of Kentucky), James Chambers (Bluegrass Community & Technical College) The University of Kentucky (UK) is extremely proud of its long-­‐standing relationship with the men and women in uniform that bravely serve this country. From its founding as a Land Grant University in 1865, charged with teaching agriculture, mechanics and military tactics, to its continuing production of leaders for the Army and Air Force through the Reserve Officer Training Corp, UK has consistently contributed to the defense of freedom. Kentucky is ranked 9th in the Nation for numbers of active duty military personnel. It is home to two major U.S. Army installations, Forts Knox and Campbell. It is also home to a very strong National Guard presence and the Commonwealth services over 300,000 military veterans. The UK College of Engineering (COE) is collaborating with the campus Veterans Resource Center (VRC), and Bluegrass Community & Technical College (BCTC) to develop clear programmatic guides for educating veterans in engineering and computer science in a manner that recognizes the unique characteristics of veterans. Our approach is grounded in the adult learning theories of Knowles and Lawler, the experiential learning theory of Kolb, the recommendations of the Veterans’ Education for Engineering and Science workshop report, and the recommendations developed from a case study completed by the University of Kentucky Military Veterans of America. The three focus areas of our approach are: 1) Recruitment and Support Constructs, 2) Transition, and 3) Integration of Technical Experience. Deployment levels in Afghanistan were widely reported at approximately 100,000 U.S. troops as of December 2010. Over 90,000 combat troops were withdrawn from Iraq by the end of August 2010. The remaining troops are scheduled to return by December 2011. Thus, our present national condition resembles that of post WWII, and it is reasonable to expect that a significant number of returning troops will flock to campuses to take advantage of the improved benefits under the GI Bill. In general, the military is more educated now than any other time in its history, however many service members still do not meet the academic criteria to be accepted directly into most universities. The Engineering Veterans Pathways project began during the fall of 2010 with support from the National Science Foundation in an effort to encourage more veterans to utilize their educational benefits, and to improve their engineering enrollment and graduation rates. II.22: Programming Standing Up Matthew Berland (Univ. of Texas at San Antonio), Taylor Martin (Univ. of Texas at Austin) Computer programming is often a stationary, solitary task; such tasks do not work well for many novices. The IPRO project uses our 'Programming Standing Up' framework (PSU) to reframe programming as a mobile, social game. IPRO is a programming and simulation environment for iOS in which a learner programs a virtual robot to play soccer in a virtual space shared with her cohort. Observations of middle and high school students working with IPRO in the classroom demonstrate how embodiment and collaboration change the way students learn to program and engage diverse populations with novel representations of programming. Our outcomes are connected with PSU design principles and inform ongoing design. Journal articles are currently in preparation, and an early version of IPRO has been released publicly. II.23: Collaborative Learning Environment for Automated Manufacturing System Integration (CLE-­‐ASI) Sheng-­‐Jen Hsieh (Texas A&M University) MOTIVE: Automation has a profound effect on the way we do work. Across the five major industry groups that employ more than 40% of all manufacturing employees, nearly three out of every four plants use advanced manufacturing technology. Designing and integrating the components of an automated manufacturing system requires knowledge about mechanical and electrical devices and the ability to write control programs to orchestrate and synchronize the process being automated. It is a highly complex task and system designers are typically senior-­‐level engineers with 10-­‐15 years of industry experience. It is also a highly collaborative endeavor, requiring constant communication between a customer (typically a manufacturer), a team of engineers, and suppliers. Web-­‐based instructional materials are being built to help engineering students and new engineers to acquire the subject knowledge and skills needed to contribute to these activities. However, the focus of these tools thus far has been on educating individual learners. Needed are instructional tools that allow engineering students to collaborate with other students and industry engineers to solve realistic problems in a realistic way, and thereby better prepare them for industry jobs. GOALS: This project aims to combine instructional materials for system integration problem-­‐solving with Web 2.0 tools to create collaborative learning environments that allow teams to work and learn together in solving system integration problems. Project objectives include (1) systematically investigate current modes of communication within the system integration industry and ways to implement these within a collaborative virtual learning environment; (2) develop Collaborative Learning Environment for Automated System Integration (CLE-­‐ASI), a web-­‐based collaborative learning environment for teaching system integration problem-­‐solving; (3) evaluate the environment; and (4) disseminate the findings and the developed system via the Internet. BENEFITS: This project will better prepare engineering students and new engineers to become productive quickly. Engineers who have a deeper understanding of system integration and how to function effectively on a team will be better prepared to adapt to external events such as changes in production goals and processes, and organizational restructuring. This will help them to function more effectively and thereby help their companies—and in turn, the U.S. economy—to be more competitive in the global marketplace. Research results will also advance knowledge in the area of automated manufacturing system integration and benefit the manufacturing industry, system integrators, and consumers as a whole. Potential industrial beneficiaries include companies that use automated manufacturing systems, system integrators, and equipment suppliers. ACTIVITIES/FINDINGS THUS FAR: In our survey of system engineers, we found that they desire communication tools that allow them to 1) obtain answers quickly; 2) make sure everyone has same understanding. 3) document discussions (preferably easy/self-­‐documenting; should not require taking notes); 4) troubleshoot systems securely and remotely; 5) “read” the body language of the customer; and 6) share files, such as CAD files. Currently the top three methods of communication among system integrators are e-­‐mail, phone, and face-­‐to-­‐face. Communication needs for troubleshooting seem slightly different than for design or maintenance tasks. With troubleshooting, clear and rapid communication and access to the system (either on-­‐site or remotely) seem to be especially critical. Currently, face-­‐to-­‐
face meetings are most used for troubleshooting, but due to travel costs and time, there is a strong desire for better remote access and communication tools. Respondents were open to using web conferencing tools, but are not using them extensively yet. We have designed and developed a prototype platform for collaborative system design. Our goal is to use this platform to study the influence of various web communication tools on communication efficiency, particularly as related to collaborative conceptual design of automated systems. Future products will include the developed platform and research findings about collaborative design. We have developed a comprehensive evaluation plan in which participants will work in teams in using CLE-­‐ASI to solve system design problems under various collaboration scenarios. Issues to be investigated include: 1) usability and robustness of various collaboration tools as well as the collaborative environment as a whole; 2) the effect of various types of collaboration scenarios on team effectiveness in producing good designs and 3) the effect of various types of collaboration scenarios on team and individual learning outcomes. II.24: REU Site for Interdisciplinary Research on Imaging and Biomarkers Sheng-­‐Jen Hsieh (Texas A&M University) MOTIVE: Imaging is an essential tool in scientific, engineering, and medical research, and is also emphasized within many military research programs. Biomarkers and biomaterials have received much attention recently. However, due to their multidisciplinary nature, these subjects are not typically covered in a single undergraduate course. APPROACH: Texas A&M University’s REU Site for Interdisciplinary Research on Imaging and Biomarkers provides a research environment for up to ten undergraduate students per year to learn about the use of imaging techniques to characterize biomarkers and biomaterials. The goal is to help participants to understand the research process, to acquire laboratory skills, and to be well-­‐positioned for graduate school and career success. Activities include joining a research group led by a faculty mentor, completion of a 10-­‐week research project, and participation in weekly research seminars, field trips, and career development workshops. Students write a report and present their research to their REU cohort and at an REU poster session on campus. They are also strongly encouraged to stay in touch with their REU mentors and graduate students and to polish their reports after completing the program, with a view toward presenting at a national conference and/or publishing in an academic journal. BENEFITS/TARGET AUDIENCE: Imaging is an essential tool in scientific, engineering, and medical research, and is also emphasized within many military research programs. Biomarkers and biomaterials have received much attention recently. The REU site provides opportunities for undergraduates to learn about the wide range of tools and research applications for imaging by working closely with multidisciplinary faculty who are leaders in their fields and who have strong interest in mentoring undergraduates. Since most undergraduates have encountered imaging technologies in their daily lives and understand that imaging has many valuable applications, we expect this site to be of high interest and impact. The site targets students who 1) have limited opportunities to participate in research on their home campuses; or 2) belong to groups that are traditionally underrepresented in engineering and science, including women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities. ACTIVITIES/OUTCOMES THUS FAR: Interest has been high; over 80 applications were received in 2010. The eight participants included three women, three members of minority groups, and one student with limited opportunities to participate in research on his home campus. Research topics included: 1) Utilization of Infrared Imaging for Studying Chicken Embryo Development; 2) Comparative Analysis of Pulse and Active Thermography for Investigating Hidden Solder Joint Integrity; 3) 3D Tracing and Validation of Mouse Brain Vasculature; 4) Electrochemical Study of LiFeP04 Thin Film Lithium-­‐ion Batteries; 5) Effects of Hydrogen Peroxide and Isopropyl Alcohol on the Mechanical Properties of Bovine Bone; 6) Reducing Error and Power in Parallel Excitation Based on Coil Selection; 7) Retinal Image Artifact Classification and Localization Utilizing Blue Channel as a Pre-­‐processing Step for Diagnosis; and 8) Unraveling the Relationship Between Mesh Size and Modulus in PEG and PEG Star Based Hydrogels. All the participants presented their work at College of Engineering and University-­‐level poster sessions and are preparing manuscripts for submission to refereed conferences and journals. Several have already made plans to attend graduate school next fall. II.25: Project IVEHOL: Integrating Virtual Experiments and Hands-­‐On Labs -­‐ A Synergistic Approach to Enhance Engineering Education Yakov Cherner (ATeL) The project IVEHOL focused on the research, testing and evaluation of the effectiveness of using hands-­‐
on, virtual and novel hybrid laboratories in undergraduate engineering education. The project has developed innovative resources for various undergraduate engineering courses delivered in traditional, online and blended formats. The covered subjects include Heat and Thermodynamics, Distillations and related processes, Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy, Fiber Optics and Photonics, Fluid Mechanics and Telecommunications. The project explored different ways to use virtual labs together with hands-­‐on labs and actual laboratory equipment. Based on student and faculty feedback and assessment, the most efficient strategies for integration of virtual and hybrid laboratories with engineering and technology curricula were identified. The technologies and approaches developed by the project were applied in the design and implementation of virtual and hybrid labs for other disciplines. II.26: Engineering Education in Context: An Evidence-­‐Based Intervention System Donald McEachron (Drexel University), Elisabeth Papazoglou (Drexel University), Fred Allen (Drexel University), Sheila Vaidya (Drexel University) Benefits: An evidence-­‐based intervention system is being developed and implemented to provide for guided evolution of engineering education programs. The purpose of the system, which includes both human and software components, is to provide potential solutions to new and unanticipated educational questions on an ongoing basis. If successful, this approach will provide a new paradigm for the development and distribution of educational innovations. Such a system could be used throughout education – both higher education and K-­‐12 – to provide up-­‐to-­‐date information on novel instructional methods to faculty in the context of their teaching responsibilities. Need: A current challenge in educational research is the lack of successful dissemination of new and novel instructional approaches. This may be the result of an unintended built-­‐in obsolescence arising from two factors. First, an overly narrow focus on answering a specific question or addressing a particular need without sufficient flexibility or feedback limits the ability of the innovation to be adapted to new circumstances. Second, it is the nature of scientific research to report population-­‐level effects. When educational research focuses on population phenomena, however, it ignores the diversity inherent in individual learners. Statements touting the efficacy of active learning as a superior instructional methodology, for example, relegate students who are reflective learners to a virtual non-­‐existence. Educational approaches incorporating a static and universal view of student learning are doomed from the start since student populations are both dynamic and diverse. Approach: To overcome this issue, we collaborated with Untra Corporation to develop a knowledge management system (AEFIS) where the characteristics of students and faculty are periodically measured, processed and analyzed in an efficient and flexible manner. These data will be related to student performance (in progress) and provided to faculty instructors as part of an Instructional Decision Support System (IDSS) based upon similar systems used in health care and business. This IDSS will provide rapid feedback of assessment data combined with student characteristics to empower faculty instructors and enhance student learning. As part of this IDSS approach, validated educational innovations (tested in an educational version of a clinical trial) will be available for downloading from an innovation warehouse (DrexelEduAps) in order to provide proven methodologies to instructors in the context of their educational and course requirements. We are currently considering developing a student version of the IDSS. Outcomes: The AEFIS knowledge management system has been developed and implemented to allow collection of student and faculty characteristics. These include psychological and developmental measures, such as the Index of Learning Styles, Myers-­‐Briggs, Multiple Intelligences, and others, as well as more physiological measures, such as sleep diaries. An educational version of a clinical trial to validate new innovations was developed, implemented and tested. The initial innovation is currently being incorporated into our biomedical engineering curriculum. Analysis of student characteristics indicated the presence of considerable diversity in every metric examined. No single measure proved adequate to capture the population and it was clear that any educational approach based upon an assumption of universality was likely to fail. As such, statements that begin “ the best approach to teaching and learning is . . .” will inevitably ignore and isolate a substantial potion of any sizeable student population. Deliverables: The AEFIS (Academic Evaluation, Feedback and Intervention System) developed in collaboration with Untra Corp. is currently being implemented across several units at Drexel as well as being deployed at other colleges and universities. Our findings have been presented at meetings of the American Society for Engineering Education, Frontiers in Education, RosEvaluation and ABET Assessment conferences and numerous other meetings. Peer review papers have been submitted and are also in preparation for submission. II.27: Use of Haptics in a Virtual Reality Environment for Learning of Nanotechnology Curtis Taylor (University of Florida), Dianne Pawluk (Virginia Commonwealth University), James Oliverio (University of Florida) Learning how things interact and behave at the nano-­‐scale can be difficult for students to understand and conceptualize, as objects at this scale are not directly observable or accessible in the classroom environment. Traditional methods of teaching are also potentially limited in their engagement of students, whom have a diversity of learning styles. We are addressing these issues by developing teaching modules about nanotechnology for grades 7-­‐12 consisting of interactive virtual reality environments with haptics, simulating key physical concepts about the world from the global-­‐ down to the nano-­‐scale which the student can then actively relate. We incorporate three different learning techniques to improve learning and interest in nanotechnology: (1) active learning, (2) the use of multiple modalities, and (3) the use of haptics. The contribution of these three factors will be examined by comparing teaching with the developed modules (vision plus haptics) to the following ‘control’ groups: didactic; active, single-­‐media (vision), no haptics; active, multi-­‐media (vision and audition), no haptics. These results will have implications for more general instructional design; in particular, determining if haptics is of benefit when other factors (i.e., active learning and multiple modalities) are controlled for. The resultant teaching modules are also intended to address the national need to attract, train and educate K-­‐12 students in STEM fields, particularly targeting nanotechnology. Much progress has been made to date. A prototype of the “HAP / NAN” interactive learning environment has been programmed and detailed plans for full virtual reality simulation design and educational assessment have also been created. The interactive learning environment includes 10 levels of scale that provide animated haptic exploration scenarios and quizzes at each level for students to exhibit their understanding of key learning objectives. Five Falcon (haptic) controllers have been purchased, and the capability to link all of the controllers together for simultaneous play has been implemented. Force feedback and assisted narration design has been completed. In addition, a nanofabrication teaching module has been created that consists of a haptic “house building” game at the macro and nano levels. Through the Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics (STEAM) Learning Network, pioneered by the Digital Worlds Institute, we intend to, first, validate the effectiveness of and, then, disseminate the completed modules across the nation to a wide variety of classrooms. In addition, we are also developing, in parallel, teaching modules that will be accessible to students who are blind and visually impaired. To engage these students, we are working on using haptics combined with sonification and voice information. These modules will also be evaluated rigorously be comparing them to didactic and active, single media (auditory only) teaching environments. II.28: Collaborative Research: Sustainability in SCM & Facility Logistics Suzanna Long (Missouri University of Science), Hector Carlo (UPRM) Today’s engineer faces a complex assortment of challenges in the modern global business environment. Awareness of these issues should be an essential component of any engineering curriculum, particularly those focused on supply chain design and management. Engineering managers and other technology-­‐
based business professionals who possess cross-­‐organizational and cross-­‐cultural communication skills, along with traditional quantitative abilities, are more adept at handling the demands of the modern business environment. Mastery of these skills must begin in the classroom and should be an essential component of supply chain-­‐logistics management curriculum. Providing real world opportunities that explore collaboration across organizational cultures, time zones, and practice gives students a tremendous competitive advantage as they enter the workforce and fosters experience-­‐based learning. Questions of sustainability and globalization are best answered through systems-­‐oriented curriculum design. This poster examines the value-­‐added skills achieved through the addition of a global, virtual student project environment through a multi-­‐institutional partnership. This partnership includes two universities in the U.S., one in Puerto Rico, and one in Spain. We plan to develop an integrated supply chain management curriculum that addresses the important concepts of green manufacturing and green facility logistics built on global processes and sustainability factors. The addition to the realm of engineering conceptual knowledge will create a highly skilled, competitive workforce capable of understanding global forces driving complex environmental systems. Assessment is addressed through both internal and external assessment mechanisms. These include the use of individual course evaluation data, pre and post-­‐test measures of progress toward learning goals and evaluation by an external reviewer with expertise in curriculum design and course improvement. II.29: Developing Integrated Creativity Assessments for the Engineering Classroom: Building on the Creative Action-­‐Assessment Cycle for the Engineering Classroom James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Holli Burgon (university of Illinois), Raymond Price (University of Illinois), David Goldberg (University of Illinois) Creativity, the ability to both ideate and to produce new and novel processes and things, is a set of skills and dispositions so complex and diverse that it is difficult to measure. Extant creativity assessment instruments tap into one or even a few attributes associated with creativity. The outcomes of these measures are informative to a point. However, given current and growing demands for breakthrough innovation (Goldberg 2008), it may be more important than ever to understand, identify, and enhance creative capacity in all of its complexity. Based on grounded theory studies of serial innovators, we are working to develop a comprehensive survey of creative capacity. Our initial survey was targeted to people in the work-­‐a-­‐day world. Recognizing the opportunities for early growth and development of creative capacity, we restructured the survey, tailoring it to a university-­‐level audience. With a sample size of approximately 150 student volunteers, our initial validity and reliability analyses are complete. We are using the data to reverse-­‐engineer weak items, tying them back to foundational elements of creativity, as well as to refine the entire instrument through cognitive interviews and expert review. More importantly, perhaps, we have begun work to develop more genuine approaches to creativity assessment. Creativity is a dynamic practice. We are examining indicators of creativity as they are evidenced in the classroom through creative action, as students generate ideas, seek solutions, respond to prompts, engage others, question, model, make connections/think systemically, gather resources, and produce. Part of our wrestle as we move forward will be to develop indicators that will allow us to look past superficial individual differences to measure creative capacity meaningfully and consistently across time. II.30: A Participatory Investigation of Learning in International Service Projects James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Russell Korte (University of Illinois), Laura Hahn (University of Illinois), Valeri Werpetinski (University of Illinois) International service projects may be a key means to educate engineering students. Participating students gain holistic, authentic learning experiences that appear to elicit many of the competencies described as essential for the “Engineer of 2020” – and many are attracted to and motivated by these projects. We are investigating what and how engineering students learn in this context, and how their experiences affect their developing professional identities. We use qualitative methods to discover, describe, and foreground their developing knowledge and competencies, and to enable these students to contribute their ideas and “lessons learned” in focused collaborations with faculty members that are leading to curricular and co-­‐curricular change. A significant finding is the transformation students go through as they learn to apply their expertise under pragmatic, social, cultural, and situational constraints. A consequence of this is also to reframe their perspective about "doing" engineering to be more ambiguous, more complex, and more influenced by interpersonal interactions. Other consequences include more mature intercultural attitudes and understandings of the strengths and weaknesses of the EWB model. We have also found that students who participate in these projects have unique and useful perspectives on the engineering curriculum, and they often develop leadership skills from their experiences. II.31: The First-­‐to-­‐Fourth Flatline: Assessing undergraduate students’ creativity James Elliott-­‐Litchfield (University of Illinois), Holli Burgon (university of Illinois), Raymond Price (University of Illinois), David Goldberg (University of Illinois) Most current models of engineering education do not foster creativity, and may actually stifle creativity. The findings of the current study confirm these suspicions to some degree, suggesting that, over the course of their college education, engineering students do not experience a dramatic change in creativity as measured by two nationally-­‐normed creativity assessment instruments: (a) the Kirton Adaptor-­‐Innovator Inventory, focused on originality, efficiency and conformity; and (b) the Abbreviated Torrence Test for Adults, focused on divergent-­‐thinking. The sample included 78 fourth-­‐year and 132 first-­‐year engineering student volunteers. While the first-­‐and fourth-­‐year sample means were just above the national sample, no significant differences were found between first-­‐ (n=132) and fourth-­‐year (n=78) scores on the KAI. Fourth-­‐year students seemed to score significantly higher (.01) than freshmen students on the ATTA. Post hoc tests suggested that the difference could be attributed to first-­‐ and fourth-­‐year males. Despite moderate correlations, however, additional multivariate analysis showed no interaction between class and gender on the ATTA. These results imply that undergraduate engineering education may not diminish creativity; however, it likely does not enhance creativity either. Current curriculum models create a creative capacity flatline between the first and fourth years. Future studies should address how the flatline phenomenon in engineering compares to other disciplines, how engineering curriculum reform might help students become frontline innovators, and how more authentic creative capacity measures might be developed. II.32: Infusing Sustainability and Renewable Energy Concepts into Electrical and Computer Engineering Curriculum Anil Pahwa (Kansas State University), William Kuhn (Kansas State University), Ruth Douglas Miller (Kansas State University), Andrew Rys (Kansas State University) A shortage of students pursuing electrical and computer engineering, coupled with both the need for sustainability and the desire of today’s students, especially women, to involve themselves in work that benefits society, suggests that incorporating sustainability principles throughout the electrical and computer engineering curriculum can bolster enrollment, while producing a diverse group of engineers equipped to meet the growing needs of society. Moreover, with growing concern for our planet, they should be made aware of the career opportunities in alternative energy and in the development of sustainable technologies. The main goal of this project is to implement curriculum reform activities at Kansas State University focused on preparation of the next generation of electrical and computer engineers to meet the growing needs in the workforce related to alternate energy and sustainability. Content related to sustainability and renewable energy has been added to several classes from freshman to senior level. Examples include: • Integration of substantial sustainability concepts in the required freshman courses. • Enhancement of the freshman laboratory experience by introducing hands-­‐on experiments in renewable energy. • Increasing renewal energy and sustainability concepts and design projects in upper level classes. • Integration of discussions and writing assignment on sustainability in Senior Seminar. In addition, rooftop solar and wind generations with instrumentation to measure power production and weather conditions were designed and installed. The project intends to educate and prepare the young generation of students for the workforce of the future ready to deal with sustainability and renewable energy. Dissemination of project related activities through a web site and displays at Open House is expected to attract students towards electrical and computer engineering. Surveys conducted in different classes show significant interest in students in sustainability and renewable energy related issues. They have demonstrated a good understanding and retention of these issues. Preliminary data shows a slight increase in the number of women students and overall retention of freshman students. The project has focused on delivering the following products: 1. Modules on sustainability for freshman electrical and computer engineering students. 2. Experiments on renewable energy for freshman laboratory classes. 3. Content and projects for upper level classes. 4. Energy production data from rooftop solar and wind generation and associated weather data. Information related to the project is disseminated to the general public through a web site and through regional conferences at Kansas State University. A paper based on the project is under preparation for IEEE Frontiers in Education Society. II.33: A Simulations Game for Teaching Construction Engineering and Management Concepts: The Virtual Construction Simulator (VCS) Dragana Nikolic (Penn State University), John Messner (), Sanghoon Lee () Understanding the dynamic nature of the construction process and the ability to make important decisions about resource utilization, sequencing, site layout, and project-­‐related risks are critical skills for design and construction engineering students. The increase in project complexity and shorter schedules pose pressure to develop more efficient construction methods, and also many challenges to educators to prepare students to manage these multifaceted processes. This research aims to improve construction engineering education through the use of interactive project learning applications. We developed the Virtual Construction Simulator (VCS), a construction-­‐based engineering simulation game that provides an experiential learning environment for engineering students to explore effective construction planning by immersing themselves in a 3D building construction project. Compared to conventional methods for teaching construction planning, the VCS simulation game challenges students to dynamically manage project constraints, variability, and performance feedback to actively make decisions regarding construction methods, daily resource needs, and construction sequences; manage various trade-­‐offs in controlling project duration and cost; and observe the course and implications of these decisions over time. Our initial results show that through this simulation game, students are better equipped to discern between as-­‐planned and as-­‐built construction schedules that can vary broadly due to factors such as weather and labor productivity. We have also witnessed the merits of the VCS simulation game as a motivational and engaging learning tool for construction engineering education. Our goal is to further develop the VCS into a versatile, customizable, and far-­‐reaching educational simulation platform for implementation across all course levels within our engineering department, at other universities, and for professional construction programs nationwide. We believe new VCS capabilities to customize content and parameters driven by course-­‐specific learning objectives will broaden and enhance student engagement and engage users far beyond the ability of conventional construction education. II.34: Integrating Nanotechnology into Undergraduate Engineering Curricula at Bucknell University Erin Jablonski (Bucknell University), Donna Ebenstein () A Nanofabrication Laboratory was implemented at Bucknell University as a platform for enhancing the undergraduate engineering education through interdisciplinary projects in designing, manufacturing, and characterizing materials and devices with nanoscale features. The laboratory provides unique demonstration and experimental capabilities in nanofabrication previously unavailable to Bucknell students and has facilitated technologically relevant senior design projects. Nanoscale science and engineering projects have been incorporated into undergraduate engineering curricula across several disciplines through courses in nanotechnology, materials science, biomedical engineering, electronics, surface chemistry, polymer science, and manufacturing. The overall goal was to introduce realistic applications of nanoscale phenomena and nanofabrication through project-­‐based learning and to demonstrate the myriad applications of nanotechnology to undergraduate engineering students. The Nanofabrication Laboratory has advanced the Nanotechnology in Engineering educational initiatives of Bucknell University. The dedicated laboratory environment facilitates the integration of topics in nanoscale phenomena and nanofabrication within undergraduate courses in several disciplines across the university. The nanofabrication capabilities allow students to apply what they learn in the classroom to engineer actual materials and devices. Utilization of the nanofabrication laboratory benefits students through hands-­‐on experience with realistic nanofabrication equipment and provides a practical foundation valuable for seeking internships and research opportunities. The Nanofabrication Laboratory and related curricular projects provides formal mechanisms through which interested faculty can better collaborate to improve interdisciplinary undergraduate education. The development of the Nanofabrication Laboratory and accompanying experiments has been disseminated through workshops and conference presentations with the expectation that similar initiatives will be implemented at other institutions. Several mechanisms have been implemented to allow related hands-­‐on learning opportunities to reach a broad public audience. Summer faculty workshops at Bucknell have provided an opportunity for interested faculty to be informed of the capabilities of the Nanofabrication Laboratory and discuss effective ways in which topics in nanotechnology can be incorporated into undergraduate engineering curricula. Emphasis has been placed on fostering interdisciplinary projects, developing new courses, and integration of nanotechnology into existing courses across the university. A fellowship program for traditionally underrepresented students has been successful for continuously designing new experiments for the Nanofabrication Laboratory. The program has fostered close student-­‐advisor interaction and exposing them to alternative applications of their acquired knowledge and emphasizing career options in nanotechnology available within their program of study. Pre-­‐college outreach and summer programs have introduced students and teachers to nanofabrication and facilitated the introduction of topics related to nanotechnology into the pre-­‐college curriculum. Age-­‐
appropriate demonstrations and experiments have been developed; K-­‐12 students have been invited to participate in nanofabrication activities with undergraduates and professors. The aim has been to make nanotechnology accessible to all students, especially laboratory experiments and demonstrations that encourage K-­‐12 and undergraduate student participation in Nanoscale Science and Engineering. Undergraduate students interested in careers at the interface of engineering and education have used these opportunities to gain valuable experience working with pre-­‐college students. A new web-­‐based, interactive dialogue will facilitate broad dissemination among instructors interested in introducing new experiments and demonstrations relevant to nanotechnology into their courses. A single, user-­‐friendly website is envisioned that will provide links to existing resources, welcome new contributions, and be a general repository for educational materials related to the teaching of nanotechnology topics as well as guidelines for experiments and demonstrations in nanofabrication. II.35: NUE: Integration of Nanoscale Devices and Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology into Undergraduate Engineering and Science Curricula James Boerio (University of Cincinnati), Vesselin Shanov (), Donglu Shi (), Dionysios Dionysiou (), Anant Kukreti (), Ian Papautsky (), Mark Schulz () This project addresses the need for a workforce trained in the areas of nanomaterials and nanotechnology as expressed by Ohio's Third Frontier Project and Deloitte Study and by industrial organizations that employ undergraduate students in the co-­‐operative engineering program in the College of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS) at the University of Cincinnati (UC). The project also supports students participating in the new Engineering Research Center (ERC) for Revolutionizing Metallic Biomaterials in which UC partners with North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University and the University of Pittsburgh and introduces high school and junior high school students that participate in UC's Summer Institute (SI) to engineering research, especially in nanomaterials and nanotechnology. Our approach is to introduce two new courses entitled Nanoscale Devices and Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology that combine with two existing courses (Introduction to Nanoscale Science and Technology and Experimental Nanoscale Science and Technology) to provide undergraduate students at UC with an outstanding education in nanoscale science and technology. Nanoscale Devices addresses design, construction, and applications of nanoscale devices while Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology discusses environmental applications of nanotechnology and the environmental impact. All four courses are offered yearly and are cross-­‐listed in several colleges to make them available to students in many disciplines. Each new course includes experiments providing students with hands-­‐on experience in nanotechnology. The experiments were adapted for presentation to students in SI, a five-­‐week program to increase interest of underrepresented students in STEM. This project will contribute to the development of human resources by providing undergraduate students at UC with an outstanding, hands-­‐on education in the burgeoning area of nanoscale science and technology and by providing students participating in SI with a hands-­‐on introduction to engineering research, particularly in nanomaterials and nanotechnology. The project will also contribute to human resources through training received by graduate students that assist in presenting the experiments. The beneficiaries of the project also include the organizations that employ students from UC either as co-­‐ops or as permanent employees as well as the new Engineering Research Center (ERC) for Revolutionizing Metallic Biomaterials. Students from a variety of disciplines, including engineering, chemistry, and physics, have enrolled in the new courses Nanoscale Devices and Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology; these students are especially enthusiastic regarding the hands-­‐on experiments included in the courses. Students from SI were similarly very enthusiastic regarding the opportunity to conduct hands-­‐on experiments in nanotechnology. SI students noted that the nanotechnology experiments were more sophisticated and more interesting than the experiments they usually did in their schools. Experiments involving the magnetic properties of nanoparticles were especially interesting to students in SI. The new course Nanoscale Devices, including four experiments, was presented for the first time in the autumn quarter of 2010; Environmental Aspects of Nanotechnology, including three experiments, will be presented for the first time during the winter quarter of 2011. The experiments developed for these two courses were adapted and presented to students in SI during the summer quarter of 2010. The reaction of students in Nanoscale Devices and in SI was determined through the use of various types of surveys and questionnaires; reactions of the students were very positive. A paper describing the experiments has been submitted for presentation at the ASEE Annual Conference in June, 2011. II.36: It's All About the Research Experience! Andrea Burrows (University of Cincinnati), Anant Kukreti (), Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School) Twelve teachers were chosen in the summer of 2010 to participate in six different projects for the Research Experience for Teachers (RET). The University of Cincinnati (UC) RET site has been operated each year since 2006. In the last five years (2006-­‐2010) 59 teachers have participated. These teachers came from 33 different schools, which included: 2 elementary, 8 middle and 31 high schools; 39 urban and 2 suburban schools; and 33 public and 8 parochial schools. In the summer of 2010 there were two teachers per project. Each of these teachers implemented the engineering related (STEM) lesson in his/her K-­‐12 classroom that he/she created over the summer with the help of the project group. The poster presents the six engineering projects and the lessons produced by these RET teachers. Overall RET lesson feedback from the K-­‐12 students (2006-­‐2010) is also presented in the poser. RET teachers, graduate UC students, and UC faculty, staff, and coordinators work collaboratively to make this RET experience a benefit for the K-­‐12 teachers and the K-­‐12 students that they interact with on a daily basis during the academic school year. These STEM lessons are needed in K-­‐12 schools today to highlight STEM application, careers, and societal impact that are often left out of traditional school lessons. II.37: Water Filtration is Elementary Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School), Andrea Burrows (University of Cincinnati), Anant Kukreti () The need that I am addressing in my classroom is the importance of clean water and how to make a workable water filtration device. Most fourth graders do not have an understanding of how water is cleaned for drinking purposes. The approach that I will be using will vary from day to day depending on the lesson that I will be teaching that particular day. The approaches that are used could vary from technology, hands-­‐on, teacher directed, or student directed. Potential benefits of my work are my fourth grade students will acquire a basic understanding of the water filtration processes, how to build a water filtration device, and learn about careers related to this field through my presentations. The fourth grade students will realize that clean water is created through a process. I have learned that my fourth grade students were unaware of the “cleaning’” filtration process that occurs before the water enters the facets. Most students did not understand where their clean water comes from. My experience with RET has made me more aware of “clean water” and therefore I have passed my knowledge onto my students. Student samples: The documentation shows that the students have an understanding the Water Cycle and that there is process to cleaning water. See samples below from students science notebooks. II.38: Water Filtration Sara Bagley (Erpenbeck Elementary School) ABSTRACT: 1. The need that I am addressing in my classroom is the importance of clean water and how to make a workable water filtration device. Most fourth graders do not have an understanding of how water is cleaned for drinking purposes. 2. The approach that I will be using will vary from day to day depending on the lesson that I will be teaching that particular day. The approaches that are used could vary from technology, hands-­‐on, teacher directed, or student directed. 3. Potential benefits of my work are my fourth grade students will acquire a basic understanding of the water filtration processes, how to build a water filtration device, and learn about careers related to this field through my presentations. The fourth grade students will realize that clean water is created through a process. 4. I have learned that my fourth grade students were unaware of the “cleaning’” filtration process that occurs before the water enters the facets. Most students did not understand where their clean water comes from. My experience with RET has made me more aware of “clean water” and therefore I have passed my knowledge onto my students. 5. Student samples: The documentation shows that the students have an understanding the Water Cycle and that there is process to cleaning water. See samples below from students science notebooks I could not add my scanned documents,I will bring them with me to confernce and add to poster. I have uploaded the entire document. II.39: NUE: Bottom-­‐Up Meets Top-­‐Down -­‐ An Integrated Undergraduate Nanotechnology Laboratory at NC State Yong Zhu (North Carolina State Universit), Mellisa Jones (), Joseph Tracy (), Jingyan Dong (), Xiaoning Jiang () The goal of this Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education (NUE) in Engineering program at North Carolina State University (NCSU) under the direction of Dr. Yong Zhu, is to develop an undergraduate Nanotechnology laboratory course, consisting of 10 portable lab modules, in the College of Engineering at NCSU that will provide undergraduate students with hands-­‐on experience in nanotechnology. The theme of this NUE project is the integration of nanotechnology with microsystem technology, i.e., bottom-­‐up synthesis meeting top-­‐down fabrication. It will bridge the “pillars” of nanotechnology – nanomaterials, nanofabrication, nanoscale characterization and nanodevices. This NUE project will develop a new laboratory course for engineering undergraduate students. This lab course will have an emphasis on size-­‐dependent properties at the nanoscale, which is critical as novel properties enable new applications. In addition to the new lab course, selected lab modules will be integrated to existing nanotechnology courses on campus. A proven pedagogical approach that features problem-­‐based, active learning will be adopted. Special efforts will be undertaken to attract minority and underrepresented groups. This program will encourage more undergraduate students in the US to pursue graduate study related to nanotechnology and will train a workforce for the emerging nanotechnology industry. Over 500 undergraduate students at NCSU are expected to be affected by the new lab course and the integration of lab modules to existing nanotechnology courses. Overall this NUE project will encourage more U.S. students to pursue graduate study related to nanotechnology and to train a workforce for the emerging nanotechnology industry. Results of this project will be disseminated to local, regional, and national education communities, both during and after the project. Of note is that regionally the results and educational modules will be shared with K-­‐12 educators at the NC Science Teachers Association and through NCSU's NanoDays. II.40: Renewable Energy Education in an ERC: College and precollege strategies for the Engineer of 2020 Lisa Grable (NC State University), Penny Jeffrey (NC State University), Leda Lunardi (NC State University) The Gen 3 FREEDM Systems Center focuses on green energy hub, power semiconductor devices, energy storage and distribution solutions, and managing renewable sources of energy. These represent real-­‐life challenges for today's students, from middle through graduate school. The College and Precollege education programs efforts foster a community with the theme "Each one mentor one" around Young Scholars, RETs, REUs, and graduate students for interactions with the research. "The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century" provides a framework for planning experiences to assist students in developing characteristics such as collaborating in a globally connected research environment, and communicating effectively about science and engineering to all audiences. Our approach includes student research exchanges, undergraduate research presentations, middle and high school teacher-­‐developed lesson plans, mentoring of Young Scholars, and a middle school summer camp. The curriculum offers a concentration in renewable electric energy systems and a graduate certificate in renewable energy. II.41: Design Squad: Inspiring a New Generation of Engineers Marisa Wolsky (WGBH) The PBS TV series and Web site Design Squad (and its spin off series Design Squad Nation) are designed to get its viewers involved in engineering through an integrated media experience and grassroots outreach campaign. Design Squad is a reality competitions series where six teenagers learn to think smart, build fast, and contend with a wild array of engineering challenges. With Design Squad Nation, engineer co-­‐hosts Judy and Adam travel across the country, working side by side with kids to turn their dreams into reality. Our ultimate goal with both projects is to inspire viewers to take on their own hands-­‐on engineering activities. To achieve this, we have created an online community for user-­‐
generated content. In local communities, we have staged public events that get kids engaged in hands-­‐
on design challenges. And, through our outreach, we have provided approaches for modeling the design process with kids through trainings; educational resources; and support for teachers, engineers, and informal educators. Design Squad was created in response to a national imperative to attract more young people to engineering studies and careers. Engineers have led a technological revolution that has improved the quality of our lives, yet children do not understand how the technology they use in their daily lives works. They are also unclear about the engineer’s role in society or even what an engineer does. Moreover, Design Squad IS one of only a few PBS programs benefiting kids ages 9 to 12 thus targeting an underserved age group in educational programming. By reaching kids at this critical middle-­‐ school age—before they hit the teenage years—our goal is to stimulate their interest in math and science before they lose enthusiasm as they advance from grade to grade. Design Squad is also making a special effort to reach out to girls and minorities, groups that are critically underrepresented—
comprising just 11% and 21% of engineers respectively. Although Design Squad is targeted to kids 9 to 12, along with the formal and informal educators of this audience, a broad range of users have benefited from the project. Our outreach sites target a variety of age groups: 20% lower elementary 56% middle school 35% upper elementary, 29% high school. And the project is used in a multiple settings: informal (Boys & Girls Clubs, Girl Scouts, public television stations, Computer Clubhouses, afterschool programs, summer camps) and formal (elementary, middle, high schools, and even colleges). And the project is reaching a diverse audience. With kids served by outreach partners: 21% are Black or African-­‐American; 21% Hispanic;18% rural, and more than 1/3 low-­‐income families. With Web site visitors: 43% are non-­‐white, ethnic minorities; 14% low income; From all 50 states (except Maine) plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, as well as locations outside the U.S.; and 11% homeschoolers. Since 2007, working with our extensive network of engineering and education partners, Design Squad has hosted over 590 nationwide events, trainings, and visits, reaching over 168,465 kids, engineers, and educators. 14,376 programs have used Design Squad’s educational materials, which include six educators’ guides (containing step-­‐by-­‐step directions and leaders’ notes for 40 activities). Summative evaluation conducted by Goodman Research Group, Inc. found that Design Squad resources were successful in afterschool settings, leading to increases in children's design process skills, change in attitudes about engineering stereotypes, and interest in participating in afterschool engineering programs. Subsequent evaluation by Concord Evaluation Group found that children exposed to Design Squad as part of their middle school science classes demonstrated significant gains in their understanding of key science concepts and improved their attitudes about engineering stereotypes as compared to a control group. Design Squad's deliverables include: • a 10-­‐part series of TV shows featuring inspirational engineering challenges; • an integrated media experience, which includes an online community, a platform for user generated content, video blogging, and mobile communication; • resources that enable in-­‐ and out-­‐of-­‐school educators to use the interactive content; • training opportunities for teachers, engineers, and informal educators; • public events that get kids and families engaged in hands-­‐on design challenges; • a viral online marketing campaign; and • support for the critical relationships we have developed in the educational and engineering community. Summative evaluation, conducted by Concord Evaluation Group, is currently assessing whether these deliveralbes have a measurable impact on kids who view the TV episodes; interact with the Web site, Video Blog, and Web 2.0 components; and participate in the hands-­‐on activities in informal and formal educational settings. II.42: Leveraging Military Training to Enhance the Study of Engineering David Hayhurst (SDSU), Dave Lighthart (SDSU), Alyson Lighthart (San Diego City College) There is a need to understand how military training might augment university education in engineering. Previous analysis done by the American Council for Education is highly compartmentalized, which creates a bias that reduces the ability of veterans to transfer military training towards engineering degrees. A comparative analysis of learning outcomes for both military training and university education indicates which units of military training may substitute for units of university education. Additionally, an analysis of the military professional structure, (MOS, AFSC or Rating) gives an indication of the depth of training. In addition to providing a possible schedule of articulation which may be adopted by engineering schools, the analysis provides a perspective on military training that may be used to enhance current university courses. Ostensibly, the main consumers of this information will be engineering department chairs and deans. The Air Force, Army, Navy and Marines all have substantial training programs related to building and maintaining bases. These duties require training in many subjects of need for civil and construction engineering degrees. Specific military training such as surveying and project management seem to articulate into self-­‐contained courses. Other training covers parts of certain courses, and sometimes parts of multiple courses. The main deliverable is a procedure for analyzing military training, combined with an index of various military documents. From this procedure, documents may be generated that allow faculty to critically analyze whether or not any given portion of military training is appropriate for substitution or exemption of portions of their school's engineering degree programs. Dissemination of this information at various conferences has been the primary method to create an impact with this work. II.43: Engineering Innovation and Design for STEM Teachers Margaret Pinnell (University of Dayton), Rebecca Blust (University of Dayton) Need: This program will build long-­‐term collaborative partnerships between STEM teachers, industry, and higher education in order for the STEM teachers to transfer and sustain knowledge of engineering innovation and design in the classroom. Approach: The University of Dayton (UD) will host current and future STEM for six weeks to learn about Engineering Innovation and Design. The UD School of Engineering will collaborate with regional resources to expose teachers to the engineering method through team-­‐based design and innovation projects. The participants will investigate engineering careers, develop problem-­‐ and project-­‐based curriculum and pedagogy, work on diverse teams, and obtain professional development credits including their STEM credentials. BENEFITS: This project will have a significant impact on the engineering community by promoting the progress of engineering in K-­‐
12 STEM curriculum and by strengthening relationships with current and future K-­‐12 teachers, engineering students and faculty and local industry. Teachers will develop curriculum that can be adopted by others nationwide. Local industry will have contact with future engineers and scientists. University faculty will learn teaching techniques. The University community will benefit from outreach an and further connection to industry. Teachers and students will benefit from the deeper understanding of the engineering profession and the long-­‐term collaborative partnerships formed. UPDATE: The UD is currently in the process of recruiting teachers and pre-­‐service teachers to participate in its first workshop. A detailed schedule for the six week program has been developed and five design projects identified. Industrial tours have been arranged and an assessment plan is in place. It is anticipated that by the end of summer 2011, there will be five innovation related curriculum ready to be piloted in the schools. II.44: Boston University RET in Biophotonics Cynthia Brossman (Boston University), Michael Ruane (Boston University) Teachers’ Research in BioPhotonics – Sensors and Systems (TRIPSS) is a three-­‐year project supporting a total of 28 teachers in six-­‐week summer research experiences. Our six-­‐week summer experience will 1)involve diverse groups of K-­‐12 teachers in STEM teaching in biophotonics, 2) immerse teachers in interdisciplinary, supportive biophotonics research groups, 3) train teachers to plan and conduct classroom teaching based on biophotonics, 4) connect teachers with local researchers: research faculty, GK-­‐12 fellows and faculty from two ERCs as well as regional STEM networks. The program also will provide linkages to an RET site at Northeastern University and programs at the Boston Museum of Science. The interdisciplinary focus on biophotonics will prepare the teachers to become educational leaders in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Through engagement in the excitement of interdisciplinary discovery-­‐based research, and through the development of hands-­‐on classroom materials, teachers will learn how to convey this excitement to their students. II.45: RET Site: Inquiry-­‐based Bioengineering Research and Design Experiences for Middle-­‐School Teachers (EEC 0743037) Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) Need: Our society is increasingly dependent on engineering knowledge, yet middle-­‐school students who fail to take preparatory math and science courses may be limiting their future abilities to pursue science and engineering at the college level. Our long-­‐term goal is to motivate and improve middle-­‐school student learning in engineering. Approach: Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) offers a unique RET program for middle-­‐school teachers that focuses on bioengineering design. Science teachers often lack a formal training in engineering, but are being expected to teach engineering in their science classrooms. The WPI RET program establishes a collaborative partnership between middle-­‐school teachers in Worcester, MA and WPI engineering faculty through inquiry-­‐based experiences in bioengineering research. This partnership helps to improve the confidence and ability of educators to teach middle-­‐school students how to approach and solve open-­‐ended engineering challenges using the design process in their classrooms. The activities of the RET are that middle-­‐school science teachers (7 per summer) from Worcester Public Schools (WPS) and nearby communities are recruited to participate in 6-­‐week-­‐long intensive summer research experiences in WPI Bioengineering Laboratories. Teachers work alongside faculty and graduate students in the Life Science and Bioengineering Center at Gateway Park, where they participate in cutting edge research projects in fields such as regenerative medicine, biosensors, and design of devices to aid persons with disabilities. Teachers gain hands-­‐on exposure to the engineering design process through their own research experience, and they prepare an engineering curriculum unit for use in their own classrooms in the following academic year. Participation in weekly seminars, meetings, and discussions help foster collaboration among the teachers and create a supportive environment for them during their summer experience. Teachers present the results of their curriculum implementations in follow-­‐up workshops and through regular blog communications. Benefit: Middle-­‐school teachers and their students in Worcester, MA and surrounding communities will benefit through increased exposure to the engineering design process. Outcomes: The objectives of the proposed project are to: 1. increase student learning via greater inclusion of inquiry-­‐based activities in classrooms; 2. increase teachers’ abilities and confidence in teaching the engineering design process; 3. increase teachers’ depth and breadth of knowledge in bioengineering; and, 4. establish a long-­‐term collaboration of teachers with each other and with WPI faculty. Our evaluation focuses on assessing our primary participant outcomes: 1) improved capacity to motivate student learning of STEM materials by utilizing inquiry-­‐based activities and exciting examples from bioengineering; 2) increased ability and confidence in incorporating the engineering design process in their curricula; 3) increased depth and breadth of knowledge in bioengineering; and, 4) enhanced collaboration among the teachers and with WPI faculty. Deliverables Between 2008 and 2010, we had 21 teacher positions in our RET. Some teachers participated for 2 years (and one teacher participated for all 3 years). By their account, 2197 students were impacted by participating in lesson plans that the RET participants developed at WPI. Our lesson plans are also available for everyone at teachengineering.org, and from the www.wpi.edu/+BME website. II.46: Cutting-­‐edge Biomedical Engineering Design Project for Teachers Results in Meaningful Engineering Design Projects for Middle School Students Jared Quinn (WPI / Ashburnham-­‐Westminster R.S.D.), Anastasia Padilla (WPI / Wachusett Regional School District), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Jeanne Hubelbank (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) Abstract-­‐ The 2010 NSF Research Experience for Teachers program at Worcester Polytechnic Institute provided 21 local middle school teachers the opportunity to work on cutting-­‐edge Biomedical engineering and Bioengineering design projects, over a three-­‐year period. One design project for the 2010 program was to create a nanostructured surface for minimizing bacterial attachment, and make correlations between surface morphology and adhesion. Nanomaterials were synthesized using the sol-­‐
gel method, and coated onto a surface using a chemical adhesion process. The surface morphology was characterized using scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy. Bacterial adhesion to the surfaces was assessed using the live/dead kit via fluorescence microscopy, as well as crystal violet staining. The initial results have shown a correlation between the presence of Gold nanoparticles and bacterial adhesion, with the additional suggestion of particle size and/or morphology also playing a role. In addition to the nanoparticle design project the RET program also provided an opportunity to create a thoroughly developed series of lessons for the middle school classroom, utilizing the engineering design process to further student understanding of science and engineering. This series of lessons utilized the theme of assistive devices to provide a new approach to traditional classroom engineering projects. This unit had heavy emphasis on the engineering design process as a thought process that can be transferred to all areas of life. The series of lessons developed through the RET program have become a thirty day engineering design class, which reaches approximately 150 seventh grade students during the school year, with plans to expand the program and train other teachers for the 2011-­‐2012 school year. II.47: REU Site: Integrated Bioengineering Research, Education, and Outreach Experiences for Females and Underrepresented Minorities at WPI (EEC0754996) Amanda Reidinger (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Jeanne Hubelbank (), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Marsha Rolle (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Kristen Billiar (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) The goal of this REU site is to increase retention of undergraduates (especially females and underrepresented minorities) in engineering and to increase interest and recruitment of middle school females and underrepresented minority students in engineering as a discipline and educational path. Eight women and two men participated in the REU program, 50% of whom were minorities. During the 10-­‐week summer program, REU students designed and executed an individual research project under the supervision of a graduate student mentor. The program culminated in a research symposium in which students presented the results of their work, and each student also prepared an abstract for submission to a research conference (with their faculty advisor’s permission). Throughout the summer, the students participated in a professional development series that focused on building career skills and understanding biomedical engineering. Mid-­‐summer, the students took a break from lab work to organize and run a bioengineering day-­‐camp for middle school girls. Each REU student mentored one girl on an individual project ranging from developing prosthetics to culturing bacteria. REU students also worked in teams to teach activities each afternoon where the topics included cardiovascular engineering, forensics, and material science. The main objective for middle school participants was to increase their interest in science since this is the age where interest in science and math falls dramatically, especially for girls. Nine middle-­‐school-­‐aged girls attended the day camp, 77% of whom were minorities. The program increased the girls’ interest in science and influenced their choice of high school courses. All nine girls indicated that they had increased interest in science after the week, with seven (78%) selecting the highest ranking of “more interested”. WPI program objectives for the undergraduate participants were to increase bioengineering knowledge and research proficiency, to increase independence as a researcher, and to increase or sustain interest in engineering as a career or area of study. REU students’ ratings of their level of expertise in bioengineering lab techniques were higher at the end of the program (mean 3.40, SD 1.20) than at the beginning (mean 2.10, SD .70), a rating of 5 being “much expertise”. Students also self-­‐reported an increase in research proficiency and an increased or sustained interest in engineering as a career or area of study. Most mentors indicated that their REU mentee had become an independent researcher over the summer. Finally, 7 of 10 students attended the Biomedical Engineering Society annual national conference, with 6 posters and one platform presentation. II.48: REU Project: Nanoscale Surface Modification of the Skin-­‐Implant Interface to Enhance Keratinocyte Attachment Sarah Mattessich (WPI), Cara Ting (WPI), Ivan Ivanov (WPI), Aung Khaing (WPI), Marsha Rolle (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Terri Camesano (Worcester Polytechnic Institute), Christopher Lambert (WPI), W. Grant McGimpsey (WPI), George Pins (WPI) The leading cause of percutaneous implant failure is infection at the device-­‐skin interface, where a lack of integration between the material and skin prohibits the formation of a stable epidermal seal around the implant. Fibronectin (FN) coatings encourage skin cell attachment to the implant surface. The goal of our study is to modify the surface chemistry of the device for optimal FN binding (integrin binding domains presented) to enhance the robustness of the cutaneous seal. Fibronectin was absorbed to self-­‐
assembled monolayers (SAMs) with terminal groups CH3, OH, NH2, COOH, PEG, and Au as model surfaces to assess the effects of nanotopography on FN orientation, the presentation of cell-­‐binding domains, and keratinocyte morphology. Atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to assess changes in FN orientation based on nanotopography by analyzing images of the surfaces. An antibody to the FN cell-­‐binding synergy site (HFN7.1) was used to assess presentation of integrin binding sites. Keratinocytes were seeded on the FN-­‐coated SAMs, and a maleimide stain was used to assess cell spreading area. We found that by controlling surface chemistry, we can alter FN attachment, and ultimately surface roughness. AFM analysis shows the greatest surface roughness for OH SAMs with FN, relative to control SAMs surfaces. However, maleimide staining data shows the greatest cell spreading on NH2 SAMs surfaces. These data will be used to develop correlations between surface roughness, surface chemistry, and cell function, and to ultimately improve skin cell attachment and the cutaneous seal. II.49: Research Experience for Teachers: Processing and Characterization of Engineered Particulate Materials for the Pharmaceutical Industry Kwabena Narh (NJIT), Howard Kimmel (NJIT), Rajesh Dave (NJIT), John Carpinelli (NJIT), Levelle Burr-­‐
Alexander (NJIT), Linda Hirsch (NJIT) Need: Comprehensive professional development programs are needed for K-­‐12 teachers to address the new skills and knowledge needed for improved classroom teaching and learning and to integrate engineering concepts into their classroom practice. Approach: RET high school teachers gained research experiences, mentored by experienced faculty, postdocs, and/or well-­‐trained graduate students, working on selected research topics in the area of pharmaceutical particulate and composite systems, that they could incorporate into their teaching practices. A systematic process has been implemented to guide and support the teachers as they developed standards-­‐based lesson plans that integrated concepts translated from their research experiences into their classroom practices. Benefit: Teachers were able to improve their classroom teaching and learning and incorporate skills and knowledge acquired from their research experience into classroom lessons, and were better prepared for their students connections between the science used in engineering applications in the real world and science curriculum standards and increasing students’ interest in engineering, leading to increased enrollment in engineering degree programs. Outcomes: Teachers were able to enrich their own knowledge-­‐base as STEM education professionals by participating as active members of a research team and expressed confidence about their experiences, and that they would be able to incorporate what they had learned into their classroom teaching. As a result, they were successful in being able to translate their research experiences into course content and develop lesson plans to implement in their classrooms, where they will be able provide their students with real world applications of their instruction. Deliverables: Teachers developed sets of standards-­‐based lesson plans which they are implementing in their classrooms and sharing with their peers. Lessons focus on concepts taught in courses in chemistry, biology, physics, and technology. II.50: REU Site in Fluid Mechanics: Educational Goals and Outcomes Amy Lang (UA), Tom Zeiler (UA), James Hubner (University of Alabama) The goal of this REU site at the University of Alabama is to expose undergraduate students to all phases of a rewarding research experience. These phases include hypothesis formation, experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and technical communication of research results related to the discipline of fluid mechanics. This site also has the goal of recruiting a large portion of underrepresented students in engineering. This research experience gives students a feel for what it is like to be in graduate school, and thus it is another goal that this experience be positive such that they seriously consider the pursuit of an advanced degree in engineering. Finally, unique to this program, a structured plan is followed by each student preparing them to attend and present their work at a professional conference within the United States, specifically, the American Physical Society Division of Fluid Dynamics (APS DFD) Meeting held each year in late November. This plan includes a series of workshops aimed at improving both written and oral technical communication skills, including several practice presentations and one final culminating research presentation each summer. Three Year Site Outcomes: The site has completed three ten week summer programs with the last occurring in 2010. Site demographics included 9 women, 4 Hispanics and 2 African Americans out of 24 students (38% women, and 15/24 or 62.5% from underrepresented groups). The workshops on speaking skills in particular have been lauded by the students as being helpful in improving their styles and increasing confidence. Early in the summer program, the students were asked to rate their speaking skills on a scale of 0 to 6. The average over all 24 students was 3.21. At the end of the summer program, they were asked again to rate the speaking skills before the summer, and what they felt their skills ranked at the end of the summer. Upon reevaluation of their earlier skills, their overall pre-­‐summer self-­‐rating dropped to 2.88 (the clarity of experience), and their exit skills rating rose to 4.10. While formal presentations were emphasized, the concept of the two minute “elevator talk” was introduced this past year. Gauging the students’ evolving interest in graduate school was tracked with several different questionnaires; each REU summer program has elicited responses showing a net increase in interest in graduate school among the students. Specifically, 12 (50%) entered the program as interested, 9 as unsure and 3 not interested. Overall, 67% had very little or no research experience upon entering the summer program. After the site, 23 of the 24 were interested. One-­‐hundred percent of the students from this REU site attended and presented at the APS DFD conference. This component of the program acts as an important follow-­‐
through mechanism to further encourage REU participants to pursue graduate studies and contributes to the success of the site by motivating both the student and mentors to obtain quality research results. Finally, one supplemental RET also participated in this site and presented her research at the APS DFD conference. II.51: An Inexpensive Accelerometer-­‐Based Sleep-­‐Apnea Screening Technique Christie Bucklin (Oakland University), Manhor Das (Oakland University), Sam Lou () An Inexpensive Accelerometer-­‐Based Sleep-­‐Apnea Screening Technique Christie Bucklin (Oakland University) Sam Luo (Johns Hopkins University) Mentor: Prof. Manohar Das Sleep-­‐apnea is an increasingly prevalent disorder in today’s society that manifests itself in breathing pauses during deeper stages of sleep. Besides daytime fatigue, sleep-­‐apnea has been linked to more serious disorders such as stroke, heart disease, and cognitive defects. Despite the rapid growth of medical technology, full-­‐
channel polysomnography (PSG) is still the "gold standard" in screening and diagnosing sleep disorders. A PSG study requires a full overnight recording of multiple biological parameters at an accredited sleep lab. Unfortunately, PSG is a very expensive, time-­‐consuming, and inconvenient medical operation. The goal of this project was to develop an inexpensive, simple, yet effective sleep-­‐apnea screening device. Using inexpensive capacitive tri-­‐axial accelerometers and simple digital processing techniques, we were able to detect and classify the majority of sleep-­‐apnea episodes in various test subjects. From the frequencies of the episodes of obstructive sleep-­‐apnea and hypopnea, a possible diagnosis and recommendation for further screening and treatment of sleep disorders can be given. Further studies to reduce cost and increase reliability are needed. This work was performed as part of the Interdisciplinary Research Experience in Electrical and Computer Engineering (IREECE) program in the summer of 2010 at Oakland University. II.52: REU Site in Regenerative Medicine, Multi-­‐Scale Bioengineering, and Systems Biology at UC San Diego Melissa Micou (UC San Diego) This poster will summarize program highlights and outcomes from the first three years of an REU Site hosted by the Department of Bioengineering at UC San Diego. Need: This REU Site addresses the need to attract and retain a diverse population of students in STEM fields such as Bioengineering. Approach: The overall aim of the program is to provide each REU participant with an intellectually stimulating and hands-­‐on research experience, in a supportive environment, and to encourage these students to pursue graduate training in Bioengineering. The approach used to accomplish this overall aim is to: • involve students in intellectually stimulating, hands-­‐on research projects with a high probability for success • develop the mentoring skills of graduate students and post-­‐doctoral researchers who are directly involved in REU projects • recruit and attract a diverse population of top quality students primarily from institutions with limited research activities, such as non-­‐Ph.D. granting institutions • foster positive student-­‐student and student-­‐faculty relationships • encourage and prepare REU students to pursue graduate degrees in Bioengineering and related fields Benefits: Programs such as this REU Site will help develop a stronger and more diverse STEM workforce. Outcomes: During the past 3 summers, the program has trained 32 undergraduate students through involvement in cutting-­‐edge, collaborative research. The program participants have been diverse in many respects with 25% underrepresented minorities, 34% women, 25% from PUIs, 9% first generation college students, 60% from out of state, and 69% non-­‐UCSD students. Anonymous surveys conducted at the end of each summer demonstrate a high level of satisfaction participants have had with the program each year. Deliverables: As a result of their work in the program, past participants have co-­‐authored 8 peer-­‐reviewed publications and 26 participants have presented their research during undergraduate technical sessions at the BMES Annual Meeting. In addition, the participants have submitted 8 abstracts to other professional meetings or non-­‐
undergraduate BMES sessions. The majority of past participants have entered graduate or professional school and all but 3 are currently pursuing traditional STEM careers. II.53: Texas Center for Undergraduate Research in Energy and Combustion Eric Petersen (Texas A&M University) Insufficient energy research and the shortage of U.S. citizens pursuing advanced degrees in engineering and science are both topics of supreme importance in modern times, and with this Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) site we are targeting both problems through a collaborative effort between Texas A&M University and the University of North Texas. Approximately ten undergraduate students from colleges and universities throughout Texas will reside at the Texas A&M campus for 10 weeks during the summer months, working alongside professors and graduate students conducting research on a broad range of topics related to energy and combustion science. The projects in this REU site emphasize experiment-­‐based research involving, for example, shock tubes for combustion studies; nano-­‐ and microfabrication; a diesel engine laboratory; furnace and gasifier rigs for studying coal and biomass fuels; advanced laser diagnostics; rocket propellants with nanoparticle additives; and a nano-­‐
fluids laboratory, among others. As an added benefit, the main 10-­‐week summer program at Texas A&M takes advantage of a complementary campus-­‐sponsored infrastructure that is geared toward fostering undergraduate research experiences, further enriching the experiences of the participants. We anticipate that this REU site will impact society in two major ways: 1) through the involvement of undergraduate students in scientific research, encouraging them to pursue advanced degrees in science and engineering; and 2) the energy-­‐related research will potentially benefit thousands of people through alternative sources and improved, less-­‐polluting combustion devices. Special emphasis will be given to the recruitment of ethnic minorities and women from universities in Texas that are not major research institutions, thus providing research opportunities to students who might not otherwise have them. II.54: NSF/REU Site: Interdisciplinary Water Sciences and Engineering (2007-­‐2013) Vinod Lohani (Virginia Tech), Tamim Younos () Investigators conducted a successful REU site during 2007-­‐2010 at Virginia Tech to train future professionals on sustainable management of water resources in an interdisciplinary and diverse environment consistent with “The Engineer of 2020” vision. Twenty-­‐six undergraduate researchers (16 women, 10 men; 5 representing ethnic minorities; 7 from HBCUs and small colleges; 3 from host institution Virginia Tech) were recruited during summers in 2007 through 2009 from diverse academic institutions all over the country. Each student completed a 10-­‐week research project, made presentations on his/her research work throughout the 10-­‐week period, and compiled a research paper under the guidance of her/his research mentor/s. These research papers were compiled into a research proceeding. Altogether three research proceedings were published, one for each year (i.e., 2007, 2008, and 2009). These are available at: This REU site has been renewed for next three years (2011-­‐2013). The goal of the site remains unchanged. Specific program objectives are to : 1) ensure diversity of participants -­‐ at least 60% of REU participants will be from the under-­‐represented groups (females and ethnic minorities); 2) design and implement a 10-­‐week research program that clearly articulates REU participants’ research activities and facilitates their interactions with interdisciplinary research groups; 3) facilitate opportunities for professional development and interdisciplinary cohort experience through weekly seminars, field trips and discussion forums; 4) collaborate with external experts on assessment and engineering education research to evaluate effectiveness of the program; 5) disseminate research and program assessment results through an end of program research proceedings and at various conferences and journal publications; and 6) facilitate opportunities for social interactions that will enhance personal and professional bonding among REU participants. Undergraduate researchers are being recruited for summer 2011 site work at the time of this writing. In this poster, the investigators will share examples students’ research work, their accomplishments, assessment tools planned/developed and results of assessment work, and plans for the site work during 2011-­‐2013. II.55: REU SITE: Educating the Culturally-­‐sensitive Industrial Engineer – A complex interdisciplinary systems perspective to global IE issues Viviana Cesani (University of Puerto Rico), Alexandra Medina-­‐Borja (University of Puerto Rico) NAE’s call to educate global engineers has sparked a number of globalizing programs and coursework at different institutions. But how globalized are really our new graduates remains to be tested. In 2009 NSF awarded funds for a Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) site at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez (UPRM) named Educating the culturally-­‐sensitive Industrial Engineer: A complex interdisciplinary systems perspective to global IE issues. This program takes advantage of the unique location of Puerto Rico with a distinct Hispanic-­‐Caribbean culture and a highly industrialized manufacturing environment to expose inter-­‐cultural teams of participants to some of the challenges of working in a global economy. Activities for summer include cultural and professional activities aimed at providing students with an opportunity for developing culturally sensitive management skills. 2010 was the first summer of the program with US-­‐mainland and Puerto Rico intercultural teams of students working on IE research. By the end of the summer internship, students gained not only critical scientific knowledge and expertise about particular areas of IE but also the experience of working with inter-­‐
cultural work teams. But, did any all this exhaustive inter-­‐cultural program had any effect in their inter-­‐
cultural abilities? And there were any differences in the way the program impacted students coming from US schools than students from the UPRM? To test whether the experience made any difference regarding inter-­‐cultural skills we first tested where summer participants stood regarding inter-­‐cultural sensitivity at the beginning of the program and ran a post-­‐test at the end using an Inter-­‐Cultural Sensitivity Scale (Chen and Starosta, 2000). Initial findings indicate that in overall, the six-­‐week research summer program did have a positive effect on the interaction confidence dimension of intercultural sensitivity scale across the board for USA and Puerto Rico students alike. Regarding particular aspects, students improved their perception about people from other cultures being narrow-­‐minded, and in general their confidence communicating in front of diverse audiences, and all aspects of their social interaction. It is important to highlight that thus far our REU site have sponsored 29 students; 23 from UPRM and 6 from US universities. These students had have the opportunity to participate in traditional and non-­‐traditional research topics including manufacturing optimization, service engineering, bioinformatics, cancer research, humanitarian supply chain, reliability engineering, information systems, transportation logistics, and social statistics among others. Furthermore, they have presented their REU research in local and international scientific forums including the Industrial Engineering Research Conference, INFORMS and 2010 Great minds in STEM Conference. Moreover, the work of our students has been documented in refereed conference proceedings and journal articles. II.56: Can Gaming Provide Enough Context to Improve Knowledge Integration and Retention in Engineering Freshmen? Agustin Rullan (University of Puerto Rico), Miguel Figueroa (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Alexandra Medina-­‐Borja (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Cristina Pomales (University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez), Felix Zapata (University of Puerto Rico) A computer-­‐based serious game is being developed where students will interact with a virtual world where the task will be to improve the operations of a factory, bank, hospital, or amusement park using Industrial Engineering (IE) techniques. This game will be used as a tool to assess how serious games improve retention and motivation of freshman IE students; support learning in context; improve student understanding of core concepts; and improve problem-­‐solving skills in complex unstructured problems. This game will also be used to gain an understanding of how engineering students learn concepts and develop skills through educational games, and finally, assess what makes an educational game fun. Participant and non-­‐participant freshman IE students will be formally evaluated and compared in the following areas: (1) level of motivation/interest and retention, (2) analytical and problem-­‐solving skills and, (3) understanding of the nature of IE. It is expected that game players will perform better in these three areas than those not exposed to the game. II.57: REU Site: Summer Research Experiences in Wireless Sensor Networks – Design and Applications Scott Smith (University of Arkansas), Jingxian Wu (University of Arkansas) Need: What need are you addressing? Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are a fast growing area of national need, and are part of NSF’s Network and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) priority area. The advancements in microelectronics, wireless communications, digital signal processing, and nano-­‐technologies, have significantly accelerated the applications of WSNs, ranging from environmental and habitat monitoring to space exploration. The unobtrusiveness, low power requirements, and low cost of wireless sensor nodes make them ideal candidates for data collection; and WSNs have become an indispensible component in our daily lives. This project entails cutting edge applied research in the fast growing area of wireless sensor network design and applications. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? The primary goal of this REU Site is to provide ECE, and potentially CS and physics, undergraduates, especially underrepresented students, with valuable hands-­‐on research experiences by engaging them in multidisciplinary, meaningful, and fun WSN related research projects that have a wide variety of real world applications. Each year the REU students will spend 40 hours per week for 10 weeks over the summer at University of Arkansas (UA), working in groups of 2-­‐4 students each, on various WSN applied research projects. The REU summer program culminates with each team giving a final presentation, demonstrating a working prototype system, and writing a conference paper on their work, to be presented at an appropriate conference. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? This project will engage at least 30 undergraduate Sophomore – Senior level Electrical and Computer Engineering students (and potentially some in related disciplines like Computer Science and Physics) in university research over its 3-­‐year duration, including at least 12 females and 12 racial minorities. The work will involve hands-­‐on multidisciplinary group research where the students start with a concept and throughout the program’s 10-­‐week duration, refine their ideas, and design and build a working prototype system. This environment will not only teach the students concepts and applications of WSNs, but will also build their teamwork, project management, leadership, and communication skills, which are extremely important for successful project completion. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? The PI’s experience with his previous REU Site shows that this type of hands-­‐on research, culminating in a completed working prototype, provides the participants with a great sense of accomplishment, and has been extremely successful in motivating the students to pursue graduate-­‐level degrees. This WSN REU Site will continue to emphasize graduate studies in order to help attract and retain a diverse group of talented individuals within STEM disciplines. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? Summer 2010 was the first offering of our WSN REU Site, and with the very late arrival of funding, there was little time for recruiting. So, we were able to get 7 high quality participants, including 1 female and 2 racial minorities. The students were split into two groups, one working on “Developing a Remote Digital Wildlife Cam Trigged by Spatially Deployed Infrared Sensors” and the other on “Developing a Smart Home Monitoring System.” Both groups did an excellent job and demonstrated working prototype systems at the end of the 10-­‐week project, and wrote a conference paper on their project to be submitted to the 2011 International Conference on Embedded Systems and Applications. II.58: BIOSENSE REU Site – Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems for the Development of Biomedical Applications and Devices at Northeastern University Kristin Hicks (Northeastern University), Michael Silevitch (Northeastern University), David Kaeli (Northeastern University), Paula Leventman (Northeastern University) Through this program, we are addressing the need to educate and inform a diverse group of motivated undergraduates, including women, underrepresented minorities and community college students, about the availability and importance of research opportunities focused on the use of subsurface sensing and imaging systems and techniques for real-­‐world biomedical applications. The BIOSENSE REU Program builds upon previous REU Programs coordinated and supported by the Bernard M. Gordon Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (Gordon-­‐CenSSIS), an NSF Engineering Research Center led by Northeastern University. We actively recruit students from minority-­‐serving institutions such as Gordon-­‐CenSSIS university partner, the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez, and collaborators in our past REU Programs, Morehouse College and Spelman College, while continuing with outreach efforts to involve community college students. In order to address this need, BIOSENSE faculty, researchers and graduate students spend 10 weeks in the summer working with and mentoring REU participants on on-­‐
going biomedical research projects, primarily at Northeastern University and Massachusetts General Hospital. To supplement the focus on hands-­‐on research experiences, we also engage the participating students in professional development activities intended to enhance their research experiences and broaden their understanding of the professional, ethical and interdisciplinary issues involved in pursuing a career or higher education in STEM fields. Participants meet as a group for seminars and workshops that are designed to allow students to obtain a deeper grasp of basic scientific concepts, develop an appreciation for biomedical research and gain experience in presenting technical ideas orally and in writing. The potential benefits of the BIOSENSE REU Program efforts are the resulting achievements and further education and career growth experienced by the REU participants. One of the opportunities that the BIOSENSE faculty strive to make available to the REU Participants is the chance to collaborate and co-­‐author research papers and posters related to the summer work. In addition, we encourage REU participants to pursue graduate education and careers in STEM fields, especially related to the areas of subsurface sensing and imaging systems. Many of our past REU program participants have obtained graduate degrees and continued on to successful engineering careers in industry and government organizations. The target audiences for our program are promising undergraduate students from all population groups (including women and other under-­‐represented groups) and from across the nation with the potential and interest to pursue graduate study in areas related to subsurface sensing and imaging. The primary approach to undergraduate research training that is embraced in the BIOSENSE REU labs is to immerse the participating students in the existing lab environments from their arrival through the completion of their projects and beyond. REU participants are provided with desk space in the lab environment in close proximity to their faculty advisor, graduate student mentors and other undergraduates. In addition, we have found that team-­‐based assignments work better for the students so we assign REU participants to projects in pairs or groups. They work on different aspects of a research project but benefit from the shared experience of exploring a novel problem with a fellow undergraduate student. An added element of the BIOSENSE REU is to have the student spend dedicated time in the medical clinic environment to provide students with a richer experience that can help motivate them to continue to pursue their education after completion of their BS. One of the main deliverables for the BIOSENSE REU participants is the presentation of the final outcomes of their research at the end of the summer. Significant time is spent working with their faculty mentors, graduate student mentors and fellow students to develop presentations of their research from the beginning of the program so that they learn how to discuss their work with people who have different levels of scientific knowledge. We encourage the REU participants to remain involved with Gordon-­‐
CenSSIS by inviting them to participate in presenting their research at other events, such as our annual research conference. We intend to promote the BIOSENSE REU program model and its components by making it available as an on-­‐line resource for other REU programs and the greater NSF community supporting undergraduates. II.59: REU Site in Additive Manufacturing Robert Landers (Missouri S&T), Hong Sheng (Missouri S&T), Douglas Bristow (Missouri S&T), Gregory Hilmas (Missouri S&T), Ming Leu (Missouri S&T), Frank Liou (Missouri S&T), Joseph Newkirk (Missouri S&T) This project seeks to excite undergraduate students in conducting research in additive manufacturing processes, train these students in the best practices of conducting research, and encourage them to seek an advanced degree. An interdisciplinary team of faculty and students (both undergraduate and graduate) at the Missouri University of Science and Technology created the REU Site in Additive Manufacturing. This program consists of a ten week period during the summer where students will engage in additive manufacturing research activities, network with students, faculty, and people in industry actively researching the latest manufacturing trends, and gain a foundation in conducting research and effectively presenting results. The target audience consists of sophomores, juniors, and seniors in material science, information technology, manufacturing engineering, and mechanical engineering. The potential benefits for these students include a chance to conduct exciting research in additive manufacturing, network with professionals in the field, and learn effective ways to conduct research and present results. The first summer program will be in 2011; therefore, meaningful data has not yet been gathered or analyzed. II.60: From Battlefield to Classroom: Designing Pathways to Engineering for American GIs Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Corrinne Zoli (Syracuse University), Jay Henderson (Syracuse University), Ann Sheedy (Syracuse University), Tim Eatman (Syracuse University), Yingyi Ma (Syracuse University), Dawn Johnson (Syracuse University), Nicholas Armstrong (Syracuse University) This project seeks to ensure that US military personnel have knowledge of the full range of educational opportunities available to them under the Post 9/11 GI Bill, and to understand how these personnel perceive their abilities and aspirations vis a vis engineering education options. In addition, the project seeks to identify potential obstacles to their success in STEM education programs, as well in post-­‐
secondary programs in general. The results of the project will enable recommendations about how to encourage GI'\s to explore engineering and STEM education, and how universities should plan to support the veterans upon their enrollment. We are using a mixed-­‐method approach which includes focus groups with active military personnel, as well as a web-­‐based survey of veterans currently using their post 9/11 GI Bill benefits. The potential benefits of the project are improved opportunities for veterans to enter STEM fields and to successfully complete their education in these fields; the enrichment of the academy with the uniquely trained, highly motivated, and remarkably diverse personnel of the US military; and the potential increase in the pool of technology professionals in the US who can contribute to the country's economic growth. In addition, the data gathered from our study will help universities plan for the influx of GIs to campuses and ensure that veterans find a welcoming and supportive environment. Our data indicate that interest in pursuing engineering degrees by GIs and veterans is surprisingly weak. Active duty military servicepersons and veterans often fail to make the connection between their military training, experiences, and skill-­‐sets and the engineering profession. Once enrolled, GIs and veterans anticipate facing a multitude of challenges, including integrating into the larger, mostly younger and less experienced student body; finding time to go to school and care for their families; focusing on the non-­‐active tasks associated with studying; dealing with PTSD in the school environment; and finding understanding professors. Much outreach to the GI and veteran community will be needed to ensure that veterans take full advantage of the Bill's opportunities to enter the engineering or STEM workforce. II.61: Battlefield Perceptions of Engineering: An Institutional Response to Absent Pathways and Missing Engineering Students Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Corrinne Zoli (Syracuse University), Tim Eatman (Syracuse University), Yingyi Ma (Syracuse University), Andria Costello (Syracuse University), Nicholas Armstrong (Syracuse University) This project establishes and strengthens meaningful pathways to engineering for veterans using the post 9/11 GI Bill. It also aims to identify the knowledge gap between what engineers do and what servicepersons know about engineering, and to design ways to fill in the missing information for the veterans. We are conducting focus groups to better understand the knowledge gap that service personnel have regarding engineering, Based on these data, we will develop and deploy: § Engineering as a Career Fairs and Workshops: a transportable curriculum to introduce and inform active duty personnel and veterans about engineering as an education and occupational field; § Select Battlefield to Classroom Scholar-­‐Mentors from the serviceperson population as leaders and mentors for other student engineering veterans; § Develop a Leadership Seminar to provide an institutional venue to hone veterans’ leadership skills for application to professional engineering and partner with regional universities and businesses to support veterans’ career pathways. The potential benefits of the project are improved opportunities for veterans to enter STEM fields and to successfully complete their education in these fields; the enrichment of the academy with the uniquely trained, highly m otivated, and remarkably diverse personnel of the US military; and the potential increase in the pool of leadership-­‐trained technology professionals in the US who can contribute to the country's economic growth. II.62: Inspiring Innovation: Merging Pedagogical Paradigms from Engineering and Architecture Sinead Mac Namara (Syracuse University), Clare Olsen (Syracuse University), Laura Steinberg (Syracuse University), Samuel Clemence (Syracuse University) This project aims to increase innovation and creativity in engineering education. It brings together faculty from the Syracuse University College of Engineering and Computer Science and School of Architecture to jointly plan, deliver, evaluate, and refine two undergraduate courses: a Statics class for undergraduate engineers and a professional elective design course for engineering and architecture students. Each course will be complemented with a coordinated lecture series in which visitors discuss the role of creativity and innovation in their work. One of the key aims of the project is to test whether the melding of the architectural teaching paradigm and the engineering teaching paradigm will result in engineering students who are more confident in their ability to solve problems and more creative in doing so. Another aim of the project is to provide wide dissemination of the curriculum so that others may use and refine it for their own universities. It is anticipated that these classes will stimulate other engineering faculty at SU to re-­‐examine their courses and look for ways to infuse similar ingenuity and “big picture thinking” into their courses. This project creates a pilot program to test new ways of encouraging creativity and innovation amongst engineers. It will test how well the more precise, linear based traditional engineering teaching paradigm can be melded with the more open, but largely unstructured architecture teaching paradigm. Through evaluation of students and their performance in the program, we will test how successful our programs are and, by teaching the courses two and three times, we will iterate and refine the courses and their methods of delivery over the term of the project. The curricula will be informed by the newest research in engineering education, creativity, and design and the results and lessons learned from teaching the courses, but also by the coordinated lecture series bringing innovative engineers and architects to campus. Thus far the project has taught one semester each of the two new courses and the lecture series begins this semester. Results (course work, student response data, and student perceptions data) from the professional elective design course were presented at the ASEE Annual Conference in Kentucky in June 2010, at the INEER International Conference for Engineering Education in Poland in July 2010, and at the ASEE Global Symposium in Singapore in October 2010. Initial results (coursework and student perceptions data) for the new statics course was also presented at the ASEE Global Symposium in Singapore. In collaboration with the evaluation team from the SU School of education the syllabi and curricula for both new courses are being refined for the second iteration of teaching. II.63: Construction of a Microscope that Incorporates TIRF and Confocal Microscopy in the Same System Rachel Kilmer (Lone Star College) TIRF and Confocal microscopy have become a powerful tool to study the dynamics of cellular structures and tissues. However, the usefulness of these specific techniques are limited by difficulties in lab space, cost and complexity of each system. TIRF's evanescent field penetrates only 100 to 200 nanometers into a sample while Confocal creates a three dimensional image that penetrates deep into cells. In the proposed project we attempt to combine TIRF and Confocal microscopy into one microscope system. As a proof-­‐of-­‐concept study the system will seamlessly switch from Confocal to TIRF to maximize the benefits of both and advance the research lab's capabilities. II.64: AIR DISPERSION MODELING: PLANNING FOR AIRBORNE TERRORISM RELEASES IN DFW Jennifer Cook (UTA RET) With the heightened awareness of issues related to natural disasters, homeland security and information security/identity theft, the research projects conducted at the UT Arlington RET site were designed to advance knowledge within and across the fields of civil engineering, computer science and industrial engineering. Participants worked with UT Arlington researchers on a project for six weeks during the summer. As a result of the experiences, teachers have the opportunity to relate “real world” issues to their students from engineering and research perspectives. The objective of the air dispersion project was to use dispersion modeling to predict concentrations of airborne toxics (biological or chemical agents) following a potential terrorist attack, using the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex as a case study. Various terrorist scenarios were evaluated using HotSpot air dispersion modeling software. Session III: Monday, March 14, 4:30 – 5:30 p.m. III.1: In-­‐Class Peer Tutoring: A Model for Engineering Education Shane Brown (Washington State University) Developing cost efficient and effective methods to improve the quality of the classroom experience in engineering courses is of broad national interest. The classroom experience is a cornerstone of higher education and increasing the quality of this experience of engineering undergraduates has the potential to significantly impact student learning and self-­‐efficacy, and attitudes towards the discipline. Progress has been made in identifying effective instructional practices, such as active learning, which have been shown to positively impact student outcomes. While active learning strategies have been shown to be effective, their impact is limited by large student–teacher ratios. Utilizing the large pool of knowledgeable students available to assist less experienced students in the classroom, it is possible to increase structured student interactions. A strong need exists to develop and test methods for providing improved opportunities for meaningful feedback during lecture to students. The purpose of this project is to implement an in-­‐class peer tutoring (ICPT) program at Washington State University and Oregon State University in statics and mechanics of materials courses and to research student attitudes towards the value of the ICPT resource compared to other available resources and the effect on subject specific self-­‐efficacy. ICPT is characterized by more experienced students helping students during lecture on active learning exercises. ICPT sessions occur once per week and last between 20 and 40 minutes per session. ICPT also includes just-­‐in-­‐time training sessions and weekly tutor office hours. There are approximately 25 active volunteer tutors at WSU. A multitude of positive outcomes exist for students, tutors and faculty who participate in ICPT based on extensive research on the value of tutoring, formative assessment, and active learning. Students and tutors have a high likelihood of learning more, becoming more confident in their ability to solve problems and understand the content, and becoming more connected to their classmates and tutors, among others. The classroom environment will be changed with the presence of tutors and students’ sense of community and available resources to help them succeed will likely be positively impacted. Faculty will receive increased information (formative assessment) on how students are doing learning course material through observing in-­‐class student-­‐
tutor interactions and from weekly meetings with tutors. Existing evaluation and research efforts are focused on reports of the value of tutors and self-­‐efficacy. A preliminary survey was developed to assess student attitudes towards the ICPT program, including both Likert-­‐scale and open-­‐ended questions. More than 80% of students agreed with the question “I wish my other engineering courses used peer tutors.” Some typical open-­‐ended responses to the question, “In what ways did the peer tutors help you this term?” were, “They were able to explain things in terms I could understand.” Relationships between student and tutor interactions and students’ statics self-­‐efficacy, or their reported ability to successfully complete statics problems, were investigated. Students reported improved statics self-­‐
efficacy due to mastery and vicarious experiences. A survey was implemented at the end of fall term 2009 assessing students’ statics self-­‐efficacy at OSU. Students’ self-­‐efficacy in the OSU ICPT section was higher (p=0.01, Effect Size = 0.84) than a section with the same instructor not using ICPT. A TUES Type II proposal was submitted recently to implement ICPT in eight universities across the country and to conduct mixed-­‐methods research on the impact of ICPT on social capital, learning, and sense of community. III.2: A Model for Faculty, Student, and Practitioner Development in Sustainability Engineering through an Integrated Design Experience Nadia Frye (Washington State University), Shane Brown (Washington State University), Michael Wolcott (Washington State University), Paul Smith (The Pennsylvania State University), Liv Haselbach (WSU), Deborah Ascher-­‐Barnstone (WSU) Sustainable design goals have reached high importance for design of infrastructure in the US. Integrated design methodologies that ally the various engineering and creative design disciplines are also increasingly practiced. However, neither engineering nor architecture students are given the opportunity to work with colleagues in a collaborative design environment. Students should be given an opportunity to become familiar with and capable users of sustainable design while understanding their role in the process. It is also important for students to receive authentic experience working on real-­‐
world design projects before venturing out into today’s competitive job market. The Interdisciplinary Design Experience (IDeX) is an interdisciplinary design course for undergraduate and graduate engineering and architecture students that is focused on real world projects with challenging sustainability goals. IDeX is designed as a two-­‐semester long course centered on a project contracted with a private or community client. A small team of engineering and architecture faculty with diverse backgrounds and interests collaboratively teach the course. IDeX also incorporates practicing professionals and faculty members not directly involved in the teaching of the course as team mentors and consultants. Graduate students participating in the course are able to develop year-­‐long project-­‐
based thesis projects relating to the course and some are on associated fellowships. As a result, participating faculty are often able to develop new research topics relating to the problems that surface through the course and its sustainable design approach. Practicing professionals are given the opportunity to work with the new generation of engineering students on both an academic and professional basis, contributing to their real-­‐world and intellectual growth. IDeX is currently divided into two separate semesters. The first semester provides the groundwork students need to understand the project, the advanced technical tools they will use, and the innovations they will require to make a contribution. Students participate in short seminars, taught by faculty and practicing professionals that introduce different advances in the fields of engineering and architecture as well as sustainable design. At this time, students also begin preliminary research and design for the project. During the second semester of the course, students work full time on the project delivering a completed design as per the project deliverables by the end of the academic year. At different points throughout the course, review sessions are held for faculty, practicing professionals and clients to evaluate and guide the students’ progress. Students are also given the opportunity to visit with the client and visit the project site at various times throughout the course. Completed IDeX projects are open-­‐ended and externally funded. The two projects to date have been a resource neutral design for WSU’s Organic Farm and an extensive community redesign for the City of Auburn that focuses on innovative stormwater handling and wetlands rehabilitation. IDeX provides students with an opportunity to develop interdisciplinary communication skills and work in an environment that promotes learning and creativity that will benefit them in their profession. The course also allows students to gain authentic, real-­‐world skills that will make them better engineers and architects and increases their understanding of sustainable design and their ability to apply it in the future. IDeX also allows MS students to develop thesis projects from the designs and research done in the course. Faculty members have the opportunity to develop research projects from the designs and research worked on in the course. Clients will also benefit from having young creative minds working on their projects and having their projects designed in the academic world, which is often at the forefront of revolutionary ideas and technologies. Students were interviewed at the end of the first year of implementation of IDeX and responded that they are leaning toward work with other disciplines and their communication skills are improving as a result. They also feel that they benefit from the real-­‐world experience they are gaining through the class. Faculty also mentioned that they see the opportunities to discover new research areas through the class as advantageous for them. The client liaisons interviewed also felt that utilizing IDeX in the design of their project resulted in a more innovative design. IDeX is an effective, innovative, and evolving program that provides a large and diverse set of benefits to participants from many sectors. The innovative model can be applied to a variety of disciplines and problems that are well suited to collaborative learning approaches. III.3: Developmental Engineering: An Examination of Early Learning Experiences as Antecedents of Engineering Education Demetra Evangelou (Purdue University), Diana Bairaktarova (Purdue University), Christina Citta (Purdue University) We are constructing a theoretical framework termed Developmental Engineering to investigate the notion of young children’s interest and mastery of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in general and of early engineering in particular. We study how young children perceive and learn about the engineered world, and use these results to construct developmentally appropriate ways to integrate engineering concepts into early childhood education and support young children's discovery. We also aim to transform teacher education and include developmental engineering pedagogy in classroom practice. Our approach in understanding developmental engineering is multi phased-­‐knowledge generation, translation, transformation-­‐ and multifaceted . The potential benefit of our work is to include early childhood education as part of engineering education and to do so on an empirical basis. The target audience includes early childhood education professionals, parents of young children as well as member of the engineering education community with K-­‐12 interests. Our finding should also be useful to policy makers of federal programs such as Head Start. Over the long term we are hoping to help increase the number and diversity of engineering professionals needed to fill engineering jobs. In the knowledge generation phase of the project, we seek to establish children’s interest and mastery though observations and interviews. We began with the initial generation, based on expert knowledge and preliminary observations, the compilation of lists of classroom based child behaviors that would signal interest in engineering. Through an ongoing iterative process we now have a working observational protocol. An example of the main categories include: o Asks questions/states problems o Construction/making things o Explains how things are built/work o Evaluates/designs We are currently refining/revising the categories through ongoing data collection. Once completed this protocol could be used by practitioners and early childhood educators to study the ways young children exhibit an interest in engineering in their classrooms or at home. Resulting from the initial phase of this project, two papers have been published in the Early Childhood Research and Practice Journal. Two more papers are in preparation for submission to the 2011 Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES) and to the 2011 Annual Conference of the Societe Europeenne pour la Formation Ingenieurs (SEFI). Work is also being presented at the Biennial conference of the Society for Research in Child Development in March 2011. III.4: Examining the Migratory Patterns of Engineering Students Using Social Psychological Theories Demetra Evangelou (Purdue University), Matthew Ohland (Purdue University), Ida Ngambeki (Purdue University) Students often graduate from a major other than that in which they enrolled. A large proportion of this migration happens within engineering with student changing engineering disciplines, sometimes more than once. This project aims to identify and understand the choices engineering students are making with regard to persistence and enrollment in various engineering disciplines. This has been done by determining the patterns of migration amongst the disciplines and exploring why these patterns exist. This project used a mixed-­‐methods design with a nested analysis method. The first part of the study used the MIDFIELD (Multiple-­‐Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development) database. This database contains data from institutions comprising approximately 1/9 of engineering enrollment in the US. This database was used to identify patterns of matriculation, persistence, attrition, migration and graduation amongst students in different engineering disciplines. Aggregate trends were determined, specifically differences amongst disciplines and at different institutions. Statistical analyses were applied to determine and describe the distribution and pathways of engineering students, based on engineering discipline, SAT/ACT score, gender and ethnicity, who matriculate into engineering, leave engineering, persist within engineering, migrate within engineering, migrate into engineering, and graduate from engineering. The second part of the study is currently underway. This part comprises of a smaller case analysis performed at Purdue University. Purdue University was chosen as the site for this case study because it is the most recent institution added to the database and so has the most up-­‐to-­‐date student records, and also because it is the home institution of both the PI and Co-­‐PI for this study. This part of the study uses a combination of surveys and interviews to investigate the reasons for the patterns identified in the first part of the study. These surveys and interviews will be analyzed in the context of Social Cognitive Career Theory, Social Influence Theory, and with regards to Individual Differences to explore why students make particular choices with regard to their undergraduate careers. The major findings from this project to date are: 1. Approximately 20% of engineering students change their engineering major 2. Changing majors within engineering usually costs the students at least an extra semester 3. Engineering students who graduate are slightly less likely to have changed their major 4. There are clear trends in migratory patterns within engineering e.g. industrial engineering is the most popular destination and electrical engineering and computer engineering trade a lot of students 5. Migration is negatively correlated with academic performance 6. Self-­‐efficacy, interest, and departmental climate have emerged as the most significant factors related to performance and migration These findings confirm that it is important to understand migration in engineering. The trends identified suggest that students’ initial disciplinary choices are unsatisfying, possibly because they misunderstand the nature of the disciplines. The finding that making these changes costs students both in time to graduation and in grades indicates that it is important that the first choice is appropriate. There are also clear individual and climactic factors which affect students’ satisfaction in their discipline, and therefore their desire to migrate. The findings from this project are expected to help engineering educators and administrators guide students to make appropriate choices within engineering. The products of this research so far have included two articles published in conference proceedings as well as a number of presentations. The first of a series of articles describing our findings is currently under preparation and will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal within the next month. III.5: Virtual Facilitation and Team Skill Education Ray Luechtefeld (University of La Verne) Engineering education has been criticized for not providing graduates with the skills needed to lead, communicate, and work effectively in an uncertain environment. While many courses in engineering provide team experiences by having students work together on shared projects, time constraints and the specialization required for highly technical fields create difficulties for faculty who are working to help their students attain effectiveness in “soft” skills, such as the ability to think “outside the box”. Merely putting students together in teams does not give them the ability to acquire these skills, just as giving them access to an electronics lab would not ensure that their knowledge of electronics would increase. The “Virtual Facilitator” is a computationally intelligent system that is designed to assist individuals and teams by intervening in dialogue using approaches similar to expert facilitators. It models specific behaviors and guides students through inquiries and observations. Interventions can be developed easily by using a “Rule Editor” web page and can be delivered using readily available social networking tools over the internet. Interventions have been developed that model the reactions of expert facilitators and that are based on approaches to spur innovation. The outcomes of studies using the “Virtual Facilitator” and the benefits and barriers to its implementation will be addressed. III.6: An Overview of Research Exploring the Attributes and Career Paths of Engineering Ph.D.s Monica Cox (Purdue University), Jiabin Zhu (Purdue University), Jeremi London (Purdue University), Benjamin Ahn (Purdue University), Shree Frazier (Purdue University), Anna Torres (University of South Florida), Osman Cekic (Purdue University), Rocio Chave An exploration of engineering doctoral education is needed for several reasons. First, the realignment of undergraduate curricula based on studies of employers’ needs and expectations are common in undergraduate education (i.e., Engineer of 2020) (National Academy of Engineering, 2004). These types of studies are not usual in doctoral education and are needed for Ph.D. programs to respond to the changing environments in industry and academia. Second, it is important to differentiate the industrial and academic expectations of engineering Ph.D.s, since, according to NSF (2008), 73.3% of engineering Ph.D.s obtained jobs in industry. This poster presents information about three engineering Ph.D. studies. In the first study, researchers explored the attributes for success for engineering Ph.D.s. via interviews with engineering professionals in academia and industry. In the second study, researchers analyzed the curricula vitae (CVs) of 34 engineering Ph.D.s in industry and academia. In the final study, researchers explored, from a gender perspective, the career paths of females and males with engineering Ph.D.s. using CV analyses. Work has resulted in the development of a comprehensive interview protocol to explore themes of graduate preparation for engineering Ph.D.s, the operationalization of stewardship in engineering, and the acquisition of norms, skills, and attributes of engineering Ph.D.s. among a national sample of engineering Ph.D.s. III.7: Prototype to Production (P2P): Conditions and Processes for Educating the Engineer of 2020 Patrick Terenzini (Pennsylvania State University), Lisa Lattuca (Pennsylvania State University) This study investigated the extent to which engineering programs, through curricular and co-­‐curricular experiences, are promoting students’ development of the knowledge, skills, and attributes identified in NAE’s The Engineer of 2020. The study assesses progress toward those goals through surveys of associate deans, program chairs, faculty, students, and alumni from a nationally representative sample of 31 four-­‐year institutions, as well as pre-­‐engineering students at 15 community colleges. The study focuses on the experiences of women, historically underrepresented minorities, and pre-­‐engineering students. Audiences include engineering educators, employers, and policymakers seeking to improve the capacity of U.S. engineering programs to prepare students for the global engineering workforce. Findings indicate a moderate-­‐to-­‐strong alignment (and some misalignments) between the NAE’s vision and the current beliefs and practices of undergraduate engineering educators in U.S. Findings also identify curricular, co-­‐curricular, and instructional strategies related to students’ design and ill-­‐
structured problem-­‐solving skills, interdisciplinary competence, and contextual competence. III.8: Synergistic Learning & Inquiry through Characterizing the Environment Annie Pearce (Virginia Tech), Christine Fiori (Virginia Tech) ABSTRACT There is a gap in engineering education with regards to understanding the human or social barriers to sustainability that inhibits the successful implementation of engineering solutions in practice. This research combines undergraduate research and work-­‐based learning or internships to create a program for SLICES whose aim is to create an inquiry-­‐based internship experience that aligns well with the goals of the participants, and taps a larger more diverse body of students than is typically able to be reached by undergraduate research programs alone. There is also a need to fill gaps in the existing knowledge base about the impacts of such programs on diverse student populations, the efficacy of hybrid experiential learning methods for sustainability pedagogy, and the role of such programs in setting the state for positive change toward sustainability in industry. The SLICES program developed five protocols for participating students to complete, each focusing on different aspects of the adoption of innovative, sustainable construction practices. A boot camp has also been created to help the students prepare for the completion of each of the protocols and collection of data. This boot camp focused on leadership, learning styles and development of interpersonal skills. A three pronged assessment design is being used to evaluate the influence of the SLICES program using alumni studies, student learning assessment, and assessment of impact on industry participants. The goal is to develop a mechanism to collect background data on the participating companies for future use by faculty as well as a generic research approach which can be replicated in different research scenarios. The beneficiaries of this research are students, faculty and industry. Students will increase meta-­‐cognitive skills, develop abilities to complete independent research and improve personal skills and leadership qualities. Faculty gain access to data on current company practices and services which can be used for research purposes, build collaborative relationships with industry and these practice-­‐oriented learning experiences better engage students. Industry gains by employing students who exhibit more leadership qualities and improved communication skills while benefiting from access to benchmark information on sustainability, educational information from students on sustainability and recommendations presented to them by students on how to increase their corporate sustainability. The pilot study revealed what students felt would be necessary to help them with this project. This information was incorporated into the boot camp for the subsequent group of students. Improvements were made to the protocols to remove redundancy and provide structured classifications for responses rather than free responses to facilitate data processing and analysis. Web-­‐based technologies were introduced to the course, including online surveys for data input. Based on feedback, the program improved the communication skills of the students, developed their abilities to conduct independent research and provided the faculty with data which could be utilized in research being conducted. Students noted their confidence in approaching others and asking questions had been improved. There are multiple significant methodological challenges identified in the literature associated with assessing learning outcomes resulting from integrated research-­‐education programs. This research addresses some of these challenges. The boot camp used to prepare students for completing the protocols continues to be modified based on feedback from participating students. Students participating in the SLICES program should demonstrate greater levels of cognitive and affective sustainability knowledge, managerial resourcefulness and information literacy than those who participate in a non-­‐SLICES internship. The protocols continue to be revised and will be used to as a guide for others developing protocols for use in their area of study. In 2011, the boot camp will be taught collaboratively with other universities. There may be opportunities to expand the model to community colleges and K-­‐12 institutions as well. III.9: Pathways to Engineering Through Improved REU Experiences Adin Mann (Institute for Broadening Participation), Ashanti Johnson (Institute for Broadening Participation), David Siegfried (Institute for Broadening Participation), Liv Detrick (Institute for Broadening Participation), LeAnn Faidley (Iowa State University) The Institute for Broadening Participation (IBP) Pathways to Engineering is a project to transfer and disseminate the effective student support and mentoring strategies that have been identified in recent research, and which may be used to successfully broaden the participation of underrepresented students in STEM. The project will employ a set of outreach activities and complementary digital tools to network and support students and faculty involved in the National Science Foundation’s engineering Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) programs. Using extensive virtual and face-­‐to-­‐face outreach, digital communication tools, and IBP’s National Student Directory, Pathways to Engineering will: 1) Encourage networking among REU PIs, Faculty, Administrators, and potential PIs particularly in regards to strategies for student support related to their REU programs, 2) Facilitate communication between students and their mentoring network of a sponsoring faculty member, graduate student mentors, and faculty mentors at their home institution, 3) Facilitate communication and networking among students, 4) Assist REU students in bridging to graduate programs by connecting students to resources regarding STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) graduate school. To date, the foundations for these elements have been developed. The elements as well as their implementation and evaluation plans will be presented III.10: Problem Framing Skills for Engineering Problem Solving John Jackman (Iowa State University), Gloria Starns (Iowa State University), Mathew Hagge (Iowa State University), Stephen Gilbert (Iowa State University), Gregory Aist (Iowa State University), LeAnn Faidley (Iowa State University) Students struggle with engineering problem solving, and past research has shown that the initial stage (i.e., framing the problem) often causes the most difficulty. Students find it difficult to frame a complex problem, identify the core components and brainstorm a possible solution path. We are studying students’ problem framing skills and the extent to which individualized, just-­‐in-­‐time feedback during the problem framing stage can help students develop the metacognitive skills needed to start solving complex problems. In the first stage of this study, we are developing metrics for problem complexity to gage the level of difficulty in order to guide our selection of candidate problems for the data collection phase. We are using Livescribe Smartpens and screen capture software to collect data on students’ problem solving activities during the problem solving stage. Subjects will be asked to “think aloud” by making statements and asking questions as they frame the problem. The Smartpens are equipped with a microphone and an infrared camera near the tip of the pen that captures images as students write in digital notebooks. Protocol analysis will be performed on the data based on a coding scheme for problem framing. It is expected that this project will lead to a better understanding of engineering students’ meta-­‐cognitive skills and a general method for real time formative assessment of problem solving. Undergraduate engineering students are the major constituent group to benefit from this project. Since the real-­‐time feedback system will be included in an open-­‐source problem solving environment, instructors at other universities will benefit from this research. We have developed and evaluated a problem complexity metric that is based on the elements of the problem description. Initial results based on student performance are promising, but additional data are needed. As part of the think aloud protocol, we have evaluated software for coding of student data. We are currently conducting studies to evaluate the protocol's inter-­‐operator reliability. III.11: Foster Complex Systems Thinking in Construction Engineering Education Using a Case-­‐Based Multidimensional Virtual Environment (CMVE) Zhigang Shen (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln), Yimin Zhu (Florida International University) In the design and construction of building systems, structural designs mainly focus on the behavior of structures under design loads specified for operating stage. Structural failure during construction phase often caused by insufficient considerations of the dynamics of temporary or transient loads, which is highly correlated to spatial-­‐temporal dynamics of the building and construction components. For example, there were cases of bridge collapse during construction due to inadequate considerations of the load dynamics during construction. Also, factors affect construction transient loads may not be engineering. For example, cost consideration may change construction sequence and accordingly spatial relationships among building components. Despite the importance for student to understand the spatial-­‐temporal and non-­‐engineering constraints in real-­‐world project, the lack of effective tools to demonstrate these constraints limited students' ability to apply engineering principles to solving real-­‐
world problems. Based on the case-­‐based and problem-­‐based learning theory, the authors is to explore using 3D computer animations of failure cases to help construction engineering and management students develop a better understand of the spatial-­‐temporal dynamics between design and construction. For example, a 3D animation of a failed high-­‐rise building was used to demonstrate the economical, spatial and temporal constraints on the design and construction. The building collapsed due to many factors, such as improper construction sequence, poor selection of staging area, bad weather, and lack of shoring of foundation wall. Through this case, computer simulation illustrated the interactions of elements of different systems, including building, nature and the social-­‐economic system, and how and why the interactions eventually led to a failure. To better understand the complexity of construction systems, information that was presented by the simulation was organized based on the structure-­‐behavior-­‐function theory. The assessment method is to compare the learning results of students between the control group and the experimental group, on the structure, behavior and function concepts on complex engineering systems. The unique contribution of this research is its synergy of 3D visualization and the real-­‐world engineering failure cases to help student to understand the complex constraints in engineering systems through "see" and "experience" within classroom. Applying multidimensional visualization of construction engineering cases to assist students’ inductive reasoning process for learning complex problems is new. The findings from this project will enrich our knowledge of inductive engineering education in learning complex construction engineering systems. The outcomes will help to close gaps between learning well-­‐structured engineering theories and developing solutions to ill-­‐structured, real-­‐case scenarios by adding inductive reasoning and complex systems thinking to traditional deductive-­‐driven engineering education. This project will directly impact the teaching and learning of a wide variety of construction engineering courses which critically rely on students’ multidimensional complex system thinking. The project will potentially result in a deep and comprehensive curriculum change to existing educational programs to foster complex thinking skills. The expected outcome of this research is the answer of whether or not the method represented by CMVE, can lead to significant improvement in students' understanding of spatial-­‐temporal and economical constraints, which are often the key factors in engineering design and construction. As to the effectiveness of the proposed environment compared with traditional case-­‐based learning or problem based learning, such effectiveness should be reflected by observable facts, including: 1) an enriched understanding of complex phenomena and 2) an improved capability to explain complex phenomena and solve complex problems. The deliverables of this research include the developed cases in CMVE and its website, the test results and the assessment, two journal papers and two conference papers. This project is sponsored by Engineering Education Program of NSF. The starting date is January 1, 2011. III.12: Using a Virtual Gaming Environment in Strength of Materials: Increasing Access and Improving Learning Effectiveness Jon Preston (Southern Polytechnic State University), Wasim Barham (Southern Polytechnic State University), James Werner (Southern Polytechnic State University) Need This project addresses the following needs that the National Science Foundation has outlined for the advancement of engineering in education: supporting education that broadens the experiences of engineering students; increasing efforts to combat public misconceptions about engineering, and continued support for engineering education research and experimentation. There is a significant opportunity to incorporate more interactive, immersive 3D simulations to invigorate engineering education and make learning more engaging. Current graphics and programming technology enable more sophisticated virtual modeling with broader appeal to undergraduate engineering students. This project facilitates more accessible and safer exploratory learning and is well-­‐aligned with the need of "dealing with predicaments as well as problems" and developing engineers that are "thinkers and strategists." Approach The researchers will model the laboratory equipment and interaction with the equipment in a 3D virtual computer simulation; the fundamental engineering formulae of tension, Poisson’s ratio, and torsion tests will be simulated. All phases of the physical lab experiments will be replicated virtually -­‐ the 3D simulation will allow the learner to examine the virtual equipment, set up experiments virtually, perform virtual tests, and evaluate results gathered in the virtual environment. Even if the set up was incorrect students may safely execute the lab experiment and watch the results. Such observable failure can lead to deeper realization of the importance of proper experimental set up, and students can repeat the experiment numerous times to compare reliable and unreliable measurements gathering. Once completed, the effectiveness of this approach will be measured using quantitative and qualitative analysis, and compared to student performance in the traditional physical laboratory. Benefit This project will improve access to common engineering experiments for universities and students that do not have access to the expensive, physical laboratory space and equipment. This project will also increase learning effectiveness via the interactive visualization and well designed interfaces of the virtual labs that allow students to explore engineering formulae in new, safer, and more engaging and interactive ways. Our project supports the change from the "status quo in engineering education" by invigorating a part of the core curriculum and expanding access and improving the process of how students are able to explore materials strength principles. Since the cost and safety barriers are reduced or removed by a virtual, games-­‐based laboratory, engineering students will be given more access in earlier years of their studies. We believe this will improve retention and help create an identity as an engineer earlier in the studies of the students. Outcomes The direct outcomes of this project will be the delivery of three virtual 3D simulated laboratory exercises for use in Strength of Materials courses. Based upon the creation of the 3D immersive simulated laboratories, learning will improve, access will be broadened, and costs will be reduced. Student failure rate is expected to decrease and overall performance on tests is expected to increase due to the interactive and visual nature of the learning environment. Access to the strength of materials test lab is limited for many institutions and proving too expensive to maintain for those that do have such labs. Fewer consumable materials, laboratory equipment, and laboratory physical space will be required to deliver the Strength of Materials course resulting in lowered overall costs. Deliverables This project will generate 3D virtual simulations that enable users to perform setup, execution, and analysis of the tensile, Poisson’s ratio, and torsion laboratory experiments . The 3D virtual environment will run on commonly-­‐available, non-­‐specialized computer systems to allow as many people as possible to make use of these tools. The researchers will disseminate the results of this project and make the virtual simulation software available for free download. These materials will be made available on a public Web site that discusses this work and made available through the NSF-­‐sponsored National STEM Digital Library. Finally, the faculty will hold a workshop that coincides with a national engineering conference (perhaps ASME) on how to incorporate games-­‐based virtual simulations into engineering education to train and educate faculty. A model curriculum for Strength of Materials (using the virtual laboratories developed) will be provided and an instructors’ guide will be included. III.13: The Role of Service-­‐Learning: Improving Engineering Education; Attracting Women into Engineering Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Linda Jarvin (Tufts University) 1. Need: What need are you addressing? This research project is investigating the efficacy of service learning (SL) as an appropriate pedagogy for engineering education. Most engineering programs across the United States offer some sort of service experience for their students; as in-­‐class service-­‐learning courses or via less formal, extracurricular programs. In addition, previous efforts to instill service-­‐based pedagogies into engineering have shown that such experiences may attract women and underrepresented students into engineering in numbers greater than in engineering overall. However, what is exactly learned is up for debate, especially given the massive variety of offerings. The goal of this research is to compare the perspectives and design processes of students involved in service activities to students not involved in such activities. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? Through various instruments, we are measuring participants' engineering design self-­‐efficacy, epistemological beliefs towards engineering, and their understanding of the engineering design process. To date, the study has explored self-­‐efficacy and epistemological beliefs of students via a widely-­‐distributed on-­‐line survey. A hands-­‐on design task has also been developed and implemented. This design task has been adapted for the computer to aid in implementation and data collection. 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? We anticipate that the proposed study will impact faculty and institutions by providing evidence on the ways in which service-­‐based pedagogies/programs can be implemented and used as pedagogical and recruitment tools in engineering programs across the United States. The instruments we develop and refine through this research study will allow other institutions and other types of service programs in engineering (and potentially other disciplines as well) to assess the effectiveness of their programs in attracting and retaining diverse populations. If, as we expect, service-­‐learning activities provides a more holistic view of the nature of engineering and of engineering design in all students, then implementation of such programs will enhance the general workforce by graduating more diverse and more competent students overall. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? Two specific results, beyond previously reported outcomes, include: a. A 15-­‐item validated instrument, available for on-­‐line use. Results from the sample of students with service experiences identified a perception that 34% of what they learned about technical skills and 45% of what they learned about professional skills was learned through their service activity. b. A hands-­‐on design task, adapted for computer-­‐aided implementation and data collection. Rigorous, qualitative evaluation of the verbal protocols collected to date (5 engineering students engaged in service efforts and 5 without this experience) shows that those who have had engineering service experiences appear to have a better understanding of client needs and design constraints, and seem more skilled at discriminating useful from superfluous information. Additional qualitative and quantitative data are being collected. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? The products thus far are 1) an on-­‐line instrument to measure self-­‐efficacy and epistemological beliefs towards engineering and the engineering design process and 2) a new hands-­‐on instrument for evaluating students design process. Future efforts will include implementation of these instruments to a larger scale and further validation of evaluation results. III.14: A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering Students (ISES) Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Kurt Paterson (Michigan Technological University) 1. Need: What need are you addressing? Over the last few years, concerns have escalated among many national organizations that technical expertise is no longer solely sufficient in the creation of future engineers. Additionally, in the United States engineering programs continue to struggle to attract students, especially women and minorities, despite decades of strategies to change these patterns. A growing body of evidence suggests that Learning Through Service (LTS), a pedagogical form that connects students with authentic problems in a community, may provide significant advantages to engineering students, but individual studies to-­‐date have been limited in their duration and scope of assessment. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? This project consists of a three-­‐year effort to measure various indicators related to desirable attributes of future engineers, and to relate how these indicators are impacted by LTS efforts, especially over the time of undergraduate education. The effort will involve students primarily at four institutions, diverse in size and culture, and a fifth group of students at various institutions who are involved with Engineers Without Borders. This sequential but staggered longitudinal study of engineering students will show the impacts of LTS on engineering students’ traditional technical attributes as well as a mix of non-­‐technical attributes. Information on interest and persistence in engineering also will be gathered. 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? It is expected that the study will significantly add to the growing body of evidence that LTS has positive benefits for engineering students, including those from underrepresented groups. Specifically, this project looks to determine whether extracurricular and curricular LTS opportunities offer similar benefits to all students and their universities; and provide insight on effective engineering course and program design. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? The study has just begun, so outcomes are, as yet, unavailable. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? The products thus far are a development of cohorts at the various institutions and the near-­‐
future unveiling of the on-­‐line instruments. Future efforts will include development and implementation of the interview protocol. III.15: Assessing Students’ Motivation to Learn and Practice Sustainable Engineering Angela Bielefeldt (University of Colorado Boulder), Christopher Swan (Tufts University), Kurt Paterson (Michigan Technological University), Mary McCormick (Tufts University), Jonathan Wiggins (University of Colorado Boulder), Kristina Lawyer (Michigan Technological University) In response to global challenges, the engineering education paradigm has shifted towards prioritizing sustainable solution development. Inherent to this challenge is the necessary expansion of technological engineering solutions to encompass the social, environmental, and economic dynamics of systems on a global scale. Educators in higher education across the country have undertaken the challenge of incorporating sustainability and human-­‐centered problem solving into curricula through various forms of pedagogy. However, few measures exist regarding the quality of learning experiences, leaving the engineering education community without an established, generalizable method of measuring or comparing the efficacy of different programs. With recognition of the need to assess sustainable engineering programs, a deeper question is evidenced: What is the appropriate assessment measure(s) for a human-­‐centered learning experience? We contend that as teaching methods shift towards a more holistic approach, assessment must evolve in parallel. Our research involves developing assessment instruments to measure the efficacy of sustainable engineering courses or programs. Using two complementary instruments, we are exploring whether learning through service has influenced students’ knowledge of and motivation to practice sustainable engineering. Our rationale for this exploration rests in the experiential aspects of learning through service; rather than learning about sustainable engineering in a classroom, students are instilled with the humanistic nature of sustainable engineering through community involvement. This presentation encompasses instrument development, validation, and current findings of our research effort. III.16: Search Experience for Undergraduates in Environmental Engineering Angela Bielefeldt (University of Colorado Boulder) The University of Colorado at Boulder (CU) as had a long-­‐standing REU site focused around Environmental Engineering (2000-­‐2004, 2006-­‐2008, 2010-­‐2012), with faculty mentors from the Department of Civil, Environmental, & Architectural Engineering and the Department of Mechanical Engineering. The site includes 10-­‐week research projects mentored by faculty, with many REU students having additional graduate student mentors. Many of the research projects have direct service links. The research has increased collaborations among our faculty, and over time the success of disseminating REU student research results at conferences and in peer-­‐reviewed publications has increased. We have maintained a highly diverse group of interns; 78% female, 26% minority, and 82% non-­‐host institution of the 78 total over 9 years. These interns have come from a diversity of majors: environmental, civil, chemical, mechanical, biological engineering; geology, physics, geophysics, environmental science, and chemistry. Many of these students have continued to graduate studies, including 10 at CU. Extensive pre-­‐ and post-­‐ surveys were used in the most recent four years of the REU site, and have shown gains in students’ confidence and self-­‐rated knowledge in a variety of areas. In particular, we have shown that a properly designed research experience with professional development components can build skills in all of the ABET criterion C ‘A-­‐K’ outcomes. The disciplines of both civil and environmental engineering have embraced the idea that professional licensure should require a Master’s degree or additional education beyond a Bachelor’s degree. Therefore, this REU site helps to meet this need by encouraging students to pursue graduate studies, and perhaps attract non-­‐engineers to consider careers in engineering. It also builds higher levels of skills per Bloom’s taxonomy in many outcome areas. Thus, the discipline as a whole benefits as well as the student participants. Building a strong cohort among the students can help achieve a broader range of benefits for the students, as they learn from each other and support each others’ long term aspirations. III.17: Identifying Characteristics of Successful Engineering Education Innovation Adopters Kirsten Davis (Boise State University), Ross Perkins (Boise State University), Sondra Miller (Boise State University) This work addresses a nationwide need to better translate engineering education research into the classroom setting. There are many significant barriers to hinder the transition from research to implementation. These barriers can be divided into two categories: individual and environmental perceptions. Individual barriers include personality characteristics of faculty members and the fact that they are often highly skilled technical specialists who lack experience in, and awareness of, pedagogy. Environmental perceptions include a faculty member’s view of the incentives for implementing engineering education innovation, particularly as it affects the tenure and promotion process. We have taken a three-­‐phase approach to addressing this need. Our first phase is assessment: characterizing faculty members who successfully implement engineering education innovations, as well as those who choose not to implement, and characterizing work environment perceptions of those faculty members. Our second phase is analysis: identifying characteristics of successful engineering education innovation adopters and identifying characteristics of work environments that promote individual success, as well as those that impede success. Our final phase is model development: developing an implementation model promoting successful characteristics and work environments. Identifying faculty characteristics of successful adopters of engineering education innovations, and those of non-­‐adopters, combined with understanding influences of work environment perceptions provides insight into the varied perspectives of stakeholders involved in the larger transformation of engineering education. This work will aid in the promotion of a realignment of individual faculty member and institutional priorities with those of the larger engineering community. When these priorities match and align with the goals of the larger community, we will have bridged the gap over the ‘valley of death’ in engineering education innovation. This project will serve as the foundation on which the complete bridge from engineering education research to successful implementation can be built. This project began in January 2011. Expected outcomes include: (1) identifying characteristics of faculty members who are adopters and non-­‐adopters of engineering education innovations, and (2) identifying influences of work environment perceptions on engineering education innovation adopters and non-­‐adopters. In addition to benchmarking characteristics of adopters and non-­‐adopters of engineering education innovation, this work will also (3) develop and validate a new implementation model to enable more successful transfer of engineering education research to practice. III.18: Teacher Training and STEM Student Outcome: Linking Teacher Intervention to Students’ Success in STEM Middle and High School Classes Gisele Ragusa (University of Southern California) Engineers and scientist utilize the principles and theories of science and mathematics to design, test, and manufacture products that are important to the future of a nation’s citizenry. With the exception of biological sciences, however, the percentage of college students seeking degrees in math, science and engineering disciplines has been declining for the past two decades. Furthermore, fewer potential engineering majors are completing rigorous college preparatory programs and graduating in the top quarter of their high schools. This shortfall has raised concerns among leaders in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, (STEM) fields. To meet the changing demands of the nation’s science and engineering labor force, recognition of the importance of pre-­‐college education intervention and implementation of challenging curricula that captures and sustains middle and high school students’ achievement and interest in science and engineering is critical. Current research reveals that one of the most important determinants of what students learn is the expertise and pedagogy of the teacher. Accordingly, our research is focused on improving teacher quality and resulting middle and high school student learning in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) via formation, nurturance and sustaining an important targeted school-­‐university urban educational partnership. Our university has partnered with large urban school districts to plan, deliver and sustain a targeted inservice teacher professional development and a middle and high school STEM curriculum intervention. The partnership goals are to assist inservice middle and high school science teachers in (1) designing and implementing integrated science and engineering curricula and (2) development of instructional methods and strategies that enable teachers to effectively: (a) teach challenging content and research skills in middle and high school as demanded by state/national science standards; (b) generate knowledge and transform practice in high school STEM education, (c) cultivate a world-­‐class STEM workforce, (d) expand students’ scientific literacy, and (e) promote research that advances the frontiers of knowledge in STEM middle and high school education. III.19: Characterizing a Trajectory of Conceptual Change in an Introductory Materials Course with Multi-­‐Level Formative and Summative Assessment Feedback Loops Stephen Krause (Arizona State University), Dale Baker (Arizona State University), Jacquelyn Kelly (Arizona State University), Jessica Triplett (Arizona State University), Andrea Eller (Arizona State University) Results from student-­‐based assessments were used in feedback loops at various levels to modify classroom materials and practice. The levels addressed were those of daily classes, multi-­‐class topical modules, and the whole course. The results from these formative and summative assessments uncovered student knowledge gaps, misconceptions, robust misconceptions, and difficult concepts. They were compiled and analyzed and used to inform, adjust, and redesign classroom teaching content, practice, and management approaches as supported by new student learning materials, activities, and assessments. Development of materials was guided by three major principles of the book, How People Learn. A first principle is that students must have their facts and ideas organized in a conceptual framework that facilitates retrieval and transfer of concepts to new contexts and applications. As such, content for a materials engineering course needs to foster learning so that students learn to bridge ideas from concrete contexts of a material in a familiar item (kitchen knife) and/or system component (bicycle tire) or a historical event (Titanic) to the abstract concept and principles that relate a material's (metal, ceramic, or polymer) internal microstructural features (bonding, crystal structure, grain size, etc.) to its macroscopic properties (such as stiffness, strength, and ductility). One of the formative assessments uses a second How People Learn principle, which is that, for effective instruction, an instructor needs to know, understand, and address students' prior knowledge and misconceptions. Pre-­‐
post Topic Concept Quizzes revealed prior knowledge and misconceptions before a topic is taught; instructional materials are modified; then it is given again and is able to evaluate conceptual change and misconception repair at the end of the topic. A second formative assessment is the daily Class-­‐End Points-­‐of-­‐Reflection assessment. These included: "Most Interesting, Muddiest, and What Did You Learn About Your Learning?" They provide instructor feedback for modifying upcoming classes. For students, they promote the third major principle of How People Learn, that of developing metacognition to facilitate skills like concept organization and relationships and monitoring one's own learning progress. Implementation of multi-­‐level assessment can also be exploited for other benefits such as use of an assessment tool to systematically study and monitor the progression of student learning and associated conceptual change over time. By using the Pre-­‐post Topic Concept Quizzes for all of the course topics it becomes possible to evaluate conceptual change and misconception repair for each topic across the semester, both for the class as a whole and for individual students. This information can be linked to the daily Class-­‐End Points-­‐of-­‐Reflection which an instructor can use to assess students' attitudes about particular concepts and topics across a semester. This can track how well the instruction is fostering metacognition in order to facilitate skills like concept organization and relationships, and monitor learning progress. Another benefit is to promote desirable learning skills through appropriate shaping of both instructional materials as well as the formative assessments. Such skills include those described by How People Learn for fostering a shift from "novice" to "intermediate" to "expert" understanding of a subject. One innovative learning aid, or tool in a Teaching Tool Kit, are Concept Context Maps (CCMaps), which are being used both to facilitate instruction and, when administered as a quiz, reveal prior knowledge and conceptual change. The multiple representations of concepts in the CCMaps reveal the ways in which various aspects of a concept can be related and connected. For example, for the concepts of materials failures and disasters, low temperature brittle failure of steels might be reflected in images of the Titanic, a microscopic fracture surface, and a graph which plots fracture toughness as a function of temperature. CCMaps can thus show the framework of related concepts in a subject area and use "expert-­‐like" visual-­‐verbal-­‐graphical expressions to represent them in ways that experts might in their own visual and verbal communication. Ongoing monitoring of student attitude and conceptual change with multi-­‐level assessment should promote continuing improvements in student learning. This innovative pedagogical strategy may also have potential for adaptation in other engineering disciplines. III.20: Implementation of Differentiated Active-­‐Constructive-­‐Interactive Activities in an Engineering Classroom Michelene Chi (Arizona State University), Muhsin Menekse (Arizona State University), Glenda Stump (Arizona State University), Stephen Krause (Arizona State University) Active learning methods have been widely recognized as a significant factor that enhances student learning. A broad array of modes of active learning have been described, implemented and assessed in different domains including the area of engineering education (e.g., Chen et al., 2008; Lin & Tsai, 2009; Prince, 2004). Problem-­‐based, inquiry-­‐based, collaborative, team-­‐based and inductive learning methods have been classified as the modes of active learning in many studies (e.g., Prince, 2004; Schroeder et al., 2007). Some exemplary research of active learning from the engineering education literature include the involvement of students in the learning process through inquiry-­‐based real life problems (Higley & Marianno, 2001), the teamwork based approach to solve complex problems (Yasar, 2008), and the activity oriented instruction to actively engage students into learning process (Shooter & McNeill, 2002). Taken as a whole, active learning methods refer to innovative student-­‐centered instructional approaches that actively involve students in the learning process. The main constructs of active learning include the participation and the engagement of students with the concrete learning experience, knowledge construction of students via meaningful learning activities, and the degree of student interaction. There has been a recent interest for the effectiveness of class activities on students’ learning in engineering education. However, the literature treats class activities as a single construct, and ignoring the unique cognitive processes associated with the type of activity. Our current study evaluated the differentiated overt learning activities framework in an engineering context. The introductory materials science and engineering course is one of the fundamental classes in an engineering curriculum. As a discipline, materials engineering is unique with its fundamental tenet of bridging nano-­‐scale structural features (i.e., electronic structure, atomic bonding, and lattice parameters) to macro-­‐scale properties (i.e., stiffness, strength, and functional properties). Therefore, materials science and engineering classes provide a rich domain in order to generate differentiated in-­‐
class activities and determine the relative learning effectiveness of these activities. In this study, we propose to investigate the differential effectiveness of activities on students’ learning for an introductory materials science and engineering concept by using Chi’s (2009) active-­‐constructive-­‐
interactive framework. This framework suggests that the activities designed as active are expected to engage learners more than passive instruction can do; the activities designed as constructive are expected to facilitate the generation of better and/or more new ideas and knowledge than the active activities can facilitate; and the activities designed as interactive are expected to generate superior ideas and knowledge with the joint intellectual effort by students than the individual students can generate herself/himself in constructive activities. The participants of this study will be materials science and engineering students and they will be randomly assigned to one of the experimental groups to work on the modified version of an activity related to atomic bonding and physical properties of materials. Students’ pre and post tests, activity sheets and verbal interactions will be scored/coded and analyzed to examine the relative effectiveness of modified activities on students’ learning. III.21: Developing and Implementing a Plan for Transitioning America's Veterans to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Academic Programs Robert Green (Mississippi State University), Sarah Rajala (Mississippi State University), Rayford Vaughn (Mississippi State University) Producing more college graduates in the STEM fields is critical to the long-­‐term economic development and national security of the United States. A ready source of highly-­‐motivated and intelligent individuals presently exists within our armed forces and the provisions of the New GI Bill offer an opportunity not seen since World War II to enroll these veterans in college. Having an understanding of the backgrounds of these veterans will allow colleges and university to selectively recruit those with an interest and/or special expertise in STEM fields. These veterans may also have special needs perhaps not commonly found amongst traditional students. They will be more likely to be married and have families. Their GI Bill benefits are finite and the veterans will need to progress to a degree with greater speed than traditional students. This may require a re-­‐evaluation of course offerings, evaluation of credit for knowledge gleaned from military service, and perhaps a novel use of two-­‐year institutions. It is also likely that these veterans will require some refresher training in common subjects. These veterans will have been out of high school for two to four or more years and may need to be refreshed in English, math, and science fundamentals. Existing remedial courses are typically too long and too basic to meet these needs which means new, shorter, more advanced refresher courses will need to be developed. These veterans will also benefit from seminars that assist them in reintegration into academia. Such seminars might include topics such as university/college culture, services available, time management and study skills. To assist in these efforts and to reduce duplication of effort, a geographically diverse consortium of schools has been developed through which research findings are shared and efforts are focused. This consortium will be used to develop articulation agreements, conduct needs assessments, and pilot various programs. III.22: CU Thinking: Problem-­‐Solving Strategies Revealed Lisa Benson (Clemson University), Sarah Grigg (Clemson University), David Bowman (Clemson University) Problem solving is considered to be an essential skill in engineering. For engineering students, successfully solving a problem involves managing the given information, understanding the problem context, and understanding the foundational mathematical skills needed to solve the problem. Educators must design instruction that guides students through problems while not revealing solutions, so they may learn this problem solving process. However, the varied backgrounds of these students make this task difficult. We are using novel digital Ink technology to determine how students with different academic preparation and prior knowledge progress in developing problem solving skills in a first year engineering program. We are collecting work completed on Tablet PCs and analyzing the digital ink using “tags” to identify events of interest using custom-­‐designed software called MuseInk. The work collected includes problems in a first year engineering course specifically selected for their level of complexity, potential for multiple approaches or representations, and the level of structure and/or definition provided. A “Tag Universe,” a database of procedural events, errors, and other items of interest, has been developed to tag relevant events within student work. The Tag Universe is organized into categories based on a theoretical framework of process activities used during problem solving: knowledge access, knowledge generation and self-­‐management. In addition, student errors are categorized (conceptual, procedural, and mechanical), and students’ recognition of their errors are being analyzed based on signal detection theory. MuseInk also allows the insertion of audio tags to document students’ verbal commentaries about what they were thinking when specific events occurred. The goal of this project is to allow students from a broad array of prior educational experiences and academic preparation to develop effective and transferrable problem-­‐solving skills. While our methods are evolving which use MuseInk as a research tool, we are also considering how the software is being used as an instructional tool. A user survey was implemented to identify ways to increase benefits to students using MuseInk and to help students become proficient in using digital Ink. Tutorials and additional classroom activities using MuseInk were developed based on survey data for use in Fall 2010/Spring 2011. To date, worked solutions and audio commentary for three problem sets were collected from total of 26 students (19 males, 7 females). Three problem sets have been tagged by our research team, and inter-­‐rater reliability analysis was conducted to ensure consistent tagging. Tag data (written and verbal) is in the process of being analyzed in terms of relationships between tag categories and students’ academic backgrounds and prior knowledge about engineering. We have defined criteria for structuring problems such that students can demonstrate their cognitive, procedural and metacognitive abilities. Through rigorous inter-­‐rater reliability protocols, we have developed a robust coding system for evaluating students’ problem-­‐solving strategies. We have documented the adoption practices of students using digital Ink and associated software for the first time, adding to the body of knowledge about “diffusion theory” as applied to technology in the classroom. III.23: Agent-­‐Monitored Tutorials to Enable On-­‐Line Collaborative Learning in Computer-­‐Aided Design and Analysis Jack Beuth (Carnegie Mellon University), Carolyn Rose (Carnegie Mellon University), Rohit Kumar (Carnegie Mellon University) The goal of this project is to create a suite of software agent-­‐monitored internet chat-­‐based course materials (tutorials) for integrating computer modeling and design skills within any mechanical engineering undergraduate program. These tutorials not only allow students to navigate complicated software interfaces, but also teach fundamental concepts through dynamic dialogues between software agents and student user groups. Further, chat-­‐based tutorials will be applied as a unique distributed teaching tool, allowing students over wide distances to be intellectually engaged in simulation software use. This project involves a partnership between Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), Parametric Technology Corporation and Drexel University. Mechanical Engineering (ME) undergraduate students at CMU are collaborating with graduate students in the CMU Human-­‐Computer Interaction Institute (HCII) (under the guidance of ME and HCII faculty) to develop a series of dialogue-­‐based tutorials for use in mechanical engineering undergraduate courses. Parametric Technology Corporation is providing their complete library of engineering design, analysis and process management software, as well as software training tutorials for use within this program. Drexel University will not only use tutorials developed at CMU within their own courses, but their students will also take part in combined distance learning software sessions with CMU students. A unique aspect of this project is its direct application of on-­‐
going research within the computer-­‐supported collaborative learning community developing programmable software agents for automated instruction and guidance. This approach is being applied to the problem of efficiently integrating distributed learning and computer-­‐aided engineering experiences into undergraduate curricula. Both of these applications require significant student guidance for success. Software agents are specifically designed to draw out reflection and engage students in directed lines of reasoning. Assessments are focusing on how students learn with various combinations of software agent, instructor, student teaching assistant and collaborative group support. III.24: ADEPT: Assessing Design Engineering Project Classes with Multi-­‐Disciplinary Teams Daniel Siewiorek (Carnegie Mellon University), Asim Smailagic (Carnegie Mellon University), Carolyn Rose (Carnegie Mellon University) The long-­‐term goal of our research is to develop technology for engineering project course instructors to aid them in assessing students' technical progress and in diagnosing group problems. We are developing tools to provide indicators of the inner-­‐workings of project groups based on data that can be collected unobtrusively from groups as they are doing their work outside of the instructors' view. With an increased awareness of group processes, our hypothesis is that instructors will be able to intervene in a more timely manner than they are currently able. Following a user-­‐centered design approach, we posed three research questions: 1) What do instructors want to know about their student groups? 2) Is the desired information observable and can it be reliably tracked by human annotators? 3) Can the desired information be automatically tracked using machine learning techniques to produce a summary report that instructors can use? III.25: Collaborative Research: Development and Testing of 4-­‐P Model to Assess the Effectiveness of Case Study Methodology in Achieving Learning Outcomes P.K. Raju (Auburn University), Chetan Sankar (Auburn University), Qiang Le (Hampton University), Barbara Kawulic (University of West Georgia), Howard Clayton (Auburn University), Nessim Halyo (Hampton University) STEM education is dotted with islands of innovation – isolated areas where information technology-­‐
based (IT) materials are being used effectively . In this project, we first address the need for transformational instructional pedagogy that uses information technology more effectively in engineering classrooms. We then address the need for the diversity of target students. The need for a greater push for diversity is borne out by the fact that African-­‐Americans, women, and minorities are less represented in the engineering field than in either science or non-­‐science areas. There is a call for significant breakthroughs in understanding how students learn engineering so that our programs prepare engineers to meet the needs of the changing economy and society. We answer this call by developing a model of student learning performance that offers new insights regarding the variables affecting the differences between innovative multi-­‐media case study environment and traditional classroom context. In this project, we integrate organizational, engineering education, and educational learning literature to develop a model of student learning so as to research how learning style, gender, and race have the potential to act as facilitators or barriers to the learning process. We argue that the gains in higher-­‐order cognitive skills, improvement in self-­‐efficacy, and improvement in team-­‐working skills are positively related to the absence of barriers to the learning process. We further argue that the instructional methodology is a moderating factor in the relationship of these variables with improvement in achieving learning outcomes. We derive a set of hypotheses based on the research model and test them using an experimental design. The targeted student groups for this experiment are freshman engineering students at Auburn University and Hampton University. An analysis of the data obtained from the experiment furthers our basic understanding of the impact of instructional methodologies on student learning. The targeted student groups for this experiment are freshman engineering students at Auburn University and Hampton University thereby leveraging the resources and initiatives beyond that of the individual universities. Auburn University strives to bring practical education and research to a changing world. A strategic initiative of Auburn is to establish and foster relationships with academic, business, and government constituents to better utilize the capabilities of the faculty and to enhance partnership opportunities with external constituents. As a historically black institution, Hampton University is a strong believer in collaboration with other universities. And this project using case studies as the teaching pedagogy has proven to especially work for minority students, engage them in learning and retain more of them in engineering. This project provides fresh insights on how instructional methodologies can be used to remove the barriers to the learning process in engineering classrooms. A course using multi-­‐media case studies was implemented during Spring 2010. The total number of students taught was 68 at Auburn University and 18 at Hampton University. All the tests/quizzes, course outlines, rubrics, lesson plans, instructions to students, assessments, strategies, attendance policy, and team-­‐based projects were the same across both universities. The evaluation data was collected using a coding scheme and made available to the evaluators: ILS results, LAESE results, Pre and post questionnaire results, etc . The results show that all of the means were above 3.0 for both pre and post surveys, indicating that the students perceived that they improved their higher-­‐order cognitive skills (mean of 3.19 and 3.54 for AU and HU), team working skills (mean of 3.34 and 3.81 for AU and HU), and self-­‐efficacy (mean of 3.43 and 3.52 for AU and HU) as a result of this course. There was no statistical difference between the pre and post results for both universities. We trained Auburn and Hampton University students on case study methodologies and developed engineering pedagogy skills of two faculty members at both universities. These faculty members were clinically supervised through one-­‐on-­‐one meetings and weekly teleconferences. The project provided graduate and undergraduate students training on research and education. Twenty faculty members were provided information about this project in the NSF awardee conference held at Washington DC during Jan. 31-­‐Feb. 2, 2010. Ten faculty members were provided information about the evaluation of this project in the AERA conference. This project was showcased at the 2010 ASEE conference in Louisville, KY. Three conference papers were presented, a journal paper and a textbook were published to disseminate the results from this project. This project has motivated three students to pursue their doctoral program in innovations in education research and curriculum. III.26: Building Design Apps for Early Engineering Education Scott Ferguson (NC State University), Larry Silverberg (North Carolina State University), William Deluca (North Carolina State University) Many engineering programs are built around foundational topics with integration coming in the form of a capstone design project. However, engineering education research has shown that this one-­‐way transition from theory-­‐based courses to an unstructured design project is not a particularly effective way for students to learn. Developing effective design problems in early engineering education is necessary to foster systems thinking, build a curriculum-­‐wide design thread, and increase student retention. Additionally, design problems are commonly accompanied by the need for repetitive analysis. While computational software provides a means of fostering the higher-­‐cognitive processes of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, the lack of these tools for early engineering education provides a barrier to implementing design at the freshman-­‐sophomore stage of the curriculum. We propose that software, specifically in the form of computational “modules”, will provide an effective approach toward integrating design in early engineering education. The analysis barrier common to complex system design will be overcome by developing open-­‐source, discipline-­‐specific Modules and multidisciplinary Design Apps. The investigators hypothesize that students using the Modules will be able to explore design variable interactions in the classroom (and on their own outside the classroom). These Modules will also be combined into a Design App, thereby building a student's appreciation for the multidisciplinary aspect of engineering, creating a hands-­‐on design experience, and fostering system-­‐level analysis. Implementation will focus on a set of discipline-­‐specific courses and one system-­‐
level course in the aerospace engineering curriculum at NC State. Design Apps provide an opportunity for freshman and sophomores in engineering to gain experience with more complex design problems while simultaneously being engaged in a hands-­‐on project that fosters their identity as an engineer. If successful, this research will ensure that practical design education and design experience occurs throughout the engineering curriculum. This work also offers opportunities for students, educators, and design engineers in the community to create and share multidisciplinary design problems. Users will be able to visit a Design App Store hosted by NC State to download Modules and Apps that meet their unique needs for immediate use, anywhere. This environment provides novel, untapped potential for innovation and the platform for a business model in engineering education. As this work began in January, our current plan to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach involves assessing the Modules, Design Apps, and accompanying lesson plans. The dependent variables measured will include gains in student's factual, conceptual, and procedural knowledge. Rubrics will be constructed to assess design solution function and quality. Student perceptions of Module and App usability, and the software’s ability to convey engineering design concepts, will be assessed to guide the software development process. Competency-­‐based assessment of a student's engineering design achievement, and the quality of their design solutions, will also be evaluated. Further, we may find that interested students download Modules onto their own laptops, as part of extra-­‐curricular activities, to design their own engineering systems. It is expected that this work will strengthen NC State’s existing design thread in the aerospace engineering department by creating a virtual, multidisciplinary rocket design problem. This Design App will allow students to efficiently and effectively sample and explore the design space in a multidisciplinary design scenario. Implementation will focus on a set of discipline-­‐
specific courses and one system-­‐level course in the aerospace engineering curriculum. This work also addresses student desires for more design activities in their courses while increasing computer literacy. To encourage adoption, the open-­‐source Modules and Apps will be hosted in a Design App Store. Additionally, the multidisciplinary nature of Design Apps can be used by researchers to benchmark the effectiveness of new multidisciplinary optimization techniques. III.27: Transforming and Integrating: Evolving Construction Materials & Methods to the Next Level Chung-­‐Suk Cho (Univ. of NC at Charlotte), David Cottrell (Univ. of NC at Charlotte), Candace Mazze (Univ. of NC at Charlotte) This project will validate an active-­‐based, student-­‐focused methodology as a successful means for student achievement, engagement, and mastery of learning objectives and project outcomes. Outside the classroom, Habitat for Humanity will serve as a gateway to hands-­‐on opportunities for students with little or no experience in construction. When classroom instruction is augmented with an out-­‐of-­‐class experience that provides a defining hands-­‐on experience – for many perhaps their first – the classroom experience itself also takes on a new aura of reality and relativity. Synergistically, the students emerging from this project will be more confident and better prepared for follow-­‐on courses in the curriculum. The investigators for this project will conduct a highly structured assessment project to document progress in terms of the project objectives. The project evaluation will be based on both survey data and objective assessment data collected before, during, and after each semester when the project has been implemented in the classroom. A variety of tools will be employed at key target of opportunity to solicit, capture, and analysis performance data. The collective sum of all applicable assessment and evaluations for each course during either Phase I (Validation) or Phase III (Implementation) will collated in a form Independent Course Assessment Report (ICAR). Classroom performance will be tracked with objective data (graded homework, exercises, and exam problems) augmented with subjective data resulting from Pre-­‐ and Post-­‐Surveys and interviews. Student data and perceptions will be complimented with input from faculty through surveys and interviews as well. The Habitat mission will also be deliberately measured. All students enrolled in the course will complete surveys designed to identify their level of knowledge and experience at the beginning of the semester. Commensurate with the Habitat program, students will be further assessed during interviews. Information collected will document past experience and current level of knowledge on applicable learning outcomes and develop profiles for the student populations. Faculty observers will document any Habitat related on-­‐the-­‐job training and instruction and the demonstrated skills displayed by the students. These skills may include technical as well as functional expectations regarding oral communication and team performance. Further, during the classroom instruction, periodic feedback will be gathered from the students concerning their perceptions of the effectiveness of the project and the Habitat experience in promoting the project objectives. Student participants will perform an after-­‐action review through surveys as well as selected exit interviews. The participants will be tracked collectively as they complete the course and assessed on their respective mastery of the course learning objectives in light of their job site excursion. Particularly during Phase I, their performance will be measured against course standards as well as against the “control group” – that is, those students who did not participate in the Habitat mission or the guided program of study – to determine if any statistically significant differences in outcome mastery can be determined and if so, whether it could be reasonably tied to the experience gained through this project. III.28: AggiE-­‐VET Cesar Malave (Texas A&M University) 1. Need: What need are you addressing? Veterans who want to earn an engineering degree begin their journey with backgrounds and capabilities that are very different than typical engineering students for whom engineering curricula and support services were developed. Therefore, the project is to better understand opportunities that engineering veterans offer and needs they have and to develop modifications to address these opportunities and needs. Overall, the goal of the AggiE-­‐VET program is to create a veterans’ community of interest to enhance the educational experience and number of veterans successfully pursuing B.S. engineering degrees at TAMU. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? Through interviews and surveys, the College of Engineering will identify both academic and personal challenges of veterans and the opportunities (e.g., course credit for previous courses and experience). Using this information, it will improve academic advising, support, and pathways to satisfy requirements for engineering degrees, at both Texas A&M University and neighboring Blinn College, where many veterans re-­‐start their academic career, to improve veteran retention and success. AggiE-­‐VET will provide opportunities for internships and research experiences with funding for veterans to enhance their career opportunities. Finally, the college will sustain AggiE-­‐
VET through partnerships with Fort Hood, the Texas A&M Veteran Services Office, Texas A&M Office of the Provost, Texas A&M Scholarships & Financial Aid, Blinn College, and industry to increase recruitment and support of engineering student veterans. 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? Target audience is veterans who are exiting military service and seeking an engineering degree; whether they will first attend a community college, as data indicates are the majority; or start at Texas A&M. AggiE-­‐VET provides opportunities for those exiting the armed services, particularly 9/11 veterans, to take advantage of the “new” GI-­‐Bill to obtain an engineering degree and contribute to the workforces need for more engineers. It will also provide academic enhancements and internships for veterans enrolled as engineering majors at TAMU, or intended engineering majors at Blinn (Community) College. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? The project began 1 October 2010. There are 75 veteran engineering majors at TAMU, with only 3 being female. Individual interviews of all the women and a random sample of males enrolled in the Dwight Look College of Engineering at TAMU will be conducted during the spring 2011 semester. Approximately 100 veterans are enrolled at Blinn College and have declared their intent to transfer to an engineer major, the majority at Texas A&M. The military transcript system (AARTS and SMART) is being reviewed by administrative faculty in the college to develop training materials for advising veterans in engineering. Preliminary findings include a Veterans Office survey at TAMU that indicated that students see barriers in not receiving credit for military training or coursework. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? Although new practices will be introduced to promote success of veterans studying engineering, a key question is whether these practices will be sustained after cessation of the grant. Two factors in the design of this project are thought to contribute to sustainability. First, the new practices that are introduced are responses to what was learned from veterans both through their interactions with campus organizations and through interviews. Second, the project is building partnerships (campus organizations, neighboring community college, industry, and neighboring military base from which many veterans on the Texas A&M campus originate) that will continue. Partnerships with many organizations connected with supporting veterans pursuing engineering degrees will promote a sustainable program influencing success of veterans working on engineering degrees. III.29: Encouraging Innovative Pedagogy through Long-­‐Term Faculty Development Teams Jill Nelson (George Mason University), Margret Hjalmarson (George Mason University) Considerable research in engineering education has concluded that student engagement in the learning process (e.g. active learning, interactive pedagogy) has a significant positive effect on student learning gains. Despite these results, however, adoption of such innovative pedagogical practices in engineering classrooms is not widespread. In order for these results to contribute to improved education, they must be translated from engineering education research to the STEM classroom. Broadly speaking, the focus of this project is to study how instructional development for faculty and documentation of faculty expertise can be structured to promote sustained incorporation of interactive pedagogy in engineering classrooms. The main effort of the project is the construction and refinement of models for ongoing instructional development and for documentation of the resulting accumulated expertise. The study structure is built around a team of faculty experts who are experienced in interactive pedagogy. The study aims to learn from their experiences and to study the expert team as a model of a long-­‐term pedagogical development team. Specifically, the study is designed to address the following research questions: 1. What is the design process for a content-­‐driven assessment guide? 2. What is the nature of the progress of a small group of invested faculty focused on interactive pedagogy? 3. How do faculty experienced in interactive pedagogy analyze student learning? This study has the potential to improve engineering student learning through fundamental research on instructional development models for promoting sustained data-­‐driven pedagogical innovation. Interactive pedagogy has been shown to improve the retention of underrepresented groups in engineering; hence, facilitating instructors’ sustained adoption of interactive teaching practices holds promise for increasing the persistence of a broader range of students. The primary audience for the content-­‐driven assessment guide that will be developed is instructors who are interested in incorporating interactive pedagogy in their courses for the first time. The models for ongoing instructional development that result from this work will be of value to the broader STEM education community. The initial meeting of the faculty expert team was held in January 2011. Discussion questions addressed by the team included: 1. What factors do you consider when you’re designing in-­‐class assessments? 2. What are characteristics of a good in-­‐class assessment? 3. How do you know when an assessment works? 4. What would have been most helpful to know when you started using formative assessment? While formal analysis of the meeting transcripts is not complete, several themes emerged, particularly with regard to the last question above. Among these themes was the importance of realizing that using formative assessment often means relinquishing some control of the classroom and accepting that risk. An additional theme was noting that students are often reluctant to participate when formative assessment is introduced but that persistence and an explanation of the benefits of formative assessment are critical to securing student buy-­‐in. As deliverables, the study will produce a model for developing and documenting teaching expertise, a content-­‐driven assessment guide for signals and systems, and a searchable database of categorized formative assessment tasks. The content-­‐driven assessment guide and database of tasks will be made available via Connexions to promote broad dissemination. Additionally, the faculty expert team, representing five universities, will provide a natural avenue for dissemination of results through university-­‐based instructional development groups. III.30: Linking Interest and Conceptual Knowledge in Electrical Engineering Margret Hjalmarson (George Mason University), Jill Nelson (George Mason University) The goal of the project is to understand the connections between students' interest in engineering and their conceptual understanding. We have analyzed a survey, interviews, and measures of conceptual understanding (course grades and a concept inventory) from junior-­‐level electrical engineering students enrolled in a signals and systems course. One outcome is understanding students interest in applications of engineering concepts and finding connections between concepts as they move through their engineering program. Students also specify their long terms goals for engineering to different degrees of specificity. III.31: JavaGrinder: Microworlds James Palmer (Northern Arizona University) Even as Bureau of Labor Statistics predictions indicate unprecedented demand for software engineers in the next five years, nationwide retention rates of incoming majors are alarmingly low and interest in computer science remains stagnant. Many educators are reevaluating how we teach computer science in the critical first year of study and are questioning the emphasis of programming and tool mastery over more abstract computational thinking. While specialized development tools and integrated development environments intend to simplify programming tasks they typically do little to support pedagogical development and evaluation of a broad range of problems at varying levels of computational abstraction. Worse yet, the languages and tools used in introductory courses often create barriers in the form of boiler plate code, complex build tools, and unintuitive interfaces that discourage students from engaging in directed and focused practice. We attempt to address these issues with a web based Computer Science platform called JavaGrinder that emphasizes problem solving and core computer science concepts while deemphasizing the role of specialized development tools. This is accomplished with a task specific web 2.0 environment where students can work either individually or as teams on bite-­‐sized problems that focus on solid software engineering practices and concept mastery. Concepts are presented within real-­‐world contexts that advocate computer science as an exciting multidisciplinary field, rather than as an abstract world of syntax and arcane codes. JavaGrinder is designed to facilitate problem-­‐solving skills by exposing the salient aspects of a problem, providing guided practice, and immediate feedback. JavaGrinder teaches true Java programming, while shielding students from language and platform-­‐specific minutiae. In this way, JavaGrinder addresses the critical gap between successful introductory programming environments and realistic functional programming and software engineering. III.32: NUE: Teaching Undergraduates Nanomanufacturing Engineering (TUNE) James Palmer (Louisiana Tech University), Hisham Hegab (Louisiana Tech University) The goal of this project is to produce nanosystems engineering graduates with the critical thinking and manufacturing skills necessary to meet the nation's workforce needs in nanotechnology. While there are a number of nanotechnology laboratory and lecture classes nationwide, the majority of the experiences demonstrate ‘recipes' to produce nanostructures but do not prepare students with the critical thinking skills required to assess and improve nanomanufacturing processes. A junior level open-­‐ended laboratory class has been developed and taught (since Spring 2009) where students were asked to control the particle size of CdSe nanoparticles. Students were taught literature searching techniques along with safety and economic analysis of processes. Faculty mentors of senior capstone projects were asked to assess the final presentations from the junior laboratory class. This has enabled the faculty to understand the skills taught in the course and level expectations. Workshops of the capstone faculty have been conducted to further coordinate the senior projects. These workshops appear to have been very effective in elevating the design experience. The quantitative impact of these changes has been published in a Summer 2010 ASEE paper. In addition, the B.S. Nanosystems Engineering program was successfully accredited by ABET (we believe this is the first ABET accredited Nanosystems Engineering program in the nation!). The junior level course was instrumental in many of the program level assessment activities and was critical for the successful accreditation. Outreach activities have been conducted in all three quarters of the capstone design course. Students in the Fall NSE 406 course have gone to regional high schools to discuss career opportunities in nanotechnology and science/engineering. Nansosystems Engineering students have participated in the Winter “Science Day” for regional Girl Scout troops. Students in the NSE 408 class developed and conducted demonstrations for the Engineering and Science day where over 800 high school students visited the campus. III.33: Nanotech Innovations Enterprise: Students Creating the Future – One Atom at a Time John Jaszczak (Michigan Technological Univ.), Mary Raber (Michigan Technological Univ.), A. Nasser Alaraje (Michigan Technological Univ.), Paul Bergstrom (Michigan Technological Univ.), Michael Bennett (Northeastern University) Nanotech Innovations Enterprise (NIE) started in January 2008 with a $200,000 Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education in Engineering Grant from NSF and matching funds from Michigan Tech’s Multiscale Technologies Institute (MuSTI). The primary goal of the enterprise is to give students a hands-­‐
on, goal-­‐oriented entrepreneurial educational experience by running their own company-­‐ researching, marketing, and producing nanotechnology-­‐related products and services. The enterprise, which has recently completed its third and final year of NSF funding, continues to flourish with an interdisciplinary team of approximately 20 highly motivated students. Most enterprise team members have stayed members for multiple semesters and have used the experience to complete senior research or senior design requirements for their degrees. Of 48 total students who have been NIE members, 23% have been women, many of whom have held leadership positions at all levels including President. Overall, 40% of the NIE members have gained significant leadership experience as project managers and/or officers. Education and outreach activities have been and continue to be core activities of the enterprise. These activities help fulfill one of the enterprise’s goals to further the broader dissemination of knowledge about nanotechnology, and also help to inspire younger students to consider careers in STEM areas. These activities have also given the enterprise new ideas for future commercial and educational products. Students are seeking funding to further develop and offer its educational and outreach activities. Team-­‐member satisfaction with the enterprise has been very high, and anecdotal evidence suggests that the nanotechnology minor and the nanotechnology enterprise have helped recruit new students to Michigan Tech. NIE has become a well-­‐established enterprise and students consistently look to recruit new members to participate in future semesters. Students have successfully developed an organizational structure, policies, and business plans for several projects. Significantly, since several projects are market-­‐ready or nearly market-­‐ready, NIE is investigating the possibility of forming a limited liability corporation in the coming year. III.34: Assessing the Impact of Faculty Advising and Mentoring in a Project-­‐Based Learning Environment on Student Learning Outcomes, Persistence in Engineering and Post-­‐Graduation Plans Mary Raber (Michigan Technological University), Valorie Troesch (Michigan Technological University), Susan Amato-­‐Henderson (Michigan Technological University) In 2000, we introduced a new undergraduate engineering curriculum option intended to serve as an alternative to the traditional two-­‐semester senior capstone design experience and one that would better meet the needs of both students and industry. Initially funded through an NSF Action Agenda grant, this program offers teams of students from varied disciplines the opportunity to work for several years in a business-­‐like setting to solve real-­‐world engineering problems supplied by industry. This alternative capstone program is now a self-­‐sustaining program that attracts engineering and other STEM-­‐discipline students to the university, retains them, and makes them more marketable to employers when they graduate. Each alternative capstone design team operates as much as possible like a real company in the private sector and is run by the students. Team sizes range from 10 to 70 or more members. All team members have prescribed responsibilities corresponding to their level of maturity, abilities, and technical education. Team members define problems, develop and design solutions, perform testing and analyses, make recommendations, manufacture parts, stay within budgets and schedules, and manage multiple projects. This alternative capstone design program has converted the traditional classroom into a multi-­‐year, interdisciplinary, experiential learning environment and has transformed the role of instructor from one who imparts knowledge to that of advisor and mentor who guides students as they discover and apply knowledge. To our knowledge, no assessment project has attempted to measure the impact of this form of faculty involvement on outcomes such as student learning, retention and career intentions resulting from this type of learning environment. The impacts of teaching, advising, and mentoring in team-­‐based design programs are not typically susceptible to the kinds of metrics used to measure research accomplishments. Therefore, a model that can directly measure quality in hands-­‐on, discovery-­‐based learning environments and its impact on student outcomes would be potentially transformative. Evaluation results can help strengthen engineering education by offering additional evidence of the impact of a curriculum such as that used in capstone programs, and the contribution of faculty who teach, advise, and mentor students. This is valuable information for recruiting engineering students, for designing programs that retain engineering and other STEM students, for improving engineering education, for attracting industry support and for appropriately recognizing and rewarding this redefined role of faculty mentor. Under NSF’s IEECI program, we undertook a study to determine whether multi-­‐year participation in a project-­‐based learning environment, together with the redefined role of faculty mentors and advisors, are positively correlated to successful student education outcomes. Two survey instruments were used, one which was developed under this research grant, and the other which was a modified form of the Academic Pathways of People Learning Engineering Survey (APPLES). The results of this survey instrument when overlaid with the assessment of the perceived impact of the faculty advisor/mentor, yielded some interesting results. We will share the evaluation methods as well as the results of both components of the survey as they relate to the faculty advisor role and project-­‐based team learning environments. We will suggest practical applications of the knowledge gained to the improvement of engineering education. We will also include recommended methods and metrics for assessing the impact of teaching, advising, and mentoring on student retention in engineering, graduation, career intentions, and other outcomes. III.35: Sustainability, Energy, and Environment: Creating and ARK of Excellence on the “SEE” Brad Mehlenbacher (North Carolina State University), Christine Grant (NCSU), Steven Peretti (NCSU), Tuere Bowles (NCSU), Pamela Martin (NCSU) Sustainability offers a theoretical framework to rationally analyze complex problems. It requires integration of concepts from many disciplines, a variety of insights, and a multitude of approaches. This project creates an ARK of Excellence that thrives in the Sustainability, Energy and Environment (SEE) realm. The ARK represents Answers, Research and Knowledge that will “Teach Students to Think Globally, Train Globally, Practice Globally”. The work of ARK on the SEE revolves around 6 core components: on-­‐campus and distance education curriculum with strong sustainability components, research experience for undergraduates (REU) tied directly into energy/sustainability issues, an interactive community of Energy and Sustainability, interdisciplinary and far-­‐reaching targeted corporate interactions and visitations, connections with “SEE” alumni, and domestic and global internships and co-­‐
operative work experiences. In the pursuit of promoting environmental justice we have embarked on The Intergenerational Stories of NC Migrant Farmworkers: Lessons of Learning, Survival and the Environment. We are working with the local migrant farming community to increase awareness both within the community and the North Carolina public at large regarding issues of health and sustainability. We are also investigating the New Hill, NC community and the effects it has seen due to a sewage treatment plant built in close vicinity. There is an online community in production that will provide a space for current engineering students, alumni, and professionals in the engineering industry to share information and problem solve in consideration of sustainability and environmental justice. Environmental justice is also closely linked to ecoliteracy, which is the focus of one branch of research within the ARK on the SEE. The Social Justice and Equity Research Collaboratory (SJERC) works in conjunction with the ARK on the SEE and is devoted to issues of environmental justice and sustainability and community outreach through its website (www.sjerc.com), which dedicates some of its modules to ARK on the SEE. III.36: The Nanosystems Emphasis – Valuing Disciplinary Depth and Differences in Nanoscale Science and Engineering Teams Dimitris Korakakis (West Virginia University), Kasi Jackson (West Virginia University), Robin Hensel (West Virginia University) The Nanosystems Emphasis bridges the traditional stovepipes of undergraduate programs in engineering and the sciences through a nine credit hour backbone of seminar and nanosystems research experiences spanning from freshman to senior year. Using nano devices and systems as naturally integrative learning vehicles, technical, social, ethical and economic considerations are introduced and developed enabling students to understand the role of their discipline and the value of others. The Nanosystems Emphasis is a creative, broadly applicable, and interdisciplinary approach to achieving the challenging objective of preparation of students for the NSE workplace. Through the program’s unique seminar and research components, engineering and science students will participate as colleagues in interdisciplinary teams and graduate equipped to understand and use to advantage their disciplinary differences to collaborate effectively in the NSE workforce. Fully implemented, the program will directly affect 120 students annually at WVU across six departments and two colleges. During the first two years of the program, we retained the majority of the students between the intro course and the sophomore seminar. However, last year, about a quarter of them continued. Most students indicated they were interested in continuing but there were two major reasons they did not: 1) they were not able to fit the seminar into their schedules and 2) because of the semester lag between taking the intro course and registering for the sophomore seminar, they found the process of registering for it confusing (it requires an instructor permit) or they neglected to follow up with the professor. Continuing students suggested some sort of programming between the intro and sophomore seminars to keep students engaged. We expect that reason 2 is a contributing factor behind reason 1. Thus far, we have seen that students want to engage early on with research and many of those continuing actually work in research labs from their sophomore year. The few students that have completed the program have moved on to graduate school, but it is too early to have a complete statistical understanding of the project’s impact. III.37: NUE: A Nanotechnology Certificate Program for Engineering Undergraduates Wendy Crone (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Naomi Chesler (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kimberly Duncan (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Tola Ewers (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kristyn Masters (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), David Shaffer (Univ of Wisconsin-­‐Madison) Nanotechnology offers an exciting array of future careers for today’s students, and it is imperative that undergraduates are offered proper training and educational opportunities in this emerging interdisciplinary field to successfully prepare them to enter this burgeoning market and workforce. For some time, University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison (UW) students have demonstrated an awareness of nanotechnology and a keen and growing interest in nanotechnology educational opportunities. Instructors in the Fall 2006 InterEng 101: Contemporary Issues in the Engineering Profession course added a special lecture on nanotechnology because, out of a class of 250 students, 31% had selected nanotechnology as their focus area from one of five topics. Responses to voluntary surveys administered to first-­‐year students enrolled in Introduction to Engineering in Spring 2008 (n=83) and 313 students enrolled in InterEng 101 and 160 courses in the Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 semesters also substantiate these early indicators. We are developing, implementing, and evaluating an interdisciplinary Nanotechnology Certificate Program in the College of Engineering at the UW through this Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education (NUE) project. Our efforts include: implementing and institutionalizing a Nanotechnology Certificate; creation of new course modules to modify existing courses on nanoscale science and engineering (NSET); institutionalization of existing special topics courses with NSET focus; development and institutionalization of proposed courses required for the Certificate; training of graduate students and faculty in developing and assessing new nano-­‐oriented case studies for simulation-­‐based active learning instructional materials; creation of a mechanism for training our undergraduate engineering and physical science students in NSET; and dissemination of the results of the project, including syllabi, instructional materials, certificate requirements, and assessment results of the effectiveness of the products created. The Nanotechnology Certificate Program promotes teaching of nanoscale science, engineering, and technology (NSET) topics by integrating them into pre-­‐
existing courses and creating course modules dedicated solely to them. The course under development, Introduction to Nanotechnology and its Societal Implications, will advance Nanotechnology Certificate students’ understanding of NSET by introducing them to the field and demonstrating the fundamental connections among disciplines at the nanoscale through case studies. Both graduate student and faculty collaborators involved in the effort will benefit from training in creating effective educational materials. And by making the certificate program open to all College of Engineering and physical science undergraduates at the BS level, a broad and diverse range of students will benefit from NSET education. Although there exist a number of courses in the UW’s engineering and physical science departments introducing students to nanoscale science, a broadly-­‐accessible coordinated curriculum has not been provided. Also, courses integrating NSET and societal implications are missing from undergraduate offerings. However, our research shows the absence of courses which include NSET-­‐focused topics is not due to a lack of faculty who perform research involving nanoscale science. An analysis of a Web of Science search in Spring 2010 revealed that between 2008-­‐2010, there have been nearly 350 published nanoscale research reports by over 150 different UW faculty. Of those nano-­‐researcher faculty, 120 have teaching responsibilities for a variety of courses within multiple disciplines at both undergraduate and graduate levels from virtually all of the campus colleges/schools. Thus, despite evidence of growing faculty expertise within the NSET realm, it is not necessarily translating into learning opportunities for students. The objectives of the Nanotechnology Certificate Program support the goal to promote the development of graduates who are well-­‐versed in nanoscale science, engineering, and technology concepts and the societal implications of technology. The courses and Certificate will impact the education of hundreds of students and will help to develop a workforce with a fundamental understanding of NSET concepts as well as liberally educated students with tools to understand the intersections between technology and society. The new introductory survey course (Introduction to Nanotechnology and its Societal Implications) will be required for all students enrolled in the Certificate, but it will also be open to and recruit students from all disciplines. The strength of the introductory course will be its interdisciplinary nature, both in the student body and the concepts addressed. Also, modules of the new course will be usable as stand-­‐alone educational tools available for integration into existing NSET courses. III.38: Cross-­‐Cultural Connections: An RET Site Program with UPRM and UW Greta Zenner Petersen (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Juan de Pablo (University of Wisconsin-­‐
Madison), Nelson Cardona Martínez (University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayagüez), Juan López Garriga (University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayagüez), Tracy Stefonek-­‐Puccnelli (Universit The University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison (UW) Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC) on Nanostructured Interfaces and the University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayagüez (UPRM) Wisconsin -­‐ Puerto Rico Partnership for Research and Education in Materials [Wi(PR)2EM] will collaborate to offer their local K-­‐12 teachers the opportunity to learn about cutting-­‐edge research in nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) and materials science and engineering (MSE), to create classroom educational materials based upon that research, and to take part in an invaluable cultural exchange experience that with enhance their teaching. This Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) program at UW and UPRM will provide K-­‐12 teachers with financial support to participate in a six-­‐week, full-­‐time summer professional development program, which will include a capstone exchange week when the teachers and RET personnel from one campus visit the RET program at the partner institution. There will be additional responsibilities and activities during the academic year to build upon the summer experience, including reunion workshops and conference presentations. As RET Fellows, teachers will work with UW MRSEC and UPRM Wi(PR)2EM faculty, postdoctoral associates, staff, graduate students, and undergraduate students to conduct research in NSE/MSE and to develop related curriculum. The UW-­‐
UPRM RET Site program will diversify the pool of K-­‐12 teachers knowledgeable about and experienced in science and scientific research, and will promote an important cross-­‐cultural impact on the RET Fellows, personnel, and, ultimately, on the students of the Fellows. Through the UW-­‐UPRM RET Program, K-­‐12 teachers in Puerto Rico will have the opportunity to conduct funded research and curriculum development in their native language and to create educational materials based on cutting-­‐edge research. This means that at least half of the educational materials developed in this collaborative RET program will be first written in Spanish. Some projects will be bilingual in their original version, and many of the activities will be translated into both languages. In addition to serving Hispanic students and teachers in Puerto Rico, this proposed RET program will also benefit the growing Hispanic population in Wisconsin and the entire United States. This will help to lower the barrier for native Spanish-­‐speaking students, both in Puerto Rico and in Wisconsin, to become more comfortable with NSE/MSE concepts and skills. In Year 1 of the program (summer 2010), UW lay the foundation for the join RET Program by hosting seven K-­‐12 teachers, four of whom are bilingual, and one of whom is from Mayagüez. In summer 2010, the full UW/UPRM parallel will run with each institution hosting a cohort of teachers and UPRM hosting the capstone exchange week. III.39: NSF Engineering Research Center for Biorenewable Chemicals Pre-­‐College Education Program Adah Leshem-­‐Ackerman (CBiRC), Mari Kemis (RISE) (Iowa State University) Des Moines Public Schools is the largest urban school district in Iowa, serving over 30,000 students. The district has a growing population of underrepresented minority students (45%) and a growing percentage of students receiving free or reduced lunch (65%). Many schools in the district fall into the category of “Persistently Failing.” Students are not meeting national standards in science and math. A significant number of science teachers are not adequately trained to teach science. Many teachers report professional isolation within their schools and among their peers. CBiRC is committed to maintaining a long-­‐term partnership with the Des Moines Public School District, by supporting an improvement in the level of teaching and learning in the science classrooms. CBiRC provides K-­‐12 teachers with knowledge, experiences, and tools to create enhanced learning environments that include more hands-­‐on and minds-­‐on activities. Select teachers receive professional development training with a strong focus on renewable and sustainable energy and relevant engineering concepts. Through these training opportunities teachers are equipped to bolster a strong sense of inquiry and curiosity for science and engineering in their students. CBiRC teachers in the Des Moines Public School District are encouraged to work collaboratively with other teachers in their district across grades. As a result the district has implemented teacher Professional Learning Communities organized by subject area within each school. Students at all levels are more engaged in classes where CBiRC teachers practice. Teachers report that compared to pre-­‐CBiRC efforts, students ask more questions, are engaged in scientific thinking and process skills and show an overall greater interest in STEM fields. The students now see themselves as scientists, and their science vocabulary and literacy has increased. Student scores on district-­‐wide assessments are also above the district average at two of the three middle schools and one of the three high schools where CBiRC trained teachers are present. Data continues to be collected, and the data is trending positively. Over the course of two years, CBiRC has provided extensive professional training to eight high-­‐school teachers, seven middle school teachers, and 12 elementary school teachers in the Des Moines, IA public school district. This training, which has involved between 40 and 1,200 contact hours per teacher, is impacting over 1,500 students across the district. Supporting this effort, science teacher professional learning communities have been established in all high schools and a pilot professional learning community of science teachers from one middle school and its feeder high school has been created. Survey results of teachers who participated in CBiRC professional training report that collaborating with their peers and mentors to share ideas is critical in understanding science knowledge and scientific research. These teachers think differently about the way they teach and the way students act and participate in the classroom. They are more knowledgeable of laboratory skills and techniques, better understand scientific inquiry, persistence and patience in the research laboratory, and have confidence working in a research setting. The teachers use problem solving, more inquiry-­‐based activities, and scientific notebooks in their classrooms. III.40: NSF Engineering Research Center for Biorenewable Chemicals (CBiRC): University Education Program D Raj Raman (CBiRC) (Iowa State Univ.), Mari Kemis (RISE) (Iowa State University), Karri Whitmer (RISE) (Iowa State University), Lindsey Long (CBiRC) (Iowa State University) The chemical industry needs to transform from one that relies on fossil carbon to one that uses a substantial amount of photosynthetically-­‐derived carbon (i.e., biomass). To achieve this transformation, the NSF Engineering Research Center for Biorenewable Chemicals (CBiRC) seeks to develop both an intellectual framework to allow the rapid development of low-­‐cost biorenewable chemicals, and to train the next generation of engineers and scientists who can bridge the gap between chemical and biochemical catalysis. CBiRC’s University Educational Programs address this latter need, by training undergraduates and graduate students in this nascent field. CBiRC has two major university educational programs: Graduate education in Biorenewable Chemicals, and a Research Experiences for Undergraduates program (REU). The graduate education program has two manifestations. At the lead institution, a Graduate Minor has been created. At partner institutions, a Graduate Certificate is available via distance-­‐education of core courses. The REU program seeks to (1) deepen understanding of fundamental principles of engineering, chemistry, and biochemistry, (2) engage students in cross-­‐
disciplinary experiential learning, (3) advance students’ knowledge of economic and environmental constraints on biorenewable chemicals, and (4) integrate REU’s into the CBiRC community. The program has pioneered a model wherein students come to the lead institution for an orientation, after which time approximately a quarter of the group go to partner institutions. Weekly online meetings are used to keep the group informed of each other’s work throughout the summer. Better trained, more innovative, culturally-­‐adaptable engineers are a goal of our work. The individuals themselves, the companies that eventually employ them (or graduate programs they eventually matriculate in), and the nation as a whole are our stakeholders in this endeavor. In addition, engineering and science educators are stakeholders in this project. We are enrolling students in the graduate minor at Iowa State University, and several students are pursuing this graduate certificate program. Since the inauguration of the Center in Fall 2008, we have offered all the core courses at least once (e.g., The Evolving Chemical Industry, Entrepreneurship in Biorenewable Chemicals, Fundamentals of Biorenewable Resources and Technology). 2.) Although the logistical challenges associated with the multi-­‐institutional REU were significant, we are on track to repeat the approach in Summer 2011. REU students reported increases in their understandings of the benefits of professional networking and interdisciplinary research as well as significant increases in their technical laboratory skills. We have learned that we need to do a better job of assessing student preferences prior to making REU offers and that we need to carefully evaluate student mentoring (especially in large labs) to ensure we are setting up the REUs and labs for success. For the graduate minor, we have created new curricula and new courses. We share these courses with partner institutions via distance education. We have also created a strong REU program which has graduated 18 diverse students and is poised to graduate more than a dozen additional students in 2011, and have found innovative ways to incorporate incoming freshmen, and our partner institutions, in the REU. III.41: NSF NUE 0939355: Creating a Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Minor James Brenner (Florida Tech), Kurt Winkelmann (Florida Tech), Joel Olson (Florida Tech), Yekaterina Lin (Florida Tech), Xu Shaohua (Florida Tech) Our goal is to develop the first nanotech program in the world that features multiple lab courses, because most students learn this field "hands on". New Nanotech Lab II and Materials Characterization Lab courses have just been pilot-­‐tested to complement existing Nanotechnology and Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering lecture courses and a freshman Nanotechnology Lab I course. Both courses feature crash courses on each instrument, followed by a mentoring transition, with grading rewards based on independence. Now that these new courses are complete, we have contracted with a publisher to write a nanotechnology lab manual that will target faculty wishing to inexpensively establish nanotech programs. http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/nanotechexptdevelopment/syllabus.doc http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/matchar/syllabusf10 -­‐ for merge.doc http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/nanotechnology/NanotechSyllabus/CHE55672011.doc http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/biomaterials/CHE55692010.doc http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/nanotechmanual/2011 syllabus.htm name = fltech password = brenner The Nanotech Lab II course adds SEM, TEM, STM, and AFM characterization of nanomaterials made using literature syntheses, as well as several new syntheses. In the Nanotech Lab II class, students synthesized CdS and CdSe quantum dot semiconducting nanoparticles and saw how they could be used in biomedical imaging, made phosphorescent europia-­‐doped yttria and saw how its glow-­‐in-­‐the-­‐dark properties were a function of how it was heat-­‐treated. They also made metallic and molybdenum carbide nanoparticle catalysts, polymer/silica structural nanocomposites, highly porous zeolites (synthetic clays) that are used in numerous applications ranging from upgrading of crude oil to solid laundry detergents. Several experiments focused on the nanoelectronics industry such as a) the use of photolithographic processes to make microfluidic channels used in lab-­‐on-­‐a-­‐chip biodiagnostic screening devices; b) the synthesis of carbon nanotubes and nickel nanowires -­‐ the wires in the next, much faster generation of computers; and even c) synthesis and testing of polymer/carbon nanocomposite sensing elements in an electronic nose. Until now, no one has had the ability to watch the steps in self-­‐assembly or self-­‐destruction as they happened. With these new microscopy methods, students tracked the very start of growth of ammonium hydrogen phosphate (AHP) crystals that many kids have made for elementary school science fairs, the growth of zeolitic clay crystals, the growth and misfolding of proteins associated with Alzheimer's disease, and the destruction of bone from excessive acid concentrations associated with gouty arthritis. The AHP crystal self-­‐assembly in http://my.fit.edu/~jbrenner/NSFNUE0939355brennerresearchnuggetslide.ppt name = fltech password = brenner shows how nanospheres of AHP grow into fractal, hierarchical nanostructures from top left to bottom right. The Materials Characterization Lab course addresses the need to get students from rookie to independent status on materials analytical equipment quickly without significant cost or downtime. This course focused on transitioning students from being beginners to being experts capable of teaching the next generation of students. This class was composed of some lectures, some hands-­‐on demonstrations, passing some online testing prior to using the equipment, mentoring under a graduate student, and finally passing a hands-­‐on practical test in front of a professor and a grad student. Students found development of troubleshooting flowcharts for STM and AFM particularly helpful. III.42: T-­‐CUP: Two -­‐ Three Community College to University Programs Project: An Innovative Model for Broadened Pathways into Technical Careers Patricia Mead (Norfolk State University) Engineering is a gateway technical profession leading to economic and occupational stability. Given the increasingly technological context of many global challenges, a diverse technical workforce is critically important for the national security and competitiveness of any nation, and particularly for the U.S. Norfolk State University, a Historically Black University (HBCU), established its Department of Engineering in fall 2003. The department administers Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in Electronics and Optical Engineering. The Engineering Department recently launched an innovative partnership with five community and two-­‐year college programs to strengthen the community college pathway into an engineering career. Central Virginia Community College, College of Southern Maryland, Northern Virginia Community College, Thomas Nelson Community College, and Tidewater Community College are the inaugural partners of the two plus three community college to university programs project (TT-­‐CCUPP or T-­‐CUP). T-­‐CUP participants matriculate at a community or two-­‐year college working toward the Associate of Science in Engineering degree, then enter a three year program at NSU. Upon completion of the full five-­‐year curriculum, participants will have earned three post-­‐secondary degrees: the associate, bachelor, and master of science degrees in engineering. Analogous to three plus two undergraduate programs that have for several decades been used to bridge physics, math, and other science students into an engineering discipline, our program is expected to be a model for attracting a larger pool of students into the engineering profession. T-­‐CUP features five program threads: curricular coherence; advising, mentoring, and support services; academic enrichment; networking and community; and assessment and evaluation. The program threads are intended to create a stable infrastructure upon which student success and institutional sustainability can be realized. The program structure is also comprehensive, incorporating formal and informal curricular components, and engaging students, community college and four-­‐year faculty and administrators, business managers, military officials, and high school teachers and parents. III.43: Education and Outreach Activities of the Engineering Research Center for Collaborative Adaptive Sensing of the Atmosphere Paula Sturdevant Rees (CASA ERC) The Center for Collaborative Adaptive Sensing of the Atmosphere is an NSF Engineering Research Center that was established in September 2003. CASA faculty and researchers are leading computer science, engineering, meteorology, and social and behavioral science experts from core partners including the University of Massachusetts Amherst (UMass), the University of Oklahoma (OU), Colorado State University (CSU), and the University of Puerto Rico-­‐Mayaguez (UPRM) as well as outreach partners including the University of Delaware (UDel), the University of Virginia (UVA), Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP) and University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS). CASA’s education and outreach mission is to educate K12, undergraduate and graduate students in understanding the complexity and interdisciplinary nature of engineered systems and their impacts on society. We focus on revolutionizing our ability to observe, understand, predict, and respond to hazardous weather events. The backbone of U.S. weather forecasting is the NexRAD network of high-­‐resolution Doppler radars operated by the National Weather Service. These radars have limited ability to watch the lower atmosphere, where most weather forms, because of the Earth’s curvature. CASA’s idea is to defeat the earth curvature problem by supplementing these radars with networks comprised of small, short range radars. We have a multi-­‐
faceted program to address educational needs at multiple levels. For the K12 community, we provide RET opportunities, hold Content Institutes, and interact with local classrooms. At the undergraduate level, we provide REU opportunities and have focused on curriculum development and enhancement. For example, “Native American Perspectives: Earth Systems of the Southern Plains”, is an introductory undergraduate course at OU which integrates indigenous knowledge into the geosciences using Native American art and stories as observations to teach earth science concepts specific to the U.S. Southern Plains. We are working to develop a similar opportunities at UMass. At the graduate level, besides RA opportunities, we have focused on the development of new courses and degree programs. All of these combine both in-­‐depth technical knowledge in students’ discipline specific field of study as well as interdisciplinary breadth of knowledge and training. At the K12 level, we aim to interest a new generation of students in the study of complex engineered systems, particularly females and minorities. At the undergraduate and graduate level, we aim to introduce students to cutting edge research as well as introduce them to interdisciplinary collaborations. CASA’s test beds provide students the opportunity to apply their dissertation research to compelling social issues; our end-­‐user thrust provides students opportunities to collaborate with leading experts in social sciences and disaster research. Our ultimate goal is to increase the number of women and minorities choosing to pursue advance degrees in STEM fields. We have successfully recruited and retained students in STEM disciplines at all levels, have increased and enhanced the diversity of students seeking STEM degrees at our core partner institutions, and we have enhanced students’ learning experiences at all levels by exposing them to the complex and interdisciplinary nature of engineered systems and their impacts on society. The main products of our research to date are refereed technical journal publications, book chapters, conference presentations, seminars and guest lectures. Teachers who have worked with us have published the results of their work in educational journals. We are exploring creating a compilation of our K12 outreach materials into a “weather radar” book. III.44: Enrichment Experiences in Engineering (E3) for Teachers Program Robin Autenrieth (Texas A&M University), Karen Butler-­‐Purry (Texas A&M University), Cheryl Page (Texas A&M University) Enrichment Experiences in Engineering (E3) for Teachers Program Robin Autenrieth, Karen Butler-­‐Purry, Cheryl Page College of Engineering, Texas A&M University The E3 Teacher Program is a summer residential program for secondary mathematics and science teachers. Teachers are matched with engineering faculty and participate in an engineering research experience. E3 provides research opportunities across engineering disciplines (e.g., electric power systems, water resources management, biodegradation of environmental contaminants, nanomaterials, digital integrated circuits). The E3 mission is to excite, empower, and educate teachers about engineering so they in turn will excite, empower, and educate students they come in contact with each day. The program is hosted by the College of Engineering at Texas A&M University (TAMU). To accomplish the goal of involving teachers in engineering research, the E3program has four objectives linked to the expected outcomes: 1. Enhance teacher understanding of engineering through immersion in authentic engineering research experiences. 2. Transfer engineering research to secondary STEM classrooms through teacher development of authentic inquiry learning activities (“projects”), integrating their research experiences and current educational research on inquiry, learning styles, and diversity. 3. Heighten secondary students’ interests, enlighten them about engineering careers and how engineers enhance the quality of peoples’ lives by highlighting career information in the learning activities designed by teachers. 4. Build an interactive community of E3 RET teachers who will continue to refine their projects, share these resources, and engage long-­‐term with TAMU engineering. The E3 program is an integral part of the College of Engineering’s outreach plan because teachers are such effective spokespersons for engineering. Recognizing the importance of diverse student population, this program recruits participants from majority-­‐minority schools. In addition, the College partners with 12 Texas high schools with high minority, high economic need populations with demonstrated records of high academic achievement. The goal of increasing the number of underrepresented students in TAMU engineering is enhanced through their teachers who are invited to participate in E3. The teachers learn about engineering, develop projects that they take back to their classrooms, and become an important link between TAMU and their students. The College is committed to the E3 program (e.g., granting faculty release time for the project, providing funds for administrative support, and supplying necessary infrastructure and facilities to run the program). The E3 program successfully recruits engineering faculty writing NSF CAREER proposals by offering the opportunity to incorporate the E3 program in their educational plan. Institutionalization is a long-­‐term goal of the E3 program. Over 100 teachers across Texas have participated in the program. Each spring, approximately 12 secondary math/science teachers are selected to participate in the E3 summer program. Teachers are paired, and then matched with an engineering faculty mentor to participate in his/her research program. Prior to campus arrival, teachers interact with faculty mentors, who provide background reading materials, and regularly communicate with the teachers to familiarize them with the research. Teachers arrive in early June; on-­‐
campus housing is provided for the 4-­‐week program. Teachers participate in research activities several days each week. As teachers develop their classroom activities, support sessions with engineering education specialists aid in the transfer of engineering research into secondary math/science curricula; teachers are allocated a $600 supplies budget for classroom implementation. Weekly field trips in addition to engineering lab tours broaden engineering career awareness for the teachers. Weekly dinners are held with engineering faculty guest speakers who share highlights of their research on high-­‐
profile topics (e.g., alternative energy source). Weekly interactive seminars expose the teachers to “culture and learning” research discussions. Teachers give two presentations during E3 program. In Week 2, they present an overview of the research in which they are participating. At the end-­‐of-­‐program symposium, they present the classroom lesson plans that they developed from their research experience. During the subsequent academic year: teachers implement lessons in their high school classrooms; teachers attend follow-­‐up E3 Workshop and TAMU Teacher Summit. Several participants have been promoted into leadership positions becoming spokespersons for the importance of engineering. We are beginning to see matriculation of the teacher’s students into TAMU. Efforts are underway to identify additional sources of funding to institutionalize the E3 program in the College of Engineering. III.45: Notre Dame RET Site in Engineering (EngRET@ND) Wolfgang Porod (University of Notre Dame), Alexander Hahn (University of Notre Dame), Nevin Longenecker (University of Notre Dame) In this poster, we describe, in general, the rationale and goals of the EngRET@ND site program and, in particular, the activities and outcomes during the third year (summer 2010) of this three-­‐year grant. EngRET@ND participants not only perform research, but they are required to develop curricular elements based on the topic of their research. This curriculum development effort is facilitated by Working-­‐Group Sessions twice a week, with an emphasis on classroom experiences that are student-­‐
centered and discovery-­‐ and inquiry-­‐based. Science coordinators in participating schools are engaged in efforts to implement these new curricular elements in the classroom, and superintendents of local school systems have committed their participation and support. EngRET@ND participating teachers are embedded in laboratories of all five departments of the College of Engineering at Notre Dame and their affiliated Engineering Research Centers, with their focus on important engineering challenges facing society, such as the environment, energy, biotechnology, and nanotechnology. Completed curricular elements are compiled, edited, and bound into the RET@ND Handbook of Laboratory Activities, which will also be made available on-­‐line, and which will serve as a means for national dissemination of educational materials produced by the EngRET@ND site. III.46: RET Site on Bio-­‐Inspired Technology and Systems (BITS) Xiaobo Tan (Michigan State University) It is critical to pique the interest of students in science and engineering, and prepare them with the knowledge and skills required for a competitive, global economy. K-­‐12 education is the first key component in the nation’s quest for a workforce that is literate in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). It has been recognized that effective K-­‐12 science and engineering education hinges on training of well-­‐qualified STEM teachers and development of innovative curriculum that integrates interdisciplinary, hands-­‐on learning with national and state standards. This is the need we are addressing in this project. Established in September 2009, the RET site program on Bio-­‐Inspired Technology and Systems (BITS) aims to advance precollege science and engineering education by training a cadre of leaders of middle and high school teachers in the STEM areas. The three-­‐year program will provide opportunities for 26 elementary, middle and high school teachers from the greater Lansing and Detroit areas, to participate in cutting-­‐edge research and develop innovative curriculum through a seven-­‐week Summer Institute. With "one-­‐on-­‐one" mentoring from engineering faculty, the teachers are involved in intriguing research in diverse areas, such as artificial muscles, robotic fish, biosensors, biomechanics, biofuels, digital evolution, and biomolecular engineering. The research experiences subsequently allow the teachers to create engaging curriculum that will excite precollege students and liven up classroom learning. The RET participants also participate in a number of professional development activities, including workshops, seminars, and field trips to industry and national labs. The BITS RET Site is expected to enrich the professional development of a number of future leaders in STEM education, result in innovative curriculum for science and technology courses, and most importantly, peak the interest of middle and high school students in scientific inquiry. The first cohort of eight teachers were recruited in Spring’10, who were engaged in 7-­‐week summer research with engineering faculty and curriculum development with Dr. Jennifer Doherty, a curriculum specialist. The teachers attended weekly workshops, brownbags, and lab/field trips, and presented their learning experiences and findings at the end of Summer’10. Evaluation was carried out by Dr. Patty Farrell, a professional program evaluator, prior to, during, and after the Summer Institute. Much has been learned in teacher recruitment, Summer Institute operations, faculty-­‐teacher interactions, and curriculum development approaches. Other than specific contributions to individual research projects, a number of the RET participants have created new curriculum modules for their classroom teaching. The PIs and the program evaluator are visiting several schools this Spring to follow up with the RET participants and observe the implementation of the developed curriculum materials. These curriculum modules will also be archived at and disseminated through the website of the BITS RET program. Dissemination is also been pursued by the RET participants and PIs through workshops and conferences. III.47: Science and Mechatronics Aided Research for Teachers (SMART): An RET Site Project Vikram Kapila (Polytechnic Institute of NYU) Under this RET Site, in 2010, eleven teachers attended a 6-­‐week summer workshop consisting of a 2-­‐
week “Guided Training” and a 4-­‐week “Collaborative Research.” Eighteen guided training sessions, consisting of lectures and hands-­‐on projects, introduced the teachers to the fundamentals of mechatronics. During the research experience phase, teachers conducted collaborative research with research assistants and faculty mentors. Follow-­‐up activities include two Research Seminar Days and a SMART Day @ Poly event. Project’s external evaluator reported that: teachers had a substantial increase (average 1.16/4 on 35 items) in familiarity with skills, concepts, and devices introduced during training; and teachers identified several benefits from research experience, e.g., working on compelling projects and making significant progress, working with innovative technology and understanding how it can be used in the classroom, etc. III.48: Expanding the EUV ERC RET Program Through a Partnership with the Alliance Program Kaarin Goncz (Colorado State University) The EUV ERC is dedicated to educating the next generation of scientists so the technological breakthroughs that are necessary is the field of laser technology can be realized. Our primary objectives for our RET program are to provide research opportunities as well as professional and curriculum development to the people most critical in nurturing this workforce of tomorrow; teachers! The important leaps that are necessary for the advancement of engineering fields can only be made if the students of today are inspired to pursue STEM careers. By involving teachers in engineering research and helping them to employ and develop STEM curriculum, the teachers will be able to transfer knowledge of engineering and technological innovation into their classrooms to both inspire and inform our youth regarding STEM careers. Laser technology has made remarkable progress in the 50 years since the invention of the first laser in 1960, and even more exciting advances are underway. Every time that new lasers have been developed to cover a previously unexploited region of the electromagnetic spectrum, major scientific and technologic breakthroughs have resulted. A research experience in laser technology shows teachers the links that arise in modern applications of photonics providing teachers with readily available career examples and role models of successful engineers. In order to impact as many teachers as possible, the EUV ERC has teamed up with the Alliance Program at Colorado State University in order to recruit teachers from the far corners of Colorado. This partnership is in its third year and has been instrumental in providing an exhilarating experience for 6 middle school science teachers from schools with students that do not normally have access to such resources. III.49: Research Experience for Teachers (RET) -­‐ Chicago Science Teacher Research (CSTR) Program Nicole Bogdanovich (Edwin G. Foreman High School), Seon Kim (UIC), Andreas Linninger (UIC) The Chicago Science Teacher Research (CSTR) program is an initiative by the faculty of three UIC Colleges in a strategic partnership with the Chicago Public School authorities and industrial interest groups to address the need to engage in-­‐service teachers in emerging science and technologies. The participating teachers have an opportunity of interdisciplinary projects in cutting edge UIC research areas of bioengineering, biomedical engineering, pharmacy, and environmental science. This program forced to integrate different levels of scientific research and knowledge in joint teams to address challenging projects. The team is composed with high level research fellows from UIC, outstanding undergraduate students from NSF-­‐REU site, highschool students from the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy (IMSA), and RET fellows. The participating teams are submerged in a structured summer period combining research, social activities, and plant site visits to R&D industrial centers. The teachers are engaged in emerging technologies and cutting edge research, graduate level course work, and the orientation, learning and teaching from students and faculty mentors. Seven weeks of research apprenticeship provides hands-­‐on lab immersion to close the knowledge gap in practiced science and technology. A key innovation is the comprehensive follow-­‐up program consisting of (i) Summer and Fall RET Conferences, (ii) sponsored follow-­‐up visits of faculty to target schools, and (iii) two-­‐day curriculum workshop monitored by prior RET fellows to ensure the effective transfer of research experience into the classroom. III.50: REU Site in Electrical & Computer Engineering at the University of Kentucky Regina Hannemann (University of Kentucky) The REU Site in Electrical & Computer Engineering at the University of Kentucky hosted 10 students last summer and will host 20 more students in the upcoming two summers. Students are exposed to faculty, graduate students, research staff, and other undergraduate students in a developing community that incorporates academic and social enrichment activities. The program objectives are as follows: a) Provide underrepresented students and students from institutions with limited research opportunities an authentic research experience that will increase their confidence and ability to contribute to the body of engineering knowledge; b) Improve student understanding of the nature of research practice and scientific reasoning; c) Provide students with a collegial partnership experience with faculty, peers, and research staff; d) Increase student appreciation of the importance of coursework to the understanding of engineering research; f) Improve oral and written comprehension and communication of technical knowledge; g) Expose students to research instrumentation, measurement techniques, documentation, and laboratory management; h) Encourage greater interest in graduate school and research careers. Recruitment efforts are targeting women, underrepresented minorities, and students from academic institutions with limited opportunities for research. Student applicants should have backgrounds in mathematics, physics, computer science/ engineering, or electrical engineering. The REU students (rising sophomores, juniors, and seniors) will participate in a wide range of research, weekly seminars, professional development workshops, field trips to local industry, and social events. The REU project will foster the integration of research and education through an immersive research experience. The research activities will advance knowledge and understanding within the subfields of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Case studies of each participant will contribute to the emerging body of knowledge regarding student learning. III.51: Interdisciplinary Research Experience in Electrical and Computer Engineering at Oakland University Osamah Rawashdeh (Oakland University), Daniel Aloi (Oakland University) The Interdisciplinary Research Experience in Electrical and Computer Engineering (IREECE) at Oakland University (OU), MI, is a ten-­‐week summer REU program that ran for the first time in 2010. The goal of IREECE is to immerse participating undergraduate science and engineering students in active research environments tackling problems in electrical and computer engineering, with a special focus on the participation of women and minority students. The ten participants are divided into five groups and assigned to one of five ongoing research efforts based on their interests, background and abilities. The projects are part of funded research at OU and student interaction with external collaborators is a crucial component of this program. The five research topics for 2010 were in the areas of automotive antenna design, development of a sleep apnea detection system, implementation of a 3D first-­‐person vision system for remotely operated vehicles, control of a mecanum wheel robot, and the design of a radial motor that is driven by shape memory alloy (SMA) wires. The first year of IREECE has resulted so far in a published IEEE conference paper, two published posters, and 3 more papers currently under preparation. The exit-­‐surveys and feedback from the participants are in agreement that IREECE has been an enlightening and exciting educational experience. III.52: Evaluating a Four Site Undergraduate Research Program in Biofuels and Biorefining Engineering Daniel Knight (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Frannie Ray-­‐Earle (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Nancy Tway (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder), Alan Weimer (University of Colorado-­‐Boulder) NEED: This NSF research experience for undergraduates (REU) site program promotes science and engineering education and careers in the biofuels and biorefining fields. The development of sustainable and renewable energy represents one of society’s greatest challenges. Biofuels are widely regarded as a key component of a new energy economy. This program enables undergraduate student access to growing technology and experience in a highly innovative and cross-­‐disciplinary problem solving. Participants learn that society's energy consumption can only be altered and modified through continued innovation and cooperation among researchers and industries. This socially-­‐minded opportunity attracts a wealth of participants annually and has the added benefit of attracting participants from populations traditionally underrepresented in science and engineering. APPROACH: An undergraduate NSF funded REU program has been developed incorporating four sites within one metropolitan area. The partner institutions include: University of Colorado at Boulder (lead), Colorado State University, Colorado School of Mines and the U.S. DOE National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The program is coordinated by and additional non-­‐NSF funding is provided through the Colorado Center for Biorefining and Biofuels (C2B2). Twenty students participated in the most recent iteration of the summer program. This site program is unique in that it incorporates participant interests in environmental protection, sustainability and renewable energy, and channels these interests into a cross-­‐disciplinary forum where participants are challenged to find science-­‐ and engineering-­‐based solutions for ‘biorefining.’ Participants learn that 'biorefining' is the concept that production of fuels and products from biomass will require a complex series of integrated chemical conversion steps that involve numerous chemical intermediates. BENEFIT: A principal objective of this site program is to encourage promising students, particularly women, underrepresented minorities, and students from primarily undergraduate institutions, to pursue careers in engineering and science research. This program is specifically designed to reflect the cross-­‐disciplinary and cross-­‐institutional nature of modern research, especially in renewable and sustainable energy. Today's undergraduate students are fueled by the motivation to make a difference in the world. This REU program attracts students that want to contribute to the advancement of science technology which has potential for enormous social impact. Although this program exists to provide education and training to undergraduate students, our efforts to promote the program have been met with great interest from pre-­‐collegiate students; parents; academic; state and federal partners; as well as industry; this indicates the broad public interest in the field and potential for future program growth. OUTCOMES: This program aims to educate and train undergraduate researchers through the accomplishment of the following annual goals: 1. Engaging student participants in the pursuit of fundamental investigations of issues related to conversion of biomass to fuels and chemicals; 2. Integrating the REU site to allow students to experience a collaborative, cross-­‐disciplinary environment to investigate problems that require such collaboration to make meaningful progress; 3. Training students in the skills and knowledge to conduct research; 4. Recruiting a competitive and diverse group of undergraduate students annually from across the country. The program was rigorously assessed with qualitative and quantitative methods. Results revealed achievement of a number of objectives associated with each goal as well as areas of targeted improvement for next year. DELIVERABLES: Throughout the project, an emphasis is placed on a continuous evaluation cycle, with quantitative and qualitative assessment methods employed to assess the program’s success in meeting its goals. Twenty students participated in the summer 2010 program, with twelve supported by NSF and the others through a variety of funding models. The average GPA of the twenty program participants in 2010 was 3.84. These students represent a wide range of prior laboratory experience with only 11 students having worked in a laboratory. Participants included 9 women (45%), 3 students from underrepresented minority groups (15%) and 3 international students (15%). Nineteen of twenty students were from out of state representing 16 different universities. Fifty percent of students were chemical engineering majors with the rest comprising seven other majors. Data was also gathered from 28 project mentors who were faculty or graduate students assigned to oversee student projects. III.53: Computer-­‐Integrated Surgical Systems and Technology (CISST) Engineering Research Center (ERC) Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program,The Johns Hopkins University Ralph Etienne-­‐Cummings (Johns Hopkins University), Jerry Prince (Johns Hopkins University), Anita Sampath (The Johns Hopkins University) Need addressed: The Computer Integrated Surgical System and Technology Engineering Research Center (CISST ERC) is the parent of the Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics (LCSR) in The Johns Hopkins University. The mission of CISST ERC/LCSR is to create knowledge and foster innovation to further the field of robotics science and engineering. Approach used: The CISST ERC REU program has been run over the past 10 years. Each summer a 10-­‐week long inter-­‐disciplinary research program for engineering undergraduates is organized. Each REU participant is engaged in solving real-­‐world clinical problems by working closely with a faculty supervisor and a graduate student mentor. Benefits: The program has been highly successful in recruiting REU participants from underrepresented minority groups. In the past ten years, 31 of the 99 participants have been from an underrepresented minority group. The program has been able to engage women participants and 52 out of the 99 participants have been women. Last summer CISST ERC REU students also got exposure to real-­‐world science careers by visiting labs at the National Institute of Health and a private company developing biomedical products. They also conducted a laparoscopic procedure on a pig in the Minimally Invasive Surgical Training Center at Johns Hopkins. Outcomes: An internal and external survey of all REU participants is done each year. Consistently, the evaluations have showed that the CISST ERC REU program has increased the participant’s interest in attending graduate programs in engineering. Deliverables: REU students write reports and present their summer research to a large audience at the end of the summer. The REU students also present posters at a university-­‐wide poster session at the Johns Hopkins Medical Campus. REU students have been authors and co-­‐authors on papers that are presented in national and international conferences. III.54: Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowships (SURF) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology Joseph Kopanski (NIST), Richard Steiner (NIST), Lisa Fronczek (NIST), Christopher White (NIST), Chiara Ferraris (NIST) This poster will describe the NIST Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship program, including our recruitment and program evaluation strategies. REU programs in the Building and Fire Research Laboratory (BFRL), Electronics and Electrical and Engineering Laboratory (EEEL), and Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory (MEL) of NIST are part of a NIST/NSF partnership which brings 130+ undergraduates from across the nation to NIST for an 11 week internship. Other REU programs at NIST are also funded by the NSF, but outside of the Directorate for Engineering. The students join on-­‐going research programs where they work as part of a team with a world class researcher as a mentor. The students live together in hotel style housing; have common social events, a seminar series, access to ethics training and a final scientific conference. NSF support enables a vibrant and active program. This is a true partnership with all of the NSF monies allocated for student support. NIST provides funds for additional students, administrative support, outreach and marketing activities, as well as all laboratory equipment, supplies, and mentors. SURF as a NIST wide program is managed by a team of volunteer directors from each of the NIST laboratories. SURF is a component of a developing NIST-­‐wide educational program running from outreach to primary schools through our NRC post-­‐doctoral program. The goals of this program include an increase in the pipeline of science and engineering students/employees available to NIST, and promotion of a more diverse workforce. As such, SURF has a significant commitment to recruiting underrepresented populations. We have found that direct personal outreach will have a significant effect on the recruitment of underrepresented groups. One of the ongoing goals of SURF is the development of strong partners within the academic community. We track our students after SURF in a variety of informal and formal ways. Students often form strong contacts with their mentors and SURF directors. They then keep us updated on the progress of their careers, as well as requesting letters of recommendation for graduate school and employment. III.55: SURF NIST Boulder Builds Bridges to Ph.D. Programs Joseph Magee (NIST), Ron Goldfarb (NIST), Matthew Pufall (NIST), Mitch Wallis (NIST), Annemiek Kamphuis (NIST) SURF NIST Boulder provides an opportunity for the Boulder Laboratories of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to offer an intensive training program through summer undergraduate research fellowships (SURF). The SURF program provides opportunities for college undergraduates to engage in research in all aspects of engineering and applied sciences. Program details are available on the Web at http://www.nist.gov/surfboulder/. SURF students are exposed to multidisciplinary research at the intersections of different disciplines, which instills a cooperative approach to sharing information and imparts a greater understanding of the methodologies, language, culture and paradigms of different disciplines. Multidisciplinary research experiences have exposed SURF students to research on important problems within a diverse team. The principal goal of the SURF program is to motivate students to pursue Ph.D. programs in preparation for careers in research and development. The program directors foster a cooperative learning environment with weekly seminars for students, frequent social outings, and field trips to nearby laboratories. To emphasize the importance of written and oral communication skills in research, the summer program culminates in students' presentations at a research symposium. In terms of broader impacts, SURF addresses the nation¢s worsening shortage of career researchers through its outreach activities aimed at recruitment of outstanding students who are either underrepresented in science or engineering or from regional colleges that may have limited research opportunities for undergraduates. The program directors have conducted ongoing reporting and evaluation to assure both continuous improvement of SURF program quality and documentation of the positive effects on participants. For short-­‐term assessments, at the conclusion of each summer, every student is asked to complete (anonymously) a questionnaire consisting of 50 questions. The annual questionnaire addresses the more immediate impacts of the SURF experience on an individual student and also requests feedback on their experiences which should lead to improvements in the program. For a long-­‐range assessment, a more ambitious project has been initiated for grouped program years 2004-­‐6 and 2007-­‐9. This project was designed to lead to statistical inferences for SURF alumni relative to their peer group. In this project, alumni from three consecutive classes were contacted and asked to complete a questionnaire anonymously. The sum total of feedback was then analyzed statistically to assess the long range impact of SURF on their academic and professional progress. Looking beyond statistics, we have also begun to collect the stories of individual students who participated two or more years ago. We view this latest effort as a second type of long-­‐range assessment that is focused on narrative evidence. For practicality, interviews were limited to those students who had been identified by their mentors as having started an advanced degree program, presented talks at scientific meetings, authored manuscripts or, received awards. In this presentation we recount how SURF built bridges for two program participants, which provides SURF with lessons learned that will receive an ongoing emphasis. III.56: Undergraduate Research in Wireless Sensor Networks and Security Infrastructure Heidar Malki (University of Houston), Xiaoging Yuan (University of Houston) Undergraduate Research in Wireless Sensor Networks and Security Infrastructure Heidar Malki and Xiaoging Yuan Abstract: In this presentation, we report our findings and research experience using advanced wireless sensor networks projects to a group of 12 undergraduate students during the summer for the last three years. Our REU Site program was funded jointly by the NSF and DoD on sensor network and security infrastructure. The program was lauded by its inter-­‐disciplinary flavor oriented towards under-­‐represented and non-­‐traditional undergraduate, emphasized on one-­‐to-­‐one mentoring and industrial tours. The projects ranged from next generation sensor network and its application to continuously monitoring in healthcare, smart material, and civil structure to multi-­‐scale biosecurity. Some of the projects were presented in technical and educational conferences and undergraduate research events. Pre and post assessment were conducted to obtain students’ feedback during the course of the program to obtain necessary data to analyze the strengths and the weakness of the students and the program. Outreach activities were organized to make a diversified enrichment program for REU participants. The activities include weekly research workshop, bi-­‐weekly group meeting field trips, and a final project presentation and competition. The University of Houston Quality Enhancement Program (QEP) put together an academic and professional development workshop to prepare students with research skills such as using library resources; writing research proposals and reports, and scientific articles; and preparing power point presentation. Field trips were organized to visit the Wiess Energy Hall in the Museum of Natural Science, Halliburton Vis Center, and the medical center in Houston to give participants experiences with real applications. In summary, we recruited 35 undergraduate students from universities and colleges across 18 states, with 34% minority and female students, making it a truly diverse program. Students and their mentors have published 10 papers, winning four awards in conferences and university wide research competitions. Their research experiences reinforced their intention to continue in the STEM field and pursue graduate research programs. Based on data we collected, many students have applied to graduate school, four of which started graduate school Fall 2009. In the poster the following 5 questions will be discussed in details. 1. Need: Findings of our three years long NSF-­‐REU program 2. Approach: Quantitate and qualitative approach 3. Benefit: Lessons learned will be shared with PIs, potential students, and NSF program managers to use the feedback to better prepare for their next program 4. Outcomes: Better organization of the program, selection, activities, mentoring, and research projects 5. Deliverables: Results of the research projects being submitted to national conferences, and the website of our REU program. Thirty five students from 18 states, with 34% minority and females demonstrate the impact of the proposed program. III.57: REU Site: Retaining Engineers through Research Entrepreneurship and Advanced–Materials Training (RETREAT) at Florida State University Okenwa Okoli (HPMI, Florida State University), Ben Wang (HPMI, Florida State University) Need: FSU’s REU site aims to address the growing problem of recruitment and retention of US students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The REU-­‐RETREAT site will harness FSU’s advanced materials research together with an entrepreneurial twist, to refocus an increased number of engineering students to continue post baccalaureate into Engineering careers in industry, or proceed to postgraduate training in materials engineering research. Approach: During the REU-­‐RETREAT program, the participants will work with leading experts and will be trained on the utilization, manufacture, and characterization of multiscale and multifunctional advanced composites. They will learn to commercialize technological innovations by participating in seminars on Entrepreneurship and an EngiPreneur Competition (an entrepreneurship-­‐based student project competition) coordinated by experts from the Jim Moran Institute (JMI) of Global Entrepreneurship of the Florida State University. Benefits: The REU RETEREAT site will target junior and senior science and technology students from colleges in the North and Southeaster US. At the end of the program, the students will not only be motivated to pursue careers in the STEM disciplines, but they will also be equipped with what it takes to identify needs/problems, develop innovative solutions/products at competitive prices, and commercialize them successfully. Participants will be exposed to the opportunities presented by the Department of Defense labs through their time at the AFRL-­‐RWAV. It is expected that an appreciable number of the participants will become interested in matriculating into science and technology graduate programs. Outcomes: The REU RETREAT will run its first internship program in the summer of 2011. At the end of the summer, we expect to have learned how to better stimulate the interests of the participants with the view to retaining them in science and technology (S&T). We will seek to publish our findings. Deliverables: The REU RETREAT program aims to enhance the chance that at least 70% of participants will matriculate into graduate programs in S&T, with at least half of them focusing on advanced materials research. The program aims at encouraging the remaining 30% to seek employment in the S&T sectors of the economy. III.58: 2010 Research Experiences for Undergraduates – Nanotechnology and Materials Systems Dimitris Lagoudas (Texas A&M University), Jacques Richard (Texas A&M University), Kristi Shryock (Texas A&M University) The Texas A&M University (TAMU) Department of Aerospace Engineering, in conjunction with the Departments of Mechanical Engineering and Chemical Engineering, conducted a Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) in Summer 2010. Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the REU established a site on the topic of Multifunctional Material Systems. Primary needs addressed by the REU are to increase interest in research and have students continue on to graduate school. Three main objectives of the REU include: 1) emphasizing multifunctional materials research across multiple disciplines; 2) conducting research at the nano-­‐level with an appreciation of its impact at the system design level; 3) exposing students to the concepts of technology innovation for emerging multifunctional engineering systems. During the ten-­‐week REU program, students become a part of a materials science and engineering faculty member’s research group and are immersed in current research projects. Example research work has included fabrication of carbon nanotube reinforced composites and multifunctional composite laminates, characterization of the impact of nano-­‐constituents on the structural and multifunctional properties of these advanced materials, and other materials-­‐related research. In addition, students attend presentation skills workshops, make a formal poster presentation of their research experience at the conclusion of the program, and submit a final written report describing the results of their research. Students also receive college credit for an independent study, as well as a stipend and housing allowance. Last summer, six TAMU students and one San Jose State University student participated in the nano-­‐materials REU. Benefits of the program include undergraduate students being able to experience the excitement of cutting-­‐edge academic research in state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art national materials science facilities and using this experience to develop their interests in materials science and engineering. Program participants are integrated into the nano-­‐materials related research groups in innovative projects to encourage advanced studies in these areas. The desire is for students to develop an appreciation for and ultimately attend graduate school. A key outcome of the program focuses on the future research plans of participants. Along this line, a student in last year’s program will present his work at the 2011 Emerging Researchers National Conference in STEM to be held in Washington, D.C., on February 24-­‐26, 2011. In addition, program participants surveyed at the completion of the program indicated that over 60% intend to pursue graduate studies in STEM fields. Exposure to revolutionary materials research in action is another significant outcome from the program. Last year, students were able to visit several of the NASA Johnson Space Center nano-­‐materials research labs, in addition to materials laboratories on the TAMU campus, and found this to be a highlight of the program. Overall, students surveyed responded that the REU had a positive impact on their knowledge of research, ability to work independently, confidence, patience, and learning of new instruments and tools. While this REU is in its first year of a renewal, over half of the students participating in the previous REU site have continued on to graduate school, a key deliverable of the project. Students that attended graduate school at TAMU went into materials-­‐related areas. The interest in graduate school can be found in the comments of current students who recognize the importance of research. For example, “During this summer, I learned to work independently, to be patient, to learn more about other fields, and also I met new people and gained self confidence. It also motivates me for grad studies.” In this program, participants are able to move to a new level in academic maturity where there is “The freedom to work on a project of my choosing and the resources available.” http://aero.tamu.edu/research/undergraduate/reu III.59: 3D Scanning For Bridge Inspection Christian McGuire (University of Arkansas), Anu Pradhan () A need has risen to find an efficient and reliable way to assess the condition of our aging infrastructure systems that are currently in use. The advent of sensing devices, such as laser scanner, provides a unique opportunity to perform object condition assessment and documentation of our critical civil infrastructure systems. However, there are significant challenges associated with leveraging such new technology. The presented research investigated a couple of challenges associated with scan planning, scan registration and subsequent data analysis. The researchers are optimistic that terrestrial laser scanning technology will provide a solid platform to determine the physical characteristics of a structure. III.60: Nature InSpired Engineering Research Experience for Teachers Poster Abstract for Summer 2010 RET Cohort Kenneth Barner (University of Delaware) • What need did we address? Math and science teachers are scrambling to include engineering and technology in their curricula, in compliance with national standards. Yet they are generally inexperienced with true research, and also generally unable to describe “engineering” to their students. As a result of the NISE RET, participants became significantly more confident in their ability to teach and truly mentor students who are tomorrow’s engineers and scientists. Said one participant, “She [the faculty mentor] made us feel like we were scientists!” Besides the actual engineering research in which they participated, they developed curriculum enhancements based on their research experience, and also developed collegial relationships with their research teams and with the college’s outreach team, resulting in arrangements being made to bring their students to campus, and also to skype with a faculty and graduate students in a campus research lab. • What approach are you using to address this need? The pairs of teachers were truly incorporated into research teams, giving them the opportunity to fully experience the nature of research. They admitted learning that “initial outcome is not necessarily desired outcome.” They also participated in tech tools workshops, learning the value of blogging and Wikispaces. Our curriculum enhancement workshops were problem-­‐based-­‐learning (PBL) in nature. • What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? The collegial relationships developed as a result of our 3-­‐year NISE RET program have resulted in campus visits to the engineering labs by students of the RET participants and their colleagues, as well as UD participation as science fair judges (Colonial School District), STEM curriculum consultants (Cecil County Public Schools), and facilitators of science teacher professional development sessions in the largest Delaware school district, Christina, (to date – with more to anticipated in the future). Our primary audiences have been high school students and teachers to date. • What have you learned so far? Over the 3-­‐year life of the NISE RET, we learned early that we need to prepare the teachers for the true nature of research (“failure is learning”). We also have become acutely aware of the lack of resources available to the teachers, so that we have now begun to create a “library” of curriculum enhancements and corresponding lessons that can be adapted to different levels of students. We have barely scratched the surface, but look forward to expanding these efforts. • What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? One RET team collaborated with UD faculty and graduate students to install a camera in the UD lab. Using that and the web, they have instituted web chats between their students and the UD faculty/lab personnel. Another team, recognizing the value of Google Apps, blogging, etc., is using these technology skills to improve student research. That team also developed photonic crystal fabrication methods that are replicable in a high school setting. To date, follow-­‐up surveys have been used with the RET participants and their students. The relationships that have developed with these teachers will continue through UD participation in their classrooms (remotely or in person) and with UD-­‐led professional development opportunities for the RET teachers and their colleagues. III.61: Nature InSpired Engineering Research Experience for Teachers (NISE RET) Working in the Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory of Ismat Shah Brian Gross (Delcastle Technical High School) • What need did we address? The National Science and Technology Curriculum Standards require that, while we teach the fundamentals of science to our students, we must also help them understand how that science is applied in real life. Those applications are developed through research; but, in general, science teachers have never truly had a laboratory research experience. We as STEM teachers needed to have a first-­‐hand experience to develop an understanding of the research process and then be able to incorporate that into our curriculum. We also needed to have a better understanding of the support that is available through the University of Delaware engineering faculty and students. Our scientific objective for the NISE RET program was to understand energy harvesting techniques and to use modeling techniques and characterization tools to design novel energy harvesting materials and devices. • What approach are you using to address this need? The curriculum planning and educational technology workshops that were part of the NISE RET program allowed us to learn how to effectively use web-­‐based tools such as blogging and google docs to collaborate and begin to find ways to build engineering/technology into our science and math curricula, utilizing a problem-­‐based learning approach. Most beneficial has been the videoconferencing and skyping we have been able to do directly into the materials science laboratory, allowing our high school students to speak directly with our UD faculty mentor and his graduate student research team. • What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? We are making science real for our high school students. • What have you learned so far? In addition to gaining an understanding of photovoltaics, we also gained an appreciation of the challenge of maintaining a supply of secure, clean, sustainable energy. We learned about organic solar cell production and our research contributed to meeting the challenge of optimizing that process. III.62: Aligning Educational Experiences with Ways of Knowing Engineering: How People Learn Engineering Sandra Courter (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madiso), Mitchell Nathan (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Al Phelps (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison), Kevin Anderson (University of Wisconsin-­‐Madison) Need Our project addresses needs in both undergraduate and K-­‐12 engineering education. First, as technology changes and engineering work evolves to meet the needs of a global economy, engineering educators need a better understanding of the engineering profession in order to better prepare students for successful practice. This project aims to provide describe the current skills, knowledge, values, and ways of thinking of practicing engineering. Second, to meet the needs of a growing, high-­‐
tech, globalized economy, K-­‐12 education must also work to better build the “talent pool” of high-­‐tech workers, particularly among underrepresented populations. One avenue to improve K-­‐12 STEM education is to reconceptualize instruction in terms of STEM integration that would break down traditional curriculum “silos.” Understanding K-­‐12 STEM teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and instructional decision making will help to break down those barriers. Approach To understand engineering practice, we conducted case studies of six engineering firms of varying sizes and industries. Those case studies included over 40 interviews and 40 hours of observations. Undergraduate engineering students also interviewed over 90 practicing engineers on their work activities, values, and advice for them. Over 700 engineers to date have also responded to surveys about their work. To understand K-­‐12 engineering courses and teachers beliefs, we first analyzed the intended curriculum within Project Lead the Way (PLTW) courses and observed the enacted practice of teachers and students. Next we conducted a quasi-­‐experimental study to measure the impact of PLTW instruction and training on the views and expectations regarding engineering learning, instruction, and career success of nascent pre-­‐college engineering teachers (N = 182). Newly minted PLTW teachers’ initial and changing views were compared to the views exhibited by a control group of high school STEM teachers. Benefit Within undergraduate education, professors and administrators will benefit from a better understanding of the current work of engineers. We continue to share ideas for how these groups can better design engineering programs and teach engineering courses to prepare students for the actualities of practice. We hypothesize that having programs and courses more explicitly connected to engineering practice will serve to improve retention of engineering students and attract more students to engineering. At the K-­‐12 level, we hope this work motivates teachers and curriculum coordinators to better connect the four components of STEM education. Too often these connections are not made explicit in student learning. These findings also suggest that more teachers would benefit from PLTW-­‐like training, as doing so increases their reported integration of STEM subjects and their efforts to connect a wider array of students with engineering. Identifying teachers’ underlying biases will also help to move integration forward. Outcomes We have learned that engineers see “real” engineering work as the technical aspects of their jobs, while noting that communication and coordination make up essential, majority components of their work. Time and budgets are the greatest constraints, often due to organizational practices—
different cultures either exacerbated or mitigated these pressures. Engineers identify themselves as technical problem solvers, but also express the importance of teamwork, learning, and doing quality work as facets of their identities. We found that PLTW teachers, particularly in introductory courses, miss opportunities to explicitly connect math concepts to engineering tasks. Teachers who have had PLTW training are more likely to report integrating STEM learning than science and math teachers who have not. Teachers unsurprisingly see high academic achievement as a key consideration for who might successfully pursue engineering; surprisingly, teachers tend to see higher SES students as more likely to succeed in such careers. III.63: Building New Engineering Education Theory and Practice for Interdisciplinary Pervasive Computing Design Lisa McNair (Virginia Tech), Kahyun Kim (Virginia Tech), Tom Martin (Virginia Tech), Ron Kemnitzer (Virginia Tech), Jason Forsyth (Virginia Tech), Ed Dorsa (Virginia Tech), Eloise Coupey (Virginia Tech) Programs that offer interdisciplinary design experiences often lack concrete, explicit learning materials and teaching practices that help students develop transferable skills to negotiate across disciplinary boundaries. We propose research for an IEECI Expansion Project situated within pervasive computing design to develop, assess, and disseminate a process model for teaching students how to collaborate in learning environments with multiple participating disciplines. We also propose to develop, implement, and test a theory-­‐driven model of design thinking. These goals will result in a) an educational, theoretical model of interdisciplinary pervasive computing design that is b) generalizable to academic and industry settings, where it will have a transformative effect on design processes; and c) dissemination across disciplinary boundaries that brings together practitioners that are transforming design methodology. Our research has resulted in new knowledge about the impacts of self-­‐managing teaming in interdisciplinary design in terms of team effectiveness (Kim & McNair, 2010), creativity (Kim & McNair, 2009), applicability to pervasive computing (Coupey, et al., 2010), and situative learning theory (Kim, et al., 2010). Research in progress assesses the impact of physical space on interdisciplinary collaborative learning environments, describes a hands-­‐on toolkit created for pervasive computing teams, and presents a new model of interdisciplinary pedagogy. Our research has resulted in 4 conference papers delivered at engineering education and pervasive computing venues, with 2 in review. An interdisciplinary workshop on design in pervasive computing is scheduled for March 25, 2011, at IEEE PerCom 2011. Session IV: Tuesday, March 15, 8:30 – 9:30 a.m. IV.1: Model Updating Cognitive Systems Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina) Model updating techniques are used to fine tune the characteristics of numerical models of existing structures based on experimental data. Model Updating Cognitive Systems (MUCogS) propose a new scheme for model updating that combines computational algorithms with the analytical power of the human mind. The research tasks of this CAREER project involves the formulation, development and validation of innovative algorithms within the MUCogS framework, while the educational component focuses in the development of critical thinking skills. This critical thinking skills are essential for the development of the engineering judgment needed to successfully complete a MUCogS. MUCogS are developed and validated using dynamic models of civil structures but can be applied to any numerical model. IV.2: Collaborative REU Program in Smart Structures Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina), GunJin Yun (University of Akron), Richard Christenson (University of Connecticut) The international REU program in Smart Structures is a cooperative effort between the University of Connecticut, the University of Akron, the University of South Carolina in the United States and the Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) as our international partner. Collaboration with international researchers allows this program to explore solutions in smart structures that can be applied globally to problems in structural control and structural health monitoring and to prepare undergraduate students for a global marketplace. The first international trip took place in 2010 with 6 undergraduate students traveling to Korea and developing projects in both structural control and structural health monitoring. A Smart Structures collaboratory was established and used extensively by the 2010 participants to share data files and documents and conduct regular research meetings. The students worked closely with faculty member and graduate researchers from KAIST. The students’ research in smart structures began in projects in the United States and were extended to corresponding projects in Korea. The structural health monitoring project focused on the identification of dynamic characteristics of a bridge and included experimental testing on an actual highway bridge in Korea. The work of the structural control group focused on the use of Magneto-­‐Rheological (MR) fluid dampers for use in seismic protection systems. The students modeled a 3-­‐story building model and developed a self-­‐
powering semiactive control strategy using MR dampers. The students also participated in a number of cultural events in Korea. IV.3: Nano in a Global Context for Engineering Students Navid Saleh (University of South Carolina), Ann Johnson (University of South Carolina), Juan Caicedo (University of South Carolina) This project is designed to offer an opportunity to teach the principles and application of nanotechnology through a real-­‐world problem of global significance: water decontamination. The project addresses the education need of engineering undergraduate students through introduction of nanotechnology principles. This need is planned to be addressed by introducing two new courses: one an introduction to nanotechnology for undergraduate students from all engineering disciplines which will be accepted as a technical elective and a second course which offers a service learning and study-­‐
abroad component in Bangladesh. The introductory course, ENCP 490x, to be offered in the fall of 2011 and 2012, will feed highly motivated students into the second, field course, to be offered annually in May 2012 and 2013. The course will address five focus areas under the common water contamination theme, namely, (i) arsenic, (ii) pathogens, and (iii) organics/metal contamination and remediation, (iv) contaminant sensors, and (v) alternative power supply for treatment systems. Principles and fundamentals of different engineering disciplines will be necessary to address the aforementioned foci. This course will consider Bangladesh as the key developing country for the first two iterations. The study-­‐abroad course will realize student experiences of real-­‐life engineering implementation issues on the focus country, Bangladesh. Both courses are novel in their focus on inquiry through design across the engineering disciplines (civil, mechanical, electrical, chemical, and biomedical), and engage students in designing a solution and its implementation. Both courses also offer a robust, integrated component examining the social, ethical, political, and economic implications of nano water decontamination systems. Students will leave these courses with a fuller understanding of: a) the relation between different engineering disciplines’ approaches to problem-­‐solving; b) the science behind nanotechnology; and c) the possibilities and challenges of actually introducing new technologies into the developing world. The new Introduction to Nanotechnology course will be inquiry-­‐ based, that is, taught through addressing a ‘driving question’ chosen from several different engineering disciplines. The teaching methods will include, but are not limited to, using cutting-­‐edge research to choose the driving question on the disciplinary area and hands-­‐on experiments to engage and motivate students to gain knowledge of fundamental physics and chemistry concepts relevant to nano-­‐engineering. Central to each unit will be a focus on differences between common layperson’s experience of the physical world and the behaviors and properties of materials and processes on the nanometer scale. There will be eight modules that will be developed in the class and the modules will be classified as introductory (Mod 1 and 2) and problem driven (Mod 3-­‐7) modules. Ethical and social aspects will be covered in an integrated module (Module 8) that will be discussed each week throughout the semester. The modules are (i) Mod 1: General physics and chemistry at the nano-­‐scale, (ii) Mod 2: Introduction to global water contamination issues, (iii) Mod 3: Arsenic Contamination and Remediation, (iv) Mod 4: Pathogen (bacteria and virus) Contamination and Remediation, (v) Mod 5: Organics/Metal Contamination and Remediation, (vi) Mod 6: Chemical Sensor Technology, (vii) Mod 7: Alternative Power Supply (Solar) for Contaminant Remediation , and (viii) Mod 8: Social and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology. Modules 1-­‐7 will occupy 2 weeks each in a semester (14 weeks total) taught 3 hrs per week. Module 8 (societal) will meet each week for an hour and discuss practical ethical issues drawn from considering the implementation of technical aspects under examination that week. IV.4: CAREER: Implementing K-­‐12 Engineering Standards through STEM Integration Tamara Moore (University of Minnesota) The problems that we face in our ever-­‐changing, increasingly global society are multidisciplinary, and many require the integration of multiple STEM concepts to solve them. These problems are the driving force behind national calls for more and stronger students in the pathways entering STEM fields. However, attempts to motivate students to enter current pathways into STEM fields is most likely not going to work. What is needed is a new trajectory to success that focuses on understandings and abilities that are more consistent with the new kinds of math/science/engineering thinking that are emerging to be most important in a technology-­‐based age of information. As these problems are multidisciplinary in nature, a STEM Integration approach must be used to prepare students to be competitive in the 21st century. Research needs to be done that helps realize the most effective ways for students to learn and engage with STEM concepts in a multidisciplinary manner and teachers to understand and implement STEM Integration approaches. Currently, there is a movement in K-­‐12 education to include engineering academic standards in the science curriculum. In Fall 2009, Minnesota was one of the first states that implemented such standards. The goal of the proposed work is to understand and identify teacher implementation strategies and resultant student learning through the implementation of these engineering academic standards. The main research questions are: 1. How are K-­‐12 engineering standards being implemented in mathematics and science classrooms? 2. What are teachers’ perceptions of the individual STEM disciplines and the integration of these disciplines during their implementation of the standards? How do the perceptions change over time? This project utilizes a mixed methods, multiple-­‐case, embedded case study design that employs a variety of data sources in order to fully understand teachers’ implementation strategies and obstacles as they work to address the engineering standards in the K-­‐12 classroom. This project seeks to provide theoretical understanding of various methods of integrating engineering content into classrooms by working closely with teachers in custom-­‐designed teaching laboratories. The broader significance and importance of this project are to understand various ways of integrating STEM content into K-­‐12 classrooms and thus potentially broaden the pathways into college STEM programs and STEM careers. As more states integrate engineering into K-­‐12 content and standards, this study which will elucidate effective means to support this integration has potentially broad impact. The rigorous focus of this project on a diverse cross-­‐section of schools may help to make the results broadly generalizable. IV.5: University Education for ERC Partners, HBCU and African Engineering Programs – SMART LIGHTING ERC Kenneth Connor (RPI SMART LIGHTING ERC), Elizabeth Herkenham (), Dianna Newman (), Meghan Morris (), Thomas Little (), Gretchen Fougere (), Steven Hersee (), Charles Joenathan (), Mohamed Chouikha (), Peter Bofah (), Charles Kim (), Craig Scott (), Yacob The NSF SMART LIGHTING ERC The ERC’s education program has three components: (1) core science and technology, integrated through engineering systems principles, linked through applications; (2) teamwork, emphasizing multidisciplinary and multi-­‐institutional programs and projects, engagement with industry, research labs, domestic and international universities, K-­‐12 schools and museums; and (3) an ever-­‐more diverse student body and workforce. Three education initiatives provide examples of specific approaches being pursued by the ERC. Reversing the Lecture-­‐Homework Paradigm: Based on tools that make it possible to offer lectures online in video and other formats and simple hands-­‐on experiences both locally and at a distance, an educational delivery experiment is being undertaken in which similar courses can be offered at ERC partners and other interested universities throughout the world without requiring well-­‐established expertise from local teaching staff. This method is being implemented and studied in fundamental engineering courses and is a natural extension of the Studio Delivery method developed at RPI, which has not found widespread acceptance, largely due to the high costs of facilities common before the introduction of The Mobile Studio. The overall goal is to create course materials and a delivery methodology that permits almost any school to utilize ERC Smart Lighting courses. Workshops for University Education: To facilitate the transfer of Smart Lighting educational materials to other universities, a variety of workshops, with an emphasis on HBCU and African engineering programs have been offered, built around the Mobile Studio platform. These include a workshop in 2009 in which ECE department heads or their representatives from most HBCU engineering programs were introduced to the Mobile Studio and its potential to provide substantive hands-­‐on experiences for their students in core courses (e.g. circuits, electronics, electromagnetics) in which Smart Lighting content is relevant. This workshop led to the addition of an HBCU meeting that will now be held on a regular basis as part of the ECEDHA Annual Conference. The need for learning technology and advanced course content at African engineering schools has also been addressed in workshops. In 2009, all three Ethiopian universities offering engineering programs (Addis Ababa and Hawassa Universities, and the Defence Engineering College) were visited. In late 2010, faculty and students from several West African schools were offered a workshop at the 4th International Conference on Appropriate Technology (Accra, Ghana). Through the use of the inexpensive Mobile Studio based pedagogy, developed at ERC partner universities, we are able to show how to easily incorporate Smart Lighting relevant content into rapidly expanding, resource poor institutions that must succeed if the economies of Africa are to grow fast enough to promote significant growth in quality of life there. This workshop incorporated LED-­‐based, free space optical communication transceivers developed at BU for their local outreach and education programs. Elevator Pitch Competition: ERC undergrad and grad students participate annually in an elevator pitch competition at our industry meeting to help them learn to create interest in and understanding of their research for a variety of audiences. At this meeting, students use their pitch to attract industry participants to their poster, but the skills developed, through training and practice before the meeting, are useful for interactions with all outside constituencies, especially in K-­‐12 outreach. Additional details can be found at http://smartlighting.rpi.edu/. IV.6: Integrated Outreach Across Age Groups and Institutions for K-­‐12 and University Students and K-­‐
14 Teachers – SMART LIGHTING ERC Kenneth Connor (RPI SMART LIGHTING ERC), Elizabeth Herkenham (), Thomas Little (), Gretchen Fougere (), Steven Hersee (), Charles Joenathan (), Deborah Walter (), Mohamed Chouikha (), Peter Bofah (), Craig Scott (), Yacob Astatke (), Judith O'Rourke (), W The SMART LIGHTING ERC outreach programs have three overall goals: to build the student pipeline for our center, to enhance the overall quality and reach of STEM education in the US and abroad, and to promote the education of ERC students through the rich experience of learning by teaching. Outreach activities are offered to students and their teachers from all levels of pre-­‐university (K-­‐14) education. Content, hardware and software developed for application at any specific level finds use at all levels; materials developed at one institution find use at all other collaborating schools. In this integrated approach to development and delivery of outreach activities, it is possible to readily address the needs of almost any new constituency as opportunities arise. Additional details on our programs can be found at http://smartlighting.rpi.edu/. At the elementary school level, activities include one hour to half day programs for specific schools (e.g. Harlem Academy 5th and 6th grade) and large groups (3rd thru 6th grade boys and girls at RPI Exploring Engineering Day or 4th and 5th graders at BU STEM Day) A Smart Lighting learning experience is offered in the BU Summer Challenge program. For each two week session, high school students investigate and experiment with tools and technologies used in the development of novel LED lighting. A 1st year engineering course has sections built on the materials and content from the Challenge program. RPI and Howard offer a joint high school program where students from the DC area participate in the Summer @ RPI one week experience on Smart Power and Light (with students from throughout the US) and then return to Howard for a several week research experience. This broadens the experience of all students in the program and expands the comfort zone of the DC students for their college application decisions. ERC undergrad and grad students, including especially those in our REU program help mentor K-­‐12 students in programs like the examples given above. They also learn to lead activities so sufficiently well that no faculty participation is necessary. With this learning and teaching environment in mind, some of the summer REU students selected come from teaching colleges where future STEM educators are trained. As with practicing teachers in RET programs, these pre-­‐service teachers also develop learning activities that utilize the capabilities of Mobile Studio and incorporate content from the Smart Lighting research labs. A variety of experiences are also offered for teachers. In addition to RET, workshops up to one week in duration, engage high school teachers in professional development focused on education in an engineering context. Teachers from Albany High School, for example, are part of an Academy of Engineering, developed with guidance from the National Academy Foundation (http://naf.org/). Rose-­‐Hulman also offers an intense one day workshop introducing Indiana High School teachers to the Mobile Studio, electrical engineering, and Smart Lighting. Beyond K-­‐12, a half day workshop for community college teachers will be offered for the first time in the summer of 2011 at the HI-­‐TEC Conference in San Francisco. IV.7: Introducing Nanotechnology into the Thermal and Fluids Curricula: A Multi-­‐Department, Modular Laboratory Diana-­‐Andra Borca-­‐Tasciuc (RPI), Theodorian Borca-­‐Tasciuc (), Amir Hirsa (), Joel Plawsky () The incorporation of nanoscale science and engineering into the undergraduate curriculum is becoming timely as nanotechnology applications are now reaching a wide range of industries. The goal of our project is to expose undergraduate students to nanoscale science and technology aspects relevant to thermal and fluids (TF) engineering via a formal class environment using an experiential-­‐learning approach. We are developing four new experimental laboratory modules to be included in two existing engineering courses, “Thermal and Fluids Engineering Laboratory” taught in the Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering Department and “Chemical Engineering Laboratory” taught in the Chemical and Biological Engineering Department, at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI). The experimental modules are focused on visual demonstrations and hands-­‐on activities for studying heat transfer, fluid flow, and capillary properties of nanofluids. The target audience is junior and senior students enrolled in mechanical and respectively chemical engineering programs at RPI. Thermal and fluids engineering topics play a major part in the preparation of mechanical and chemical engineers, and nanotechnology training in TF areas is critical. One of the modules (on nanofluids boiling)was finished and offered ahead of schedule in Fall 2010 to students enrolled in Thermal and Fluids Laboratory. The purpose of this pilot program was to test module performance in a classroom environment and to gauge student interest. The module was received well by the groups of students who selected to study it. Once completed, the modules will be available to all junior/senior students registered in the two programs at RPI. We are also making plans to make them available to female and minority high school students visiting RPI during Design Your Future Day-­‐an event aiming at increasing participation of underrepresented students in engineering programs. IV.8: Engineering Students' Attitudes and Threshold Concepts Towards Sustainability and Engineering as Environmental Career Johannes Strobel (Purdue University), Nicole Weber (Purdue University), Melissa Dyehouse (Purdue University), Jun Fang (Purdue University), Constance Harris (Purdue University) This research award to Purdue University studied the attitudes and threshold concepts of first and second year engineering students towards the relationship between environmental sustainability and engineering. The study employed an innovative research design, in which the researchers investigate students' conceptions and attitudes (and change of both) by asking students to co-­‐design an educational game in a participatory mode. The goal is to better prepare students for the practice of engineering through developing tools to enhance understanding of environmental sustainability. These techniques are expected to increase students' interest in engineering and will enhance the number who complete engineering degrees and are ready to fill engineering jobs. Findings indicate that students' understanding of sustainability and environmental issues significantly increases and their competencies in a particular technique, LCA are significantly evolve. We also find evidence that students' habits of mind and their resistance to new ideas stays very much the same: Students see environmental and sustainability issues as an add-­‐on, and even "compromising" engineering designs. These findings are replicated at a second university site (with a different instructional approach), in which we utilized the same research instruments as in your primary research site. During this project: the team developed several different instrument: (1) Environmental engineering awareness and resistance to change survey, (2) knowledge and competency test used in pre-­‐post design, (3) a four-­‐week LCA module with embedded game design, now tested for the second time and (4) an electronic game under testing right now. IV.9: Preparedness Portfolios and Portfolio Studios Jennifer Turns (University of Washington) To effectively prepare to be engineers in the 21st century, students must acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes relevant to engineering; the type of integrated understanding of these competencies that is a hallmark of expertise; and the life-­‐long learning skills and professional engineering identity that enable students to apply their understandings in rapidly changing contexts and circumstances. In order to accomplish these complex and interrelated goals, students need a variety of learning experiences (e.g., courses, labs, design experiences, internships, and research experiences). They also need opportunities to understand and articulate what they have learned from their educational experiences and how what they have learned relates to their futures as engineers—opportunities for both foundational and critical reflection. To address this need, we are advancing scholarship on undergraduate engineering student learning by examining the efficacy of preparedness portfolio development (i.e., portfolios that represent an argument about one’s preparedness for some future activity) and portfolio studios (i.e., multi-­‐session environments where students work together on the tasks involved in creating their portfolios) as mechanisms for reflection and ultimately for developing life-­‐long learning competencies, integrated knowledge, and a professional engineering identity. IV.10: Encouraging Diversity in Engineering through a Virtual Engineering Sciences Learning Lab Stephanie August (Loyola Marymount University), Michele Hammers (Loyola Marymount University) Rather than waiting for students to pursue STEM education, virtual worlds and games can be used to bring science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to the students through engaging and socially oriented activities. We are developing a virtual science museum and education center that provides practice with basic engineering concepts and transforms an entertainment-­‐based platform into a delivery vehicle for electrical engineering and computer science content. As part of an initiative to move engineering education into the 21st Century, the Virtual Engineering Sciences Learning Lab (VESLL) project represents an exploration of the many benefits of virtual learning environments, including enhanced opportunities for visualization, immediate feedback, student autonomy, increased access to resources without the demands of co-­‐presence, multiple communication channels for student interaction with peers and instructors, and innovative ways to evaluate student learning. We have created VESLL on an “island” in Second Life® that a student can visit using an avatar. A student creates an avatar and via the avatar visits VESLL as s/he might visit a brick-­‐and-­‐mortar science museum. S/he begins by entering an orientation center, and then proceeds to the various work areas to learn about and experiment with fundamental engineering concepts or visits virtual meeting areas within VESLL to discuss ideas or collaborate with other students, faculty, and visitors. Each work area or “lab” includes a tutorial on a particular concept. For example, in the positional numbering systems lab students use a set of interactive number panels to increment and decrement numbers represented in various bases, or to compare and convert numbers in different bases. Once students understand the basic concepts, they test their knowledge on a hexadecimal crossword puzzle and a word jumble activity (using the hex alphabetic symbols) or try their hand at opening a lock by converting a number from one base to another. In the logic circuit lab students learn about basic logical operations, interact with logic gates and circuits and build their own circuits using gates and connectors. We are currently designing a collaborative game in which teams of students use the skills they acquire in VESLL to solve complex puzzles. These puzzles will be set in a story line that adds a gaming flavor to maximize entertainment value and will involve existing activities as well as biographical information provided on displays throughout the island and other exhibits. Future plans include developing more complex objects and activities that encourage socially aware community-­‐based solving of social problems, such as providing clean water to a rural community. Assessments are built directly into the virtual environment. They include pre-­‐ and post-­‐knowledge tests, demographic survey, technological tools and activities inventory, and post-­‐activity satisfaction survey. Our approach has potential to attract diverse audiences to engineering and computer science. By providing expanded access to innovative STEM education learning tools, VESLL can be used to recruit K-­‐12 students from underrepresented groups into STEM educational fields. Cyberlearning appeals to today’s youth and taps into modes of information management and social interaction that are second nature to them. Online environments such as Second Life have strong appeal to female youth. Thus, VESSL has potential to contribute to efforts to recruit and retain women and men in the engineering sciences. Preliminary feedback from workshops presenting VESLL to the target student population indicates that students feel the activities provide an interesting way to learn the material. Students enjoy exploring the Second Life environment and find that using Second Life makes the learning experience more interesting than a regular classroom lecture. Students felt they would be likely to use learning activities of this kind as part of their studying and preparation for class and that having access to activities like this online would make it easier to find time to work with classmates on assignments. These activities made them more interested in learning the material than they were before the workshop. On average, students more than doubled their scores after working with the VESLL activities. We continue to be encouraged by our early assessment data. VESLL activities are being integrated into the PI’s sections of CMSI 182 Introduction to Computer science for non-­‐majors course and will be available to students in introductory engineering courses. A summer workshop with students from various local institutions was held in 2010 and will be repeated in 2011 with students and faculty from local institutions. Presentations have been made at several conference venues. This poster outlines the nature of this project, describes the completed activities, and presents preliminary results and future plans. IV.11: How Can You Get There If You Don’t Know Where You Are Going? A theory for understanding the lack of interest among domestic students in the engineering PhD Michelle Howell Smith (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln), Namas Chandra (University of Nebraska-­‐Lincoln) There is a critical shortage of American citizens who have earned a PhD in engineering; without these citizens who have the skills to lead scientific and technological innovations, our quality of life, national security and greater opportunities for future generations are at risk (National Academy of Sciences, 2007). While the number of doctoral degrees earned in engineering increased from 3,166 in 1995 to 6,404 in 2005, the percentage of PhDs awarded to U.S. citizens declined from 55% of the total to only 40% (National Science Foundation, 2008). This decline in the proportion of domestic PhDs has occurred at an especially bad time, when the overall production of PhDs in engineering is not sufficient to meet the growing demands for their skills in the United States (National Science Board, 2003). This study has utilized a sophisticated mixed methods design for data collection and analysis that focuses on producing data directly relevant to engineering colleges as they attempt to increase enrollment of domestic PhDs. Over 200 engineering students and faculty members at seven universities were interviewed to determine the range of factors that influence domestic PhD enrollments. Engineers with a PhD working in industry were also interviewed. A grounded theory process was used to analyze the qualitative data and resulted in the development of a theoretical model. The qualitative phase is being followed by a scientific survey of over 15,000 engineering undergraduate students at the seven universities to test the theory generated from the interview data. The study design pays particular attention to the perspectives of both underrepresented minorities and women by over-­‐sampling these groups within the pool of all domestic students. No study has undertaken a systematic examination of the reasons domestic engineering students do or do not pursue a PhD. In order to attract more domestic students, universities need an empirical understanding of the factors that underlie the decision to pursue or forego an engineering PhD. They also need a new set of strategies for increasing domestic PhD enrollments. This study is designed to address both of these critical needs. The findings of this research study will have broad application in the field of engineering doctoral education and will include specific strategies that universities can implement to increase domestic student enrollment in engineering PhD programs. We learned from undergraduate participants in our study that the default setting for most undergraduate engineers is a lack of consideration of, interest in, or a plan for pursuing the PhD in engineering. The pressure to get a high-­‐paying job where the workload is not as intense as the undergraduate curriculum reinforces this lack of interest. However, what we learned from people who were pursuing or had already earned a PhD in engineering was that their pathway to the PhD contained unexpected, unplanned experiences, that most often seem inconsequential at the time, but that changed the trajectory of their career path. These moments, in hindsight, were salient and pivotal in shaping their decision to pursue the PhD. The nature of these moments varied for each participant. The commonality among the stories is that there was an accumulation of these moments that in combination with their personal characteristics and other relevant factors ultimately tipped the scales in the direction of the PhD. Preliminary recommendations include: • Increase opportunities for undergraduates to be exposed to the PhD such as interactions with PhD students, graduate school workshops/fairs and interaction with industry PhDs. • Engage undergraduate students in meaningful research experiences. • Increase faculty encouragement of undergraduate students to consider the PhD. • Expand graduate program recruitment efforts and reach out to recent alumni. • Increase recruitment of master’s students to the PhD program. IV.12: A Unified Framework for Remote Laboratory Experiments Xuemin Chen (Texas Southern University), Claudio Olmi (University of Houston), Bo Cao (University of Houston), Gangbing Song (University of Houston) Developing a remote experiment requires knowledge in hardware and software. Unfortunately, most of the great engineering experiments are not transformed into an online experiment due to the lack of complete and easy to use software solution. Currently, LabVIEW is the most popular rapid developed software for deploying experiments online. Unfortunately, LabVIEW is expensive, and it requires the Internet users to download and install runtime engine on their computers. The runtime engine must match the LabVIEW version used by the experiment developer. The versions are not interchangeable and the runtime engine package is rather large. Recently, LabVIEW integrated a new feature to interact with the experiment Virtual Instruments by using RESTful web services. REST (Representational State Transfer)provides a lightweight protocol accessible to a wide variety of clients. The architecture does not require complex message parsing and provides a simple interface for user to begin using Web services in LabVIEW. Unfortunately, it requires the client interface to be developed using different technologies. In addition, as the number of remote experiments increases, the software is not capable of handling multiple users with multiple resources. In this project, a unified framework for next generation remote experiment laboratory is under development. The framework allows using the latest Internet technologies, Web 2.0, to provide an interactive user interface for the client computer that does not need any additional software to be installed. Moreover, the dynamic interface is compatible with most of the web browser software and most of the operating systems currently available. The use of a pure JavaScript environment for the client interface provides a wide compatibility with current technologies. On the other hand, a proxy server was added between the experiment and the Internet client to hide the remote experiments from the Internet. The proxy filter route the data exchanged with the available experiments. As a result, the number of experiments behind the server could grow exponentially without changing the way or the Internet address of the collection of experiments. IV.13: The Civil Engineering Sketch Workbooks – Mechanix-­‐Free Body Tracy Hammond (Texas A&M University), Tony Cahill (Texas A&M University), Martin Field (Texas A&M University) An introductory Engineering course with an annual enrollment of over 1000 students, a professor has little option but to rely on multiple choice exams for midterms and finals. Furthermore, the teaching assistants are too overloaded to give detailed feedback on submitted homework assignments. Mechanix-­‐FreeBody is a computer-­‐assisted tutoring module for use by engineering students learning free body diagrams. Mechanix uses recognition of freehand sketches to provide instant, detailed feedback as the student progresses through each homework assignment, quiz, or exam. Free sketch recognition techniques allow students to solve free body diagram as if they were using a pen and paper. The same recognition algorithms enable professors to add new content simply by sketching out the correct answer. Mechanix is able to ease the burden of grading so that instructors can assign more free response questions, which provide a better measure of student progress than multiple choice questions do. Mechanix-­‐FreeBody teaches the analysis of input forces and reactions with free-­‐body diagrams. Such analysis focuses on an arbitrary object (eg. an escalator, chair, or box). Recognizing ‘bodies’ is interesting because there is a large variety of possible shapes that could constitute a ‘body’, and matching two shapes should be fairly lenient, so that the student’s sketch does not need to look exactly like the reference solution (which the student cannot see). The system allows for users to draw freely, and will provide feedback at any stage along the way as requested by the student, with two different levels of feedback available for the novice and intermediate student. Student progress as well as any feedback provided is summarized and provided to the instructor so that the same system can be used for in class tutorials, homework, and even tests. Because feedback is provided to the student, a test scenario now doubles as a learning scenario, reinforcing correct concepts rather than incorrect ones. Hand sketching allows students to create the answers themselves rather than identify the answers, as is common in a scantron-­‐testing scenario, providing an active learning teaching environment. IV.14: Chemical Engineering Undergraduate Curriculum Reform Charles Glover (Texas A&M University), Mahmoud El-­‐Halwagi (Texas A&M University), Lale Yurttas (Texas A&M University), Larissa Pchenitchnaia (Texas A&M University), Patrick Mills (Texas A&M University Kingsville), Irvin Osborne-­‐Lee (Prairie View A&M University) This project to renew curricula at three chemical engineering departments to address pressures of multi-­‐disciplinary technological developments and the growing breadth of abilities and knowledge areas expected for competitive chemical engineering graduates. To address this need, a three-­‐prong approach was developed that included 1) curriculum content reform and development; b)integrated student and program assessment; and 3) faculty and student development initiatives. These three efforts involved six key strategies: a) identifying and organizing curriculum development activities around four course strings to improve integration of learning outcomes and activities; b) developing ICCs to organize and reinforce core ideas in CHEN curricula; c) using service learning in required CHEN courses; d) integrating comprehensive assessment plans and processes throughout the chemical engineering curriculum and using the data to make and evaluate changes; e) offering faculty development activities to offer knowledge and development opportunities for chemical engineering faculty members; f) sharing our experiences with audiences beyond the Texas A&M University System. This work benefits chemical engineering departments by providing information and experiences on new courses, our course string concept, service learning activities, and integrated curriculum components, through journal and proceedings publications and the ICC website (alcheme.tamu.edu). In spite of significant challenges, the chemical engineering department has created an operational assessment plan that is being applied to analyze the learning and development of chemical engineering students with respect to a forward-­‐looking set of learning outcomes. Some new courses have been added to the curriculum: Engineering Biology (a new required course); Special Topics-­‐EPICS: Engineering Projects in Community Service (an elective course); Sustainable Design for Chemical Engineers; Systems Biology; Bioremediation and Green Chemistry. A required course on Statistics is added to CHEN curriculum in Fall 2010. The DLR grant has enhanced collaboration between faculty and graduate students, especially with respect to undergraduate education. Most importantly the DLR grant has established engineering education as a research area in chemical engineering department and college. Further, the project has developed ICCs that will be useful in supporting the move to a renewed curriculum. These resources will be available to other chemical engineering departments. Hopefully, these will be lasting contributions to chemical engineering education. Certainly, difficulties were encountered. First, the development of applicable assessment tools and processes for chemical engineering curricula and students remains a significant challenge. Second, engaging faculty members across the three chemical engineering departments has been more challenging than expected. Faculty members, in spite of their commitment to undergraduate education, are juggling multiple, competing responsibilities. The deliverables of this project are nine peer-­‐reviewed publications, eight faculty development activities (conducted at the DLR member departments), and the ICC website with instructional material for chemical engineering undergraduates. IV.15: Exploratory Study of a University Partnership with Three Non-­‐Metropolitan Community Colleges Mary Anderson-­‐Rowland (Arizona State University) We addressed the needs for more engineers; more diversity among engineers; four-­‐year institutions to work collaboratively with community colleges (CCs), especially non-­‐metropolitan; a Transfer Student Center to stay open and staffed; an evaluation of an incentive for students to take a success course; and more engineering students with advanced degrees. Our approach included visits to Hispanic-­‐serving non-­‐metropolitan community colleges to encourage their students and local high school students to study engineering; potential transfer students visited the university; community colleges gave scholarships; a success class for transfer students awarded a $300 scholarship for class completion; and transfer students were encouraged to go to graduate school. The target audience included high school students local to the three targeted CCs and their undecided and engineering students. The potential benefits are that more engineering degrees are earned to help both Arizona industries and the nation to meet their needs for more qualified and skilled STEM workers. The distance between schools of one to three hours is a challenge, but not a deal-­‐breaker. CC visits by the university are essential: the most effective speaker is an engineering student alumni from that CC. Captive classrooms at a CC work well with carefully selected material presented by university personnel. Many CC students have a limited career vision. The project is now funded by an NSF STEP grant with five non-­‐metropolitan CCs. A website has been created and there are publications. The university and CC leaders are committed to working together for five years past the first year of this grant. The $300 scholarship program continues. IV.16: Learning to Innovate Through Bioinspired Design Julie Linsey (Texas A&M University), Daniel McAdams (), Michael Glier (Texas A&M University) This project seeks to develop the tools to improve interdisciplinary engineering students’ ability to employ biological analogies in engineering design. These tools will enable design engineers to tap the plethora of novel and elegant design solutions that exist in the natural world. Specifically, a certificate program in biomimetic design as well as a technical elective on biomimetics are being developed at Texas A&M University. At this time, Texas A&M is processing the petition to create the certificate program and the technical elective is being developed based on current research efforts in biomimetic design. Additionally, relevant design problems are being formulated to compare the design ability of students within the certificate program to those with more traditional design instruction. IV.17: Acquisition of Instrumentation to Support a Multi-­‐disciplinary Acoustic Laboratory for Faculty and Student Research at Union College Palmyra Catravas (Union College), Helen Hanson (Union College) This MRI centers on a suite of advanced instrumentation that will enable a variety of research efforts at the interface of Electrical Engineering and Music, including specific projects in speech acoustics and on graphical techniques applied to the visualization of music and other signals. The equipment will be housed in a new, low-­‐noise laboratory that is currently under construction in the Wold Science and Engineering Center at Union College. We will report progress towards a research project that focuses on speech acoustics, in which recordings must be acquired and analyzed to determine how and when children develop individual acoustic contrasts that define a speech segment sound. We will also report on a research project that involves the development of new visualization techniques whose genesis is in the analysis of signals measured from musical instruments but that can be applied in many disciplines. As part of our efforts, we are using this instrumentation to provide research experiences for undergraduates and to develop an engaging outreach program to address stereotypes that impede entry of students from historically underrepresented and economically disadvantaged groups into STEM fields. IV.18: Engineering the Common Good John Duffy (U Mass Lowell), Linda Barrington (U Mass Lowell), Manuel Heredia (U Mass Lowell) Service-­‐Learning Integrated throughout a College of Engineering (SLICE) has been implemented over the last six years with the broad aim of developing better engineers and better citizens while improving communities and with the strategic goal of integrating S-­‐L into core required courses so that every semester students have at least one course containing a S-­‐L project throughout the entire undergraduate curricula in five majors. Four of the engineering programs at the University of Massachusetts Lowell have achieved on average one course each semester with a S-­‐L project (either required or elective within the course). In ’09-­‐10 the FTE 1250 students did 1150 S-­‐L student-­‐projects. Annual questionnaires and over 150 in-­‐depth interviews of students and faculty revealed in part: Over two-­‐thirds of the students and faculty members expressed agreement with the basic idea of SLICE, with about 15% opposed. Twenty-­‐three percent of entering students cite S-­‐L as one of the reasons for enrolling, and more than two-­‐thirds of the students at all levels reported that S-­‐L helped keep them in engineering. Indirect measures of subject matter learning were significantly positive overall. Females had significant highly positive responses to S-­‐L. The advantages of this approach are that S-­‐L is available to essentially all the students in the college for a significant number of semesters, that no extra courses need to be taken to get the benefits of S-­‐L, that core subject matter is reinforced with the S-­‐L projects (besides teamwork and communication), that the students are exposed to a variety of projects and community partners, that a large number of faculty benefit, and that a high number of community projects can be undertaken. S-­‐L has become more than a pedagogy: civic engagement is viewed by three-­‐fourths of the student as an interwoven part of the profession. Thirty-­‐five faculty members out of 70 total have committed to continue with S-­‐L. IV.19: Formative Feedback: Impacting the Quality of First-­‐Year Engineering Student Work on Modeling Activities Monica Cardella (Purdue University), Heidi Diefes-­‐Dux (Purdue University) To practice engineering, students’ must be able to apply mathematical knowledge and skills to open-­‐
ended, complex and ambiguous problems. Additionally, students need exposure to the types of problems that they will encounter in professional practice throughout their undergraduate education. However, to ensure that students are learning from these experiences with developing mathematical modeling in complex, open-­‐ended problems, students must receive appropriate support through pedagogically-­‐appropriate instructional materials and feedback on intermediate solutions. The goal of this project is to investigate instructors and students' experiences with feedback to inform the development of these pedagogically-­‐appropriate materials. IV.20: Students' Understanding of Human-­‐Centered Design and the Impact of Service Learning Monica Cardella (Purdue University), William Oakes (Purdue University) Given that design is a central and distinguishing activity of engineering (Atman et al., 1999; Bucciarelli, 1994; Simon 1996), and has been recognized as a key criterion for evaluating engineering programs (ABET, 2000), it is essential that we not only provide engineering students with opportunities to develop design skills (Dym et al., 2005), but we provide students with research-­‐informed learning opportunities that can provide them with knowledge, tools and skills that will enable them to be good designers. It can be argued that to be a good designer, an engineer must have an understanding of the humans (which include direct “users” as well as other stakeholders) that are either involved in or impacted by their design process. This process of taking users and people into account throughout the design process, called human-­‐centered design, can lead to innovation in engineering design (Brown, 2008), help students develop skills in creativity, practical ingenuity and communication necessary for the Engineer of 2020 (NAE, 2004), can give engineers a competitive advantage in a global workplace (NAE, 2005), and help engineers address the Grand Challenges identified by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE, 2008b). This project addresses three needs related to students’ development of human-­‐centered design skills: 1) we must understand what the human-­‐centered design learning trajectory looks like, which involves characterizing the different ways (less-­‐comprehensive to more-­‐comprehensive) that students understand human-­‐centered design, 2) we must identify a mechanism for assessing human-­‐
centered design, in order to provide feedback to students and instructors and to use as a research tool for 3) investigating different pedagogical approaches to helping students develop an understanding of human-­‐centered design. IV.21: Reforming Environmental Engineering Laboratories for Sustainable Engineering: Development of Problem Based Learning and Case Studies for an Environmental Engineering Lab Course Stephanie Luster-­‐Teasley (North Carolina A&T State Univ), Cynthia Waters (NCAT) This research was initiated to develop a method to enhance student critical thinking and analytical skills in an environmental Engineering Laboratory course. The educational intervention entailed developing laboratory modules which use problem based learning and case studies to introduce lab topics. The use of case studies and problem based learning in this course first began with the PI’s participating the NSF Case Studies Workshop and participation in previous research grants for case studies and PBL. The goal of the work is to develop a total of four new environmental engineering laboratory modules over the next two years that use problem-­‐based learning and case studies to teach new environmental sustainability and laboratory concepts. This restructuring of the lab course diverged from traditional step-­‐by-­‐step lab instruction by using an inquiry-­‐based “open” experiment method to enhance student learning. One major goal for this research was to address NSF IEECI exploratory focus to study educational approaches for how principles of sustainability can be infused into traditional courses and how educators can best provide hands-­‐on approaches of engaging students. Student learning gains and perceptions for using problem based teaching were gleaned from this research. Assessment of the research consisted of pre-­‐surveys including the on-­‐line learning Styles Inventory developed by Felder and a baseline student achievement learning gains (SALG) on-­‐line assessment. At the completion of the semester, students were assessed using a post-­‐SALG survey, a post-­‐survey Assessment of Student Preferences for Teaching and Learning, and an ABET Based Questionnaire for Course Assessment. Two modules were developed for the first year of the research with the anticipation of adding two more modules during year two. The spring 2010 modules consisted of: (1) Green Engineering Design and (2) Water reuse and recycling. The year two activities are being partially shaped by student input from the focus groups and will incorporate modules on Solid Waste Handling/Recycling and Biodegradation/ Bioremediation. IV.22: A Practical Approach to Integrating Nanotechnology Education into the Undergraduate Curriculum Dhananjay Kumar (NCAT), Devdas Pai (NCAT), Sergey Yarmolenko (NCAT), Cynthia Waters (NCAT), Robin Liles (NCAT) This NUE project takes into account the need for a better integration of theory, experiment, and applications. A team of engineering faculty members from North Carolina A&T State University (NCAT), actively involved in nanomaterials-­‐based research and have been collaborating with each other for the past several years, have taken up the challenge to enhance undergraduate nanoscience and engineering education in the area of devices and systems. We are engaging undergraduate students directly in the research laboratories and ongoing sponsored as well as unfunded research projects. This approach is expected to better equip the students with a working knowledge of the fundamentals of nanoscience and engineering and the proficiency to contribute meaningfully to research and development of economically-­‐viable nano-­‐devices with innovative applications in all spheres of daily life. An interdisciplinary undergraduate graduate level course with significant hands-­‐on laboratory component (nanotechnology-­‐I) has been developed for enhancing fundamental and advanced knowledge of nanoscience and nanoengineering. Instructional effectiveness and student learning are being assessed through a course concept inventory in this course, also developed by us (Nanotechnology-­‐I). The inventory measures both pre-­‐instructional knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of nanoscience and engineering, as well as changes in knowledge and understanding of these concepts over time. Besides providing hands-­‐on partcipation opportunities and demonstration in our labs during the course, a couple of students have been afforded the opportunity to experience eight weeks of extensive reserch experience under the REU supplement program to this project. Secondly, a selected number of undergraduates, well-­‐imbued with this foundational perspective on nanotechnology, or with a high GPA and excellent grades in materials science and engineering related courses, have been recruited and are being financially supported to engage in a semester-­‐long nanomaterials research project (Nanotechnology II). A faculty member serving as PI/CoPI of this project is serving as a project advisor to each undergraduate student. Projects are focused on design, analysis, testing and/or experimental work in the area of nanoscience and nanoengineering. Each student is being required to make a mid-­‐semester oral presentation research project status progress to a panel of 3-­‐5 faculty members. At the end of the semester, each student will submit a substantial written report, a poster documenting his/her work, and make a more detailed oral presentation to the same panel. The students enrolled in this course are also required to attend a weekly ERC seminar. These students will receive “Independent Study” or “Independent Research” course credit for this systematically mentored and monitored team activity. The results and findings of this project will be prepared for publication in peer-­‐
reviewed journals and presented in national and international conferences and meetings such as National Educators workshop, ASEE, ASME, and MRS. The project is expected to provide a significant number of underrepresented minority students with training and mentoring focused on the economic and intellectual powerhouse area of nanotechnology. Besides the obvious benefit of attracting the best undergraduates into graduate research, our students will also be engaged in passing on the learning downstream through helping with summer camps for K-­‐12 educators and school visitations to help attract the enrollment of high-­‐quality students from across the nation. IV.23: Education and Outreach Update: ERC for Revolutionizing Metallic Biomaterials Devdas Pai (NCAT) As with all ERCs, the Engineering Research Center for Revolutionizing Metallic Biomaterials is charged primarily with advancing scientific discovery and build bridges from science-­‐based discovery to technological innovation to realize transforming engineered systems with the cooperation of industrial and small innovation firm partners. As a member of the Generation-­‐3 cohort of ERCs, however, we additionally need to partner effectively with foreign universities to provide unique opportunities for research and learning collaboration that will prepare U.S. engineering graduates for leadership in innovation in a global economy. The goal of the education and outreach program is to prepare diverse and talented domestic and international graduates who can function in a global world where research, design and production efforts cross national borders. Priming the pipeline requires partnerships with pre-­‐college institutions to attract students to engineering. This poster will summarize the activities to date, highlighting the accomplishments of our third year of operation. IV.24: NUE: Nanophotonics Modules for Diverse Curricular Incorporation Albert Titus (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Alexander Cartwright (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Natalia Litchinitser (University at Buffalo, SUNY), Vladimir Mitin (University at Buffalo, SUNY) Advances in the photonics and nanotechnology areas open doors to new technologies that industries are attempting to develop into products. Because of this, there is a growing need for undergraduate students to be exposed to these topics to better prepare them for opportunities in the future. To address this need, we are developing a set of Application Modules and Knowledge Modules to teach nanophotonics to undergraduate students. The Knowledge Modules (KMs) provide the background material needed on various topics related to nanophotonics. The Application Modules (AMs) provide guided, hands-­‐on experiences that allow students to apply what they have learned in the KMs. The goal of this NSF-­‐funded effort is to develop these modules for use in courses at various levels within the undergraduate curriculum. For example, some of the developed modules were incorporated into the courses EE418/518 “Quantum Mechanics for Engineers.” Regarding dissemination, we visited the University of Puerto Rico (UPR), Mayaguez campus, in December to deliver a workshop demonstrating remote access to Nanoscience Laboratory at UB and on site usage of an atomic microscope that was brought from UB. The KMs will be available online as they are developed. The AMs will also be available online; this will include the descriptions of the experiments and details about the equipment needed to carry out the experiments. We believe, and will demonstrate as we assess the modules, that the combination of KMs and AMs will lead to students developing a better understanding of nanotechnology, photonics, and nanophotonics. IV.25: “NUE: Nanotechnology for Manufacturing Flexible Electronics” at Binghamton University Howard Wang (Binghamton University) The Goal of this NUE project is to develop a comprehensive nanotechnology educational program in the Watson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Binghamton University (BU) to meet the educational needs in nanoscale science and engineering at the undergraduate level. Using a focused theme of nanotechnology applications in flexible electronics (FlexE) manufacturing, the Flex-­‐NUE will also trains a workforce for the emerging industry of FlexE manufacturing. The objectives of the FlexE-­‐
NUE program includes: (1). Establish a series of 3 core courses that cover from basic nanotechnology concepts to nanoscience and engineering fundamentals to nanotechnology-­‐enabled devices and systems; (2). Set up senior projects that offer design practices and research experiences in various aspects of Nano/FlexE, and deliver educational modules for Nano/FlexE teaching and learning; (3) Organize a lecture series that covers a broad spectrum of issues in nanotechnology, including research frontiers, industrial perspectives, and ethical, societal and environmental impacts, etc. (4). Offer opportunities for learning about modern research techniques, FlexE manufacturing, discovery through cyberinfrastructure, global collaboration in a virtual community. (5). Disseminate course materials and educational modules to other campus, community colleges, high schools and industry. The FlexE-­‐NUE will be an exciting and well-­‐rounded intellectual journey for future engineers; it is designed to encompass multifaceted educational approaches for all levels of learning in the area of Nano/FlexE, particularly at the undergraduate level. The Progress of this NUE project include: (1) 53 senior undergraduate engineering students (including 10 female students) have participated in 13 diverse projects themed in nanotechnology and flexible electronics. NUE senior project symposia have been held regularly twice each semester since Fall 2008. (2) Three undergraduate level nanoscience and nanotechnology courses have been developed and offered since Spring 2009. (3) An open-­‐access webpage hosting the information of the NUE project has been developed for nanotechnology education of undergraduate students, high school students and teachers, and general public. (4) An outreach program involving both local Vestal High School and the Curie Metropolitan High School in Chicago. FlexE-­‐NUE has also participated in the Go Green Institute which involves middle school students from 15 school distributes in the southern tier of New York State. IV.26: Nano Technology and Engineering Education in Maine Rosemary Smith (University of Maine) A new course, entitled Introduction to Nanoscale Science and Engineering (INSE), has been developed at the University of Maine for engineering undergraduates. The course introduces students to nanotechnology and related research being conducted on the UMaine campus. A team of ten UMaine engineering and science faculty participate in the course by leading tutorials and laboratory experiences. Students learn the basic concepts of nanoscale science and engineering through scientific explanations for the basis of nanoscale derived properties, illustrated by specific nanoscale engineering examples from ongoing research projects at UMaine. During the course, students are exposed to state-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art laboratory methods of nanoscale preparation, manipulation and characterization. Weekly laboratory experiences include a hands-­‐on component, designed to illustrate the nanoscale concepts, fabrication techniques and materials properties described in the tutorials. Students participate in group discussions about the role of engineers in nanotechnology development, nanoscale research ethics, and the dynamic boundary between science fiction and scientific fact. IV.27: Introduction of Nanotechnology in Introduction to Materials Science for Engineers Daniel Lewis (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) Consistent with the Rensselaer School of Engineering 5 year plan and a long history of undergraduate education, this work will develop and implement a new set of hands-­‐on, discovery based, just-­‐in-­‐time laboratory demonstrations and teaching modules for introducing undergraduates to the science, engineering, and societal aspects of nanotechnology through the ENGR-­‐1600 course: "Introduction to Materials Science for Engineers". ENGR-­‐1600 is the ideal course because: 1) this course reaches over 500 undergraduate students each year, 2) this course teaches fundamental materials concepts that enable the implementation of nanotechnology in practical device applications, 3) nanotechnology is a natural extension of current course topics, and 4) we have developed a proven teaching methodology. IV.28: WEPAN Knowledge Center: Expanding Access to Research-­‐Based Practices to Advance Women in STEM, www.wepanknowledgecenter.org C. Diane Matt (WEPAN) There is much excellent research and practice on advancing women in STEM. While the body of knowledge is robust, before the WEPAN Knowledge Center (WKC) was created, both research-­‐based and practice-­‐related resources were unorganized and scattered—published in a wide range of journals from Harvard Business Review to the Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering to publications focusing on career development. The WKC makes it easy to find quality resources to inform research, practice and systemic change to advance all women in STEM. Funded in 2007 by a National Science Foundation Engineering Education and Centers (EEC) grant (#0648210) Women in Engineering ProActive Network (WEPAN) has built the WEPAN Knowledge Center (WKC), an online, searchable, globally-­‐accessible repository that puts the spotlight on more than 1,000 resources, including information, data, best practices, and Agenda Papers on issues related to women in STEM. In addition, the WKC offers a professional learning community, an online capacity-­‐building tool, where communities of people and groups working to address these issues can connect, collaborate, share best and promising practices and support one another’s programs. The WKC is a flagship project of WEPAN, and in 2010-­‐11 the WKC released its first Agenda Paper—a “how-­‐to-­‐guide” for faculty search committees, Putting Policy into Practice to Diversify Faculty: Search-­‐Recruitment-­‐Hiring in Engineering. In January 2011, the WKC published its first quarterly newsletter, Connections. The WKC also worked with the NSF-­‐
funded ENGAGE project, supplying a professional learning community for the project and supporting dissemination efforts by offering a series of three webinars attended by hundreds of participants from around the world. The WKC is now actively engaging partners in alliances and collaborations to expand its user base and encourage systemic change to increase the participation of women in STEM. About WEPAN WEPAN is the nation’s leading organization for transforming culture in engineering education to promote the success of all women • Translates research into practice • Inspires a network of advocates • Mobilizes diverse stakeholders • Fosters diversity in engineering graduates WEPAN has over 600 members from more than 200 engineering schools, companies ranging from small businesses to Fortune 500 corporations, and nonprofit organizations. A national nonprofit educational organization, WEPAN is headquartered in Denver. For more information, visit http://www.wepan.org. IV.29: Learning Nano and Bionanotechnologies through Educational Games Development (RET Supplement: NSF EEC-­‐0836680: NUE: Development of the NanoEngineering Minor Option (NEMO) at the University of Houston) Andrey Koptelov (University of Houston/HISD) The focus of this work is to enable the opportunities for the middle school students to learn basic concepts of nanotechnology and bionanotechnology in the middle school while expanding their knowledge of modern computer and computer science technologies. Our goal is to enhance the students’ interest in science, math, and technology in general and toning down the presentation level of subjects making them more understandable for the students without missing on the essentials of the basic concepts. We have learned that our approach enhances students’ motivation and interest in nano and bionanotechnologies. The activities that were conducted are expected to help develop students’ critical thinking and enhance their interest in learning. Using students’ willingness to play educational games and develop their own games, we encourage and motivate them to learn bionanotechnology and other topics. We have also learned that students can successfully plan, develop and create educational games and to conduct necessary research to complete their computer game development projects. Our approach integrates at least three steps. The first is planning and developing an educational computer game, second is creating (visual programming) the game and the third is testing and playing the game to learn basic concepts of bionanotechnology and implementing the game into the classroom activities. This approach is found to be appealing for the students. The potential benefit of our work is to provide students with additional ways to get acquainted with rather complex concepts in science and technology in an easy non-­‐intimidating way. Students will learn about modern areas of science and technology while creating and developing educational computer games. These activities will enhance students’ academic achievement by actively engaging the students in ‘hands-­‐on’ studies of relevant science and technology topics. In particular, it is an approach to learn about nano and Bionanotechnologies in a very exciting way. The target audiences of this work are middle and high school students. The product of our research is educational computer game focused on introduction to bionanotechnology. This game was developed and tested by eighth grade students from Fonville Middle School, Houston ISD. This project was integrated into the curriculum in Technology Applications classroom. The survey of more than 200 students involved clearly shows that this work already has and will have an impact. IV.30: Gen-­‐III ERC Center for Integrated Access Networks Education Programs Frances Williams (CIAN), Meredith Kupinski (), Arlene Maclin () Aspiring engineers require training that will prepare them for success in the modern photonics workforce, which is globally connected and based on proficiencies in diverse disciplines of high technology as well as knowledge of innovation and commercialization processes. The design of CIAN’s education programs are guided by the hypothesis that the skills described in the Attributes of Engineers of 2020 are the building blocks of innovation, namely: 1. The training of undergraduate and graduate students working in CIAN’s cross-­‐disciplinary, multi-­‐institutional laboratories is rooted in a systems-­‐level understanding that requires a rigorous focus on application-­‐driven ingenuity. Student’s aptitude for industrial success will be also refined by summer internships and periodic communication with CIAN’s industrial partners, such as during the Industrial Advisory Board annual meeting and, for relevant projects, dissertation co-­‐advisors. 2. Tutoring for Young Scholars, mentoring REU/RET participants, and volunteering for outreach events will encourage CIAN students to appreciate their own education accomplishments and challenge them to creatively articulate their research. 3. CIAN’s partnerships with UA’s Eller College of Management and Arizona’s Center for Innovation exist to offer student seminars and workshops on business skills and translating innovative ideas from the research lab into a start-­‐up company. The Student Leadership Council (SLC) has been founded on the premise that its greatest success will be possible if the students are autonomous; therefore financial and administrative support is provided along with encouragement to create their own charter. 4. Curriculum Development, true innovation is most often found at the boundaries of established disciplines or at the intersection between them. To prepare students for innovation in their work, the educational program must be interdisciplinary and must provide an accurate knowledge of the component disciplines and an ability to understand and work in the space between them. To address this need, “super-­‐courses” are being developed that are composed of coordinated learning modules that are vertically integrated, that are designed to be delivered by web, by classroom and by laboratory experience, and that provide a complete set of pre-­‐requisite knowledge for students coming from varied science and engineering backgrounds. 5. Through mentoring, both in CIAN’s research environment and during industrial internships, students will have the opportunity to observe successful behaviors of senior level personnel. The necessity of being a lifelong learner, to stay current on research and commercial developments, will be taught through these relationships. IV.31: Responsible Research in Action Posters Chloe Lake (University of Buffalo), Katherine McComas (Cornell University), Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University) In light of nanotechnology’s current and potential impact on society, the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) recognizes the importance of promoting consideration and awareness of the societal and ethical implications of nanotechnology among its facilities’ users. The goal of this project was to develop a series of posters encouraging NNIN laboratory users to consider societal and ethical issues (SEI) in their research, especially with regard to maximizing the benefits and reducing the potential societal risks associated with their work. As part of a summer REU project, five thematically-­‐
integrated posters were developed through interaction with focus groups of NNIN users. The finalized posers were placed at the fourteen NNIN sites across the country and are available for distribution to other nanotechnology facilities. We expect these posters to be useful in fostering an environment where the broader impacts of research are considered. IV.32: NNIN iREU: An International Undergraduate Research Experience in Nanotechnology Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University), Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology) The global nature of science and engineering, both in academia and industry, can not be denied. Research and development are conducted by teams in multi-­‐national companies and by informal groups of collaborating academics, spanning many cultures and countries. In such an environment, the cultures of communication, work habits, ethics, and cooperation can not be separated from the practice of engineering. This international aspect of science and technology, however, is indeed “foreign” to most US undergraduates. On the other hand, students from other countries become keenly aware of the global nature of the scientific enterprise very early on, placing US students at a significant disadvantage in the global environment. To be effective contributors to this global scientific enterprise, students must add additional dimensions to their education, dimensions that are not often covered in traditional education. This program addresses the need to expose US undergraduate science and technology students to the international nature of modern research at a critical early stage in their careers through a focused summer research program in an international setting. NNIN has established a summer research program in nanotechnology in partnership leading laboratories in Japan, Germany, and Belgium. NNIN is fortunate to have access to a select group of experienced undergraduate researchers through its well recognized Research Experience for Undergraduates program This selection process both assures that participants have an adquate foundation of skills and knowledge upon which to build an individualized international experience and that we have a method to select the most qualified students. Participating students will travel to Japan, Germany, or Belgium to undertake a 10 week research project under the direction of a senior scientist. Upon return to the US, they will share their international research experience with the collected participants at the NNIN REU Convocation. Through this program, outstanding students not only gain additional research experience in nanotechnology but also gain important exposure to the challenges and opportunities presented by research in an international context. IV.33: Nanooze: Nanotechnology Magazine for Kids Lynn Rathbun (Cornell University), Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology), Carl Batt (Cornell University) Nanooze is a science magazine for kids, with emphasis on nanotechnology. It is planned as enrichment material at the middle school level but is broadly applicable at other levels. Nanooze is available on-­‐line in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, and is distributed in print to classrooms around the country. Approximately 100,000 copies of each issue are distributed. Recent issues have covered nanotechnology and food, nanotechnology in medicine, and nanotechnology in space. IV.34: The NNIN RET Program in Nanoscale Science and Engineering Nancy Healy (Georgia Insitute of Technology), Angela Berenstein (University of California Santa Barbara), Gary Harris (Howard University), Kathryn Hollar (Harvard University), Ron Redwing (Pennsylvania State University) The National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) offers an RET program in nanoscale science and engineering. Five NNIN sites participate: Georgia Institute of Technology (lead), Harvard University, Howard University, Pennsylvania State University, and University of California Santa Barbara. Targeted teacher participants are science teachers of grades 6–12 from school districts adjacent to the NNIN sites. We are in our fifth year of the program with new funding awarded in spring 2009. The program is designed to help integrate nanoscale science and engineering into the K-­‐12 science curriculum to encourage students to pursue STEM education and careers and help address future US workforce needs of nanotechnology. The NNIN RET 8 week program consists of: 6 weeks in summer at the NNIN site, 1 week follow up during the school year, and 1 week sharing experience at the annual meeting of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). All participants of a year attend the NSTA and participate in the NNIN Share-­‐A-­‐Thon, a half-­‐day event where teachers share their research experiences and the lessons developed. In addition, the participants “work” the NNIN exhibit booth at NSTA to interact with fellow attendees. This has been extremely successful for interacting with fellow RETs and sharing their expertise with NSTA attendees. The objectives of the program are to: • actively engage in nanotechnology research underrepresented science teachers or those that serve underrepresented students • build a library of nanotechnology classroom activities and broadly disseminate these activities -­‐ these activities are standards-­‐based lessons • develop a long-­‐term mentorship support community of professors, graduate students, NNIN staff, and science teachers in high-­‐need school districts who will advocate STEM and nanoscale science and engineering education and careers Our annual survey results indicate that the teachers are actively engaged in research, are stimulated to improve their teaching, and believe nanoscale science and engineering should be included in the science classroom. A goal of the program is to build a library of standards-­‐based classroom activities. Our RETs have developed a variety of units that are used in their classrooms. Once tested in their classrooms, the units are placed on the NNIN education portal (http://www.education.nnin.org). All of our participants include nanoscale science and engineering in their teaching which may spur interest by their students in STEM. IV.35: RET Site: Bioengineering Toolkits for 4th and 5th Grade Teachers (BET 4 Teachers) Lisa Friis (University of Kansas), Erin Lewis (University of Kansas), Lisa Blair (Greenbush -­‐ Southeast Kansas Education Service Center) Need: In the NSF-­‐funded RET Site: “Bioengineering Toolkits for 4th and 5th Grade Teachers” (BET 4 Teachers), bioengineering faculty and graduate students from the University of Kansas (KU) partner with Kansas Southeast Kansas Education Service Center at Greenbush (Greenbush) to provide research experiences in bioengineering for elementary teachers from 4th and 5th grades. Education researchers have shown that the drop in interest in engineering for girls and minorities starts in elementary school. The program goal is to encourage female and minority students at this young age to retain their interest in science and mathematics through the formative years by exposing them to bioengineering, a field that does not suffer from lack of participation of females and minorities. Approach: In the first two summers of the program, eleven teacher participants have worked on twelve bioengineering research projects with seven KU faculty and seventeen KU students. Approximately 60% of teachers’ time was spent on research activities, 30% on toolkit lesson plan development, and 10% on didactic training, networking, and industry tours. RET teachers collaborated with the faculty, students and Greenbush staff to develop toolkits to translate the research concepts to the 4th and 5th grade levels while addressing state curriculum requirements. Lesson plans were taught to students in the RET Teachers participant classrooms during the academic year. In the following summer, teachers returned to revise lesson plans and renew their research experience. Benefit: By developing lesson plans for elementary school students that teach the required curriculum in terms of bioengineering, we are specifically targeting increasing interest in engineering in females and minorities. However, studies have shown that programs targeted at these groups positively influence all students. We hypothesize that this positive exposure of elementary school students to bioengineering at these critical ages will carry through the students’ academic career and make all students more likely to pursue careers in engineering, regardless of the discipline. Outcomes: Teacher feedback showed satisfaction of the program and toolkits, increased levels of understanding of engineering principles and laboratory research protocol, and an increased comfort in communicating bioengineering ideas to elementary students. Graduate students reported an increased comfort level in scientific communication with the public, an understanding of the organization of elementary education, and an increased appreciation for the education profession. The project team learned of elementary educational needs and requirements, especially the importance of meeting state standards for learning. It was also noted that the term “engineering” was daunting to the RET teacher participants, whereas the term “science” is much more accessible to elementary educators. We learned to encourage teachers to incorporate the word “engineering” as much as possible in their lesson plans and to say the word to students so that it is not perceived as out of their reach. Deliverables: In the first two summers of the program, twelve lesson plans have been developed. Lesson plans are implemented in the RET teacher participant classrooms, revised based on classroom experiences, and standardized for national distribution. Greenbush has developed three of the lesson plans into half day modules that they teach both on-­‐site in their main lab facility and online. In the first 1.5 years of the program, these bioengineering modules have been taught to over 2,000 children in Kansas and the surrounding region. Components of the first year lesson plans were also developed into short modules that could be used for outreach activities. These modules allow people who have not had experience in interacting with young children to present bioengineering in a way that will interest kids at the elementary school level. These modules are being vetted at KU first before making them available nationally to student chapters of bioengineering societies. NSF Program: EEC-­‐0808749 IV.36: ‘Shaping Inquiry from Feedstock to Tailpipe’ to Promote a SHIFT in Science Instruction Claudia Bode (University of Kansas), Susan Stagg-­‐Williams (University of Kansas), Lisa Blair (Greenbush -­‐ Southeast Kansas Education Service Center) Oftentimes, science teachers have very little research experience. We are addressing this need by engaging teachers in research on different aspects of renewable fuels – from how they are made to how they burn in vehicles and impact the environment. In this program, faculty from chemical, mechanical, and environmental engineering, as well as ecology, biology, and geography mentor high school teachers and community college instructors with expertise in chemistry, biology, physics, and environmental science. We recruit teachers primarily from Kansas high schools and community colleges, both urban and rural populations. The first year of the program involved nine participants from eastern and southern parts of the state. Ten new lessons were made in year 1 and posted at: https://www.cebc.ku.edu/education/RET-­‐2010.shtml. One team studied how algal oils are converted to biodiesel and created several lessons about pond water algae. A second team studied how soybean oil and used cooking oil are converted into biodiesel. They created a lab activity that incorporated the recent BP oil spill catastrophe. The third team studied how different biofuels combust in vehicles. They also modified a remote control car to run on biofuel. The fourth team learned about the ecosystem impacts of burning fossil and renewable fuels and made two lessons that link biofuels to the growing threat of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. In order to bridge the gap between science subject areas, these lessons will be modified in year 2 to encourage cross-­‐disciplinary classroom connections. We hypothesize that linking students from different subject areas will promote interdisciplinary communication at an early age and better prepare students to view complex problems in terms of an integrated system. Ultimately, this will help prepare students for college and stimulate interest in STEM careers. IV.37: Rutgers University Research Experience for Teachers in Engineering (RU RET-­‐E) Kimberly Cook-­‐Chennault (Rutgers, the State University), Evelyn Laffey (Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey) National Science Foundation Engineering Education Programs Awardees Conference Rutgers University Research Experience for Teachers in Engineering (RU RET-­‐E) Abstract 1. Need: What need are you addressing? The latest technological revolution has brought with it a high global demand for scientific and mathematical literacy. Domestically, the number of technology based jobs, such as engineering, that require scientific and mathematical literacy far exceeds the number of qualified native applicants. In order to compete in the global economy, our nation’s universities must attract, retain, and graduate qualified engineering majors, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, race, or financial need. In collaboration with local K-­‐12 schools, Rutgers aims to introduce more students to STEM fields by infusing engineering education into the K-­‐12 curriculum. The premise behind RU RET-­‐E is to engage K-­‐12 teachers in meaningful research and support them as they develop and implement K-­‐12 engineering lessons for the pre-­‐college classroom. 2. Approach: What approach are you using to address this need? The goals of RU RET-­‐E are to: (1) engage middle and high school math and science teachers in innovative “green” engineering research during the summer, and to (2) support teachers in integrating their research experiences into their academic year, pre-­‐college classrooms. The overarching theme of the research projects -­‐ “Green Technology” was selected to engage our community in the Green Revolution. Specifically, RU RET-­‐E will engage K-­‐12 teachers in 6 weeks of research during the summer. Participants will design lessons based on their research that they will pilot during the summer and implement during the academic year. Findings will be shared at conferences and during a Professional Development Day for K-­‐12 educators during National Engineers Week at Rutgers. 3. Benefit: What are the potential benefits of your work? Who are the target audiences? The broader impact of this program is to build a long-­‐term collaborative relationship between local district schools and the School of Engineering (SoE) at Rutgers University. Our partnership will infuse engineering education into the K-­‐12 curriculum. RU RET-­‐E will also provide an enriching professional development experience for math and science pre-­‐ and in-­‐
service teachers. Through a grant writing workshop, our program will provide an opportunity for the districts and Rutgers to build a long-­‐lasting collaborative. The potential benefit of RU RET-­‐E is to assist our community in developing a greater understanding, love, and appreciation of engineering. The target audience is K-­‐12 pre-­‐ and in-­‐service teachers, as well as their students. 4. Outcomes: What have you learned so far? At this point, we are receiving applications for summer participants. The number of applicants far exceeded our expectations. Therefore, we are developing a standardized rubric to fairly judge and select participants. We learned that utilizing email distribution lists (i.e. New Jersey State-­‐
Wide Systematic Initiative) is a more efficient way to get the message out about RU RET-­‐E than school visits. In terms of management, we have had a difficult time getting our team together and projects formalized. Lastly, we have received feedback that six weeks (Monday – Friday, 9am – 4:30pm) is difficult timing for some teachers. 5. Deliverables: What are the products of your research so far? How are you ensuring they will have an impact? We are in the early stages of RU RET-­‐E implantation. At this time, our research has not yet developed products. IV.38: SWEET -­‐ Summer at WSU -­‐ Engineering Expereinces for Teachers (RET Site) Richard Zollars (Washington State University) The SWEET program (Summer at WSU – Engineering Experiences for Teachers) is an RET site activity that has been ongoing since 2003. During that time a total of 80 teachers, 38 faculty members, and 173 students have participated. As with all RET programs the focus of the activity is involving middle school and high school science and mathematics teachers in research. In particular, SWEET focuses on involving the teachers in on-­‐going research in engineering, focusing primarily on bio-­‐related projects. A number of changes in operations of the program have been implemented in order to optimize the impact of the teacher’s participation. To help reduce the isolation that some teachers have reported recruitment now is focused on having pairs of teachers from a school (or school district) participate in the program. Having a colleague helps insure that the materials developed during the summer’s on-­‐
campus phase will be successfully incorporated into the teacher’s classrooms. More recently the SWEET program has coordinated its activities with that of a GK-­‐12 program within this college (CREAM -­‐ Culturally Relevant Engineering Applications in Mathematics). This coordination of effort helps both programs address the need to involve a wider range of students in engineering. Recruiting efforts for both programs have focused on schools in Washington and Idaho with a higher than average proportion of students from underrepresented groups, primarily Hispanic and Native American. As a result a total of eight mathematics and science teachers from two high schools in southern Washington have participated in the SWEET/CREAM combination. The student body in each of these two high schools is more than 85% Hispanic. IV.39: On A Research Experience for Teachers in Manufacturing for Competitiveness in the US (RETainUS): Goals, Plans, Implementation and Lessons Learned Mohamed Abdelrahman (Texas A&M Uni.-­‐Kingsville), Holly Anthony (Tennessee Technological University) This project describes an outreach program that aims at retaining and advancing the manufacturing base in the US through meaningful changes in the teachers’ understanding of manufacturing and how it relates to the Math and Science Curriculum. The program establishes a Research Experience for Teachers Site. It is designed at improving the teachers’ comprehension of the research and development process through hands-­‐on experience and real world problems that relate to: a) advancing the state of the art in conventional manufacturing processes such as metalcasting; b) new trends in manufacturing such as rapid prototyping, c) emerging technologies such as nano-­‐materials and manufacturing of special coating materials, and d) enabling technologies serving manufacturing processes in general such as intelligent optimization. Manufacturing is a field where boundaries between disciplines disappear opening opportunities for multidisciplinary research. The research projects and faculty mentors participating in the program represent 5 different disciplines in the college of engineering. This approach offers the teachers a multi-­‐perspective view of how underlying mathematical and scientific concepts are integrated in engineering applications. RETainUS uses a non traditional approach to the teachers’ participation in the research. It is designed for teachers to maintain ownership of the research as principal investigators of their research question. Mentors and graduate students act as consultants to the teachers. This dynamic approach is believed to give the teachers a better understanding of the process of research from the conception and development of the idea, to the carrying out of the research and the dissemination of the results. The dynamic nature of the program requires a more active role of the mentors and project directors than a traditional approach where a teacher plugs into the role of a research assistant. This work addresses the goals and aspirations of the project team and how the program was designed to achieve these goals. It highlights the unique features of the RET program, practical issues that arose during the course of implementation of the first year of the project and lessons learned from the perspective of the project directors. IV.40: Introducing Engineering into the Middle School Math Classroom Jackie Mitts (Stillwater Public Schools) "When am I ever going to use this?" This is the most common question among middle school math students. Bringing engineering problems into the classroom dispels that question because those real-­‐
life problems allow students to see the practical application of mathematics. Additionally, of the STEM subjects, engineering is not a part of our current curricula. While science, technology, and mathematics are being taught, they are in separate classrooms and are not integrated effectively. The students are not able to see the connections and interdependence of these disciplines. This summer at Oklahoma State University, I was one of eight Oklahoma teachers to participate in the Research Experience for Teachers. This project was funded by NSF, and the primary goal was to develop curricula in which students gain an awareness of engineering while learning mathematics. My research group participated in studies on water quality. We researched the real world problem of safe drinking water and learned water testing and treatment procedures. My experience in the lab enlightened me to many real-­‐life applications of the mathematics that my students learn in our regular classroom curriculum. I created a curriculum unit comprised of several independent lesson plans that can be incorporated into my current mathematics curriculum. These lessons support my national and state objectives and allow students to learn about engineering as well. My lessons are intended to allow eighth and ninth grade students to experience the interdependence of science and mathematics while introducing them to engineering topics. The potential is that students will more fully understand mathematics as they experience its practical application. No longer will mathematics be a disconnected compilation of numbers and operations, but the students will begin to see the meaning and purpose behind the mathematics. Also, students who have never been introduced to engineering may discover a potential career choice. In my lab experiences I learned that mathematics can be used in every phase of the engineering design cycle – research, modeling, implementing, measuring, and communicating. The implementation phase involves mathematics as engineers test their products. They can apply specific measurements and mathematics to verify that their design is good when measuring. Furthermore, mathematics is essential proof when communicating to a company that a design is sound. In essence, mathematics could be described as the microscopic aspects of a larger, visible product, or “emergent phenomena.” One can’t often see the mathematics that the engineer used to create the design, but the end result would not have been possible without it. In implementing my unit, I have learned that the students are very open to exploring engineering topics. They appreciate seeing the real-­‐life uses of mathematics. I have also more fully realized that our current curricula are severely lacking in connecting the STEM subjects. A product of my research is a curriculum unit that I will use in my classroom this year. I am ensuring that the lessons are effective by implementing them at natural times within the current curriculum. The students learn a new topic and then see through engineering how it applies to real-­‐life. The unit is also written in such a way that any mathematics teacher will be able to teach all or a portion of the unit to his/her class. Additionally, I am writing a teacher narrative to describe my research experience. My reflections will enable me to revise my unit in ways to make it more effective. Furthermore, my experiences and observations will benefit other teachers as they introduce engineering into their own classrooms. IV.41: West Virginia Research Experience for Teachers Site Darran Cairns (West Virginia University), Nigel Clark (West Virginia University) The Research Experience for Teachers Site at West Virginia University hosted its first cohort of teachers in Summer 2010. Eleven teachers from West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Florida spent six weeks participating in engineering research projects on vehicle efficiency, fuel cells, flexible solar panels, and climate change in Appalachia. Teachers also took part in and International Summer Energy School(ISES) hosted by the University of Birmingham, England and taught lessons at Lordswood Girls' School with English Science Teachers. We will discuss the program, the ISES and share examples of lesson plans including a sequence of Geometry lessons centered around the impact of tire pressure on vehicle rolling resistance and thus vehicle energy efficiency. IV.42: The Joule Fellows: Teachers in Sustainable Energies Research Laboratories Kazem Kazerounian (University of Connecticut), Aida Ghiaei (University of Connecticut), Zahra Shahbazi (University of Connecticut) The School of engineering at the University of Connecticut has developed and implemented a comprehensive program to host local teachers at the University of Connecticut for a period of 6 weeks in each of the summers 2009 and 2010. Each summer the program trained 12 teachers as Joule Fellows. The activities were integrated into five categories: (I) research preparation, (II) research participation, (III) professional development, (IV) bridging technology and K-­‐12 curriculum, and (V) mentorship. Participating Joule Fellows: -­‐Examined engineering developments through classroom instruction, guest lectures and field trips including visits to various facilities such as Windham Water Work, UTC Power and UConn Center of Clean Energy where they gained a more intimate familiarity with the engineering applications and career opportunities; -­‐Gained exposure to discoveries in sustainable energies by working with faculty researchers in their laboratories; -­‐Learned best engineering research practices (including measurement and data acquisition, data analysis and presentation, and computational tools), proposal writing, technical communication, scientific ethics and code of conduct, to expand the impact of their experience beyond the RET program; including, computing tools, and an overview of energy research in order to deepen the understanding of engineering and its applications among instructors. -­‐
Learned techniques for creatively solving problems in the laboratory and learn how to translate this knowledge into effective lessons for their students; -­‐Developed and implemented experiments based on the research activities of the Joule Fellow program to use in their home institutions during the academic year. Ed Smith, a science teacher and a participant of 2010 program, expresses his experience: “In all honesty, this was the best program I have ever been a part of based on the wealth of things I learned and the diversity of ideas and equipment I have brought or will bring into my classroom. I chose Water Hydraulics Lab as they were conducting experiments to harvest energy from low flow water situations – such as in streams or even sewers. Two Rivers Magnet Middle School sits astride the Connecticut and Hockanum Rivers and I saw a possibility to bring ideas and a possible project back to my school to harvest the energy of either of these rivers.” In addition to developing an in-­‐depth perception of engineering and its relevance, the participants gained a sense of confidence and appreciation about engineering research and its national and international advantages: Paul Leonowich, a 2010 program participant and a science teacher at Vinal technical high school, mentioned that the program was very inspirational for him. "I gained a deeper appreciation for engineering and science. I also learned a great deal about the new green technologies and also how I can introduce them to my high school students through science classes." Even though, the major target audiences of this program are K12 students -­‐
with whom teachers shared their experience through prepared lesson plans, educational kits and movies-­‐ in the long run, everyone in nation reaps the benefits of RET through advanced energy researches and increased general awareness of energy usage. We also learned valuable feedbacks and modified the program accordingly. A handful of these findings can be summarized as follows: •The Selection of host faculty and graduate students plays a vital role in program success. In the second round of the program we did this task more meticulously by considering faculties, graduate students and teachers’ personal interests and capabilities which resulted in a more dynamic environment. •We had to compete with other summer programs for teachers to attract their attention to this program. It requires early advertisement at schools to have a richer and more diverse pool to select participants •Specific attention is needed in selection of projects to assure that the project is reasonable and at the same time remains substantial. •Technical high schools have shown elevated interest in this program. To conclude, in order to observe the efficiency of the program, each of the participants was assigned to prepare a lesson plan, an educational kit and a movie entitled “How I spent my summer at UConn?” After getting feedback from UConn mentors, the materials were used in classes to transfer the knowledge to students. The best lesson plan and movie have been chosen to be posted in the program website to be available for interested individuals. Also teachers have been assisted to share their educational kits and lesson plans to benefit their students from the other participants’ experience. The participants of RET are still in contact with each other and Uconn mentors through an electronic network to exchange feedbacks and experience. IV.43: NUE: Interdisciplinary Course -­‐ Nanoscale Transport Phenomena for Manufacturing Nanodevices Zhiyong Gu (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Bridgette Budhlall (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Hongwei Sun (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Carol Barry (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Alfred Donatelli (University of Massachusetts Lowell) Commercialization of many “nanotechnology products” requires incorporating nanoscience discoveries into macro, micro, and nanoscale designs and manufacturing methods. However, there is a large gap between nanoscience and commercial production of nanotechnology products. Nanoscience must be coupled with new nanomanufacturing science to create product prototypes and scalable manufacturing processes. Integration of the interdisciplinary knowledge required for designing and manufacturing nanodevices into undergraduate curricula is still a big challenge. We plan to address this educational challenge and generate practical ways of introducing nanotechnology into undergraduate education with a focus on manufacturing nanodevices. More specifically, we plan to create an interdisciplinary course in which nanoscale transport phenomena needed for manufacturing of nanodevices will be presented through lectures, hands-­‐on laboratory exercises, demonstration experiments, and a final design project. This new interdisciplinary course are being developed by five faculty from three engineering departments (Chemical, Mechanical and Plastics Engineering), who have critical knowledge in nanoscale fluid mechanics and heat transfer, to better prepare undergraduates for employment focused on designing and manufacturing nano/microfluidic systems. The proposed course will translate nanoscience discoveries in nanoscale transport phenomena into workable knowledge that will better prepare undergraduates for employment focused on nano/microfluidic systems, lab-­‐on-­‐a-­‐chip devices, electronics devices, medical devices, and other emerging technologies. The impact of this senior-­‐level course will significantly enhance the “Nanomaterials Engineering Option” in the Chemical Engineering undergraduate curriculum as well as the medical device industry focus in Plastics Engineering, and may be used in the five-­‐year BS-­‐MS program which is popular in the College of Engineering. The course will be available to over 180 chemical, mechanical, and plastics engineering seniors per year. An exportable module for freshman introductory engineering courses will also impact all freshmen in the College of Engineering (400 students per year). This is a newly funded NUE grant. From the start of the project in November 2010, the PIs have met several times to discuss tentative course contents and started designing the lab modules. The course numbers have been determined for each department. The expected outcomes include: (1) A stand-­‐alone course which will be started as an elective to seniors in UML’s Francis College of Engineering in the fall semester of 2011; (2) Hands-­‐on laboratory experiments that will be developed into modules to complement each lecture; (3) Design and fabrication of a working nanodevice at the end of the course. The knowledge from this interdisciplinary project will be disseminated through (1) a hands-­‐on workshop for faculty at other universities (2) a hands-­‐on workshop to interested faculty in local community colleges (from which UML receives many transfer students), (3) short courses for industry professionals, and (4) publication in engineering educational journals and conference presentations. The modules will be placed online at the NSF-­‐funded www.nanohub.org website. IV.44: Incorporating Ethical Decisions into Nanomanufacturing Research Carol Barry (University of Massachusetts Lowell), Jacqueline Isaacs (Northeastern University), Ronald Sandler (Northeastern University) A program was developed to provide extensive training in ethical decision making, thereby allowing undergraduate student researcher to incorporate these ethical considerations into their research projects and future descisions. This training goes beyond engineering ethics to include research integrity, business ethics, the ethics of emerging nanotechnology, and value sensitive design. This professional development programming consisted of an interactive lecture “Value Sensitive Design” and individual discussions with student researchers on how to consider the social and ethical dimensions of emerging nanotechnologies with respect to their research and engineering design decisions. The students evaluatation of the possible ethical implications of their research were part of their final research presentations. IV.45: Evaluating E. coli at Potential Charles River Swimming Locations Kellie Burtch (Innovation Academy Charter Sch) In 1910, the Charles River was converted from tidal mud flats to a basin that extends from Boston Harbor to Watertown. Millions of visitors enjoy the recreational opportunities and festivities in the Charles River Reservation, an urban park with 19 miles of shoreline in the heart of Boston’s Metropolitan Area. In 1995 the EPA began the Clean Charles River Initiative, which set an ambitious goal of making the Charles River fishable and swimmable. Many organizations and individuals have contributed to the dramatic improvement in river health. Since the Initiative began in 1995, the EPA’s overall ecological health grade the Charles River received has increased from a D to a B+! IV.46: REU Site: Microscale Sensing, Actuation and Imaging (MoSAIc) Sriram Sundararajan (Iowa State University), Pranav Shrotriya (Iowa State University) The objective of this REU site is to engage ten undergraduate students in research experiences in the area of Microscale Sensing, Actuation and Imaging at Iowa State University (ISU). The students pursue fundamental investigations in the area of design and manufacture of sensors, actuators and smart materials as well as “state-­‐of-­‐art” imaging and diagnostic systems. Examples include flexible linkages, magneto-­‐restrictive materials, high temperature MEMS pressure sensors, solar cells, nanomechanical sensors for biological agents, switchable surface assemblies and high spatiotemporal resolution 4-­‐D imaging sensors. The key components of this REU program include 1) a research project chosen by the student and advised by a faculty member and graduate student; 2) a suite of technical short courses; 3) professional development activities such as Lunch-­‐n-­‐learns with local researchers; workshops on career opportunities and graduate school, journal clubs and e-­‐portfolio maintenance; 3) organized social and cultural events designed to complement the research activities including field trips to regional points of interest and; 4) a campus-­‐wide REU Research Symposium to provide feedback on student work, and to recognize exceptional achievement. Students also undergo training in ethical implications of engineering that is conducted by the Director of ISU’s Bioethics program. Students participate in two sessions involving case study materials and role playing exercises followed by student presentations as well as discussions on broader issues and implications. At the end of their REU experience, students include a discussion of ethical issues raised by the research projects in which they participated, and the research they may plan to pursue in their careers. Participants are also encouraged to present a technical paper/poster within one year after participating in this program at regional or national meetings. IV.47: EEREU @ Penn State: Research Toward Applications Sven Bilen (Penn State), Kenneth Jenkins (Penn State) This poster presents highlights of the 2010 Electrical Engineering Research Experience for Undergraduates (EEREU) at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park. The summer of 2010 marked the eighth year that Penn State’s Department of Electrical Engineering hosted its annual EEREU Site Program. Twelve outstanding young men and women participated in the 2010 EEREU summer program at Penn State’s University Park Campus. These EEREU scholars, selected from applicants nation-­‐wide, consisted of first-­‐year, sophomore, and junior college students with outstanding academic backgrounds and intense interests in exploring research in electrical engineering and related areas. The theme of the EEREU program is to expose students to a broad range of research areas within electrical engineering and then understand how this research transitions to commercial ventures. During the nine-­‐week summer program, each EEREU student carried out a research project under the guidance of his or her faculty mentor(s), in laboratories located in the Department of Electrical Engineering and the Materials Research Institute. The students were also guided in understanding how the research they were doing, whether fundamental or applied, would have an impact and how it transitions from the lab to product. One of the major activities of the EEREU program was the 2010 Annual EEREU Symposium held at University Park, where the EEREU students summarized their research experiences and presented their findings at a full day symposium on July 23, 2010. Complementing the research activities, the EEREU program organized an array of group activities including a Weekly Scientific Seminar Series that introduced a broad range of research topics to the EEREU students; a field trip program on which EEREU students visited prominent local and regional industries, start-­‐ups (including those started by Penn State EE alumni), and research sites; and a Weekly Workshop on Ethics and Entrepreneurship through which students were engaged in debate and analysis of issues in ethics and company start-­‐ups in engineering. More information about Penn State’s EEREU program can be found at the EEREU website: http://www.ee.psu.edu/reu/. IV.48: Rutgers-­‐NSF REU in Cellular Bioengineering Charles Roth (Rutgers University) While there are tremendous opportunities to use advances in areas such as biomaterials and stem cells to better diagnose, image and treat human disease, we lack a suitably trained and diverse workforce to lead the next generation of such efforts. There are two aspects of this need that we seek to address. First, we feel that a training program rooted in biomedical engineering, but reaching out to a wide variety of disciplines, will produce a versatile cohort of researchers uniquely equipped to be leaders in this area. Second, we seek to identify and provide research opportunities to students who are academically talented and intellectually curious but who do not have major research opportunities available at their home institutions. We utilize a multi-­‐tiered approach to the training of REU participants in the Rutgers-­‐NSF REU in Cellular Bioengineering. A Cellular Bioengineering Boot Camp was established to inoculate the participants with basic skills that they will need regardless of research project. A weekly research seminar series led by the PI brings the group together to develop research communication skills and to broaden the individuals’ research knowledge base. Mentoring is provided at the levels of Program Director, faculty PI, near-­‐peer mentors and peers group. Writing of a proposal and an abstract and the presentation in both poster and oral form motivate productive research, develop essential skills and reinforce positive outcomes. A major goal of the program is to provide research opportunities to several types of groups that do not otherwise have exposure to cutting-­‐edge research. Applications from underrepresented ethnic minorities and women are highly encouraged. The program has also reached out substantially to colleges, largely but not exclusively regional, that do not offer substantial research projects. These students gain research experience that positions them much better for graduate study than they would otherwise be. The first cohort of students participated in our REU during summer 2010. We were able to attract a diverse population of ten participants, which included four underrepresented minorities, three women, three students who were first generation to college and five who hailed from primarily undergraduate institutions. Participants were uniformly able to assimilate into research laboratories, be productive in their individual laboratories and put together a variety of documents detailing their research plans and findings. All students presented locally at our program oral presentation conference and final poster symposium. In addition, the participants have collectively made five presentations at national conferences and two journal publications have been submitted. Two of the four graduating seniors have applied to Rutgers for graduate study. IV.49: Relative Effectiveness of Different Modes of Education Abroad Jan Helge Bøhn (Virginia Tech) Governments, universities, and foundations are making substantial investments in sending US students abroad. The belief is that this will facilitate their growth and development as global citizens. In engineering we are particularly interested in preparing our students to operate effectively in the increasingly global engineering market place. In short, we want to educate global engineers. The question is: How do we do this most effectively? How much student time and effort is required to make what impact? And what are their relative associated costs? Currently the effective impact of the different modes of education abroad experiences is poorly understood, and thus we make haphazard investments based on intuition rather than on their actual effectiveness. Hence there is a need to understand the relative effectiveness of various modes of education abroad experiences on the growth and development of students as global engineers. We compare US undergraduate mechanical engineering populations that are exposed to three different levels of education abroad experiences: (1) BSME students that are completing their entire senior year in Germany, with all their engineering courses there taught in German; (2) NSF REU students that are individually embedded in German graduate research teams for a summer using English as the language of communication; and (3) NSF REU students that are individually embedded in US graduate research teams for a summer while working on transatlantic projects using audio-­‐ and videoconferences and e-­‐mail exchanges. The benchmark population are US BSME students participating in domestic undergraduate summer research. These students were interviewed after their respective experiences with regards to their factual knowledge of the US and Germany, awareness of US and German cultural tendencies, and awareness of differences in US and German cultural images. This study aims to demonstrate the relative ability of the various education abroad experiences to impact the development of students into global engineers. This insight will enable governments, universities, and foundations to better structure their investments in student education abroad so as to maximize the impact made on the students’ development as global citizens and their ability to successfully compete in the increasingly global economy. (1) Students do not develop measurably as global citizens when limited to working with colleagues abroad using only audio-­‐ and videoconferences and e-­‐mail exchanges. (2) Working a summer abroad is sufficient for students to significantly grow their awareness of differences in US and German cultural images, and their awareness of US cultural tendencies. Extending the experience to a year does not measurably increase this growth. (3) The summer abroad significantly increases the factual knowledge of Germany and the awareness of German cultural tendencies, and extending this experience to a year significantly continues this growth. (4) The summer abroad does not measurably impact the factual knowledge of the US, but extending the experience abroad to a full year does significantly increases this knowledge. (5) The factual knowledge of Germany for students that spent a year in Germany is approximately equal to the factual knowledge of the US for students that have never left the US. These results have been reported via an invited presentation at the 13th Annual Colloquium on International Engineering Education (Newport, Rhode Island, November 2010). One MS thesis and two journal papers are in development. The results will be used to refine the continuation of this NSF REU program in Germany (summers 2011, 2012, 2013), a US-­‐
German dual BS Mechanical Engineering degree program, a US-­‐German dual MS Mechanical Engineering degree program, and several undergraduate and graduate courses that are team-­‐taught with colleagues at other US, German, Mexican, and Chinese universities. IV.50: Sustainable Energy Alternatives and the Advanced Materials Sylvia Thomas (University of South Florida) Sustainable Energy Alternatives and the Advanced Materials SEAM REU University of South Florida National Science Foundation (Award #0851973) Department(s) of Electrical, Chemical/Biomedical, & Mechanical Engineering, Physics and Chemistry Abstract The primary goal of this work is to address the national need to increase the number of undergraduate students obtaining degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) areas, as well as the initiative to successfully transition students to graduate school. An especially intensive effort is being made to attract minority and female students into the program. Undergraduates are involved in interdisciplinary research projects in the fields of sustainable energy alternatives and the advanced materials used to develop these systems. Faculty researchers and graduate students serve as mentors and encourage students to pursue graduate school. Approach: In an effort to address this national need we have focused on the following objectives: Specific Objectives: • Recruit undergraduates to conduct summer research; • Provide research training and mentoring in the area of national need – sustainable energy; • Encourage participating students to pursue advanced degrees; • Provide information on the benefits of graduate school and the application process; • Provide community building opportunities among REU students. Benefit: This work will build a pool of academic researchers and mentors for advanced technical innovation and a more diverse cohort of internationally competitive engineering and science contributors Outcomes: The REU experience had such an impact on the students that over 97% of the students indicated the experience had increased their engineering skill and 98% would recommend the experience to a colleague. In addition, survey results show that over 90% of the participants will be applying to graduate school. Deliverables: Students have presented their work in several formats e.g. posters, final reports, and oral presentations. In response, student posters were received well at the NSF REU Research Day sponsored by USF Office of Sponsored Research and the College of Engineering. Students’ works have been accepted to other conferences for presentation and journal submissions are in progress. IV.51: Education Activities at the Engineering Research Center for Mid-­‐InfraRed Technologies for Health and the Environment (MIRTHE) Roxanne Zellin (MIRTHE) MIRTHE, established in 2006, is the National Science Foundation-­‐sponsored Engineering Research Center dedicated to developing Mid-­‐InfraRed Technologies for Health and the Environment. The Center is headquartered at Princeton University, with partners City College New York, Johns Hopkins University, Rice University, Texas A&M University, and the University of Maryland Baltimore County. The center encompasses a world-­‐class team of electrical, environmental, and mechanical engineers, physicists, chemists, mathematicians, and clinicians. MIRTHE develops knowledge, technologies, and engineering systems for mid-­‐infrared spectroscopy and provides unprecedented optical and chemical trace gas sensing capabilities. MIRTHE advances mid-­‐IR tunable Quantum Cascade lasers, detectors, and ultra-­‐
sensitive sensor systems and demonstrates specific applications through testbeds in environmental sensing, homeland security and medical diagnostics. MIRTHE’s cross-­‐disciplinary and cross-­‐institutional nature with faculty and industry/practitioners spread across a broad spectrum of disciplines provides an intellectually fascinating research and learning environment that is rich in real-­‐world challenges and complex systems solutions. Therefore, MIRTHE conducts comprehensive pre-­‐college and university-­‐
level education programs that directly flow from MIRTHE’s research activities, its innovation, and the enthusiasm of its researchers. The programs address students from K-­‐12 and college, as well as graduate students, post-­‐doctoral researchers, teachers in K-­‐12, and community college teachers. MIRTHE’s pre-­‐college program aims (i) to significantly increase the number of students in the STEM fields by getting very early career (middle-­‐ and high-­‐school) students excited about careers in science and engineering, and (ii) to educate K-­‐12 students and general public about the important societal challenges of securing a clean, sustainable and safe environment, clean air to breathe and accessible healthcare on the national and global scale, and to teach and inform about engineering solutions. The duration of the programs spans from 1 day – usually for the programs that involve a large number of participants – to several weeks for the programs centered on mentoring individuals. MIRTHE’s university-­‐level education program refers to a set of programs offered to the students, sizable groups of undergraduate and graduate students, as well as post-­‐doctoral researchers, who conduct MIRTHE-­‐
related research and participate in MIRTHE educational programs for a significant portion of their careers, and for whom participation in these programs influences their career choices and career outlook. This researcher population includes core students, as well as REU students, and other researchers such as international visitors and exchange students, all typically with significant time commitment in MIRTHE and an established trainee/mentor relationship with at least one MIRTHE faculty or practitioner. The rationale behind the two segments of MIRTHE’s education and outreach stems from the two different natures of long-­‐term planning involved in both segments: in MIRTHE university-­‐level program, the same individual students attend many of the programs continuously, in sequence or repeatedly. On the contrary, participants in the pre-­‐college outreach programs change frequently. Knowing one’s audience (long-­‐term participants versus first-­‐ or one-­‐time participants) clearly influences the planning and execution of the various programs. IV.52: Investigating the Elevated Temperature Effect on Carbon Nanotube-­‐Superacid Solutions Rooservelt Akume (Rice University), Anson Ma (CBEN) Single Walled Carbon Nanotubes (SWCNTs) exhibit extraordinary thermal, mechanical and electrical properties that allow them to be used in a variety of applications. For example, SWCNTs are known to have a modulus five times that of steel, a thermal conductivity ten times higher than silver, and a current carrying capacity a thousand times better than copper. However, these properties only exist on the nano-­‐scale. Processing fibers of SWCNTs is a major challenge because of attractive van der Waal forces between nanotubes that cause them to stick to each other. There is a strong need to process SWCNTs into macroscopic articles such as fibers and films whilst preserving their intrinsic properties on the nano-­‐scale. The approach involves using “superacids” which are found to be an excellent solvent for the otherwise difficult to process nanotubes. Neat SWCNT fibers have been successfully spun from SWCNT-­‐superacid solutions. From the processing viewpoint, there is scope to lower the viscosity and thus enhance the processability of spinning solutions by spinning at the elevated temperature. In this study, we investigated the effect of temperature, and more specifically whether elevated temperature would cause structural damage to SWCNTs. To this end, SWCNT acid solutions were mixed at 60 and 100 oC for 22.5 hours; Raman spectroscopy measurements were subsequently carried out to characterize the defect density before and after the heating. This project provides important information about the way in which SWCNTs can be processed into useful materials. Experimental results confirmed that SWCNT-­‐superacid solutions can be processed at high temperature without adversely damaging the SWCNTs. My target audiences are the world of professional rese