skip to main content

Title: Faculty Views of Undergraduate Intellectual Property Policies and Practices
Given that undergraduate engineering students are becoming more involved in research and entrepreneurial activities that can lead to the generation of intellectual property (IP), this study investigates faculty attitudes related to IP policies and practices associated with educating and guiding undergraduate students. We surveyed a sample of 143 faculty members from both engineering and entrepreneurship education to examine: (a) the extent and nature of faculty involvement in undergraduate IP; (b) issues confronting faculty as they relate to undergraduate IP; (c) ways to catalyze undergraduate involvement in the generation of IP; (d) indicators of success; (e) future changes; and (f) best practices. We found that the majority of faculty members who were involved in undergraduate IP perceived that unclear policies, a lack of information, and unclear ownership of inventions were the most significant obstacles when guiding and teaching students. Furthermore, unwritten policies, biased ownership of information toward universities, lack of legal assistance for undergraduate students placed undergraduate students in a gray area where legal policies were not sufficient. Faculty who had previously guided students through the patent process reported greater concerns about teaching students the values and the principles of protecting intellectual property than those who did not. In terms of more » the role universities should play in enhancing undergraduate IP generation, most participants agreed that universities should educate students about IP protection (87%) and entrepreneurship (71%). The three most highly rated success indicators in educating undergraduate IP development were the increasing number of students involved in real world innovation and invention and entrepreneurial activities and enhancing student involvement with industry. When asked how universities could mitigate issues related to student IP, six themes emerged from participants’ open-ended responses, including: university taking no claim on student IP; early education and training about intellectual property issues; consulting assistance from TTO; creation of entrepreneurial culture or ecosystem; and access to low cost legal advice. Faculty members surveyed had strong views about where potential problems occur, and fewer recommendations on what resources should be provided. From the data, it is clear that there is still much to be accomplished to clarify the extent to which universities should be involved in managing undergraduate intellectual property. With further research and understanding, best practices for undergraduate IP generation can be applied to avoid further IP challenges for faculty, students, and academic institutions. « less
Award ID(s):
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. An enormous reserve of information about the subglacial bedrock, tectonic and topographic evolution of Marie Byrd Land (MBL) exists within glaciomarine sediments of the Amundsen Sea shelf, slope and deep sea, and MBL marine shelf. Investigators of the NSF ICI-Hot and NSF Linchpin projects partnered with Arizona Laserchron Center to provide course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) for from groups who do not ordinarily find access points to Antarctic science. Our courses enlist BIPOC and gender-expansive undergraduates in studies of ice-rafted debris (IRD) and bedrock samples, in order to impart skills, train in the use of research instrumentation, help students to develop confidence in their scientific abilities, and collaboratively address WAIS research questions at an early academic stage. CUREs afford benefits to graduate researchers and postdoctoral scientists, also, who join in as instructional faculty: CUREs allow GRs and PDs to engage in teaching that closely ties to their active research, yet provides practical experience to strengthen the academic portfolio (Cascella & Jez, 2018). Team members also develop art-science initiatives that engage students and community members who may not ordinarily engage with science, forging connections that make science relatable. Re-casting science topics through art centers personal connections and humanizes science, to promotemore »understanding that goes beyond the purely analytical. Academic research shows that diverse undergraduates gain markedly from the convergence of art and science, and from involvement in collaborative research conducted within a CURE cohort, rather than as an individualized experience (e.g. Shanahan et al. 2022). The CUREs are offered as regular courses for credit, making access equitable via course enrollment. The course designation carries a legitimacy that is sought by students who balance academics with part-time employment. Course information is disseminated via STEM Bridge programs and/or an academic advising hub that reaches students from groups that are insufficiently represented within STEM and cryosphere science. CURE investigation of Amundsen Sea and WAIS problems is worthy objective because: 1) A variety of sample preparation, geochemical methods, and scientific best-practices can be imparted, while educating students about Antarctica’s geological configuration and role in the Earth climate system. 2) Individual projects that are narrowly defined can readily scaffold into collaborative science at the time of data synthesis and interpretation. 3) There is a high likelihood of scientific discovery that contributes to grant objectives. 4) Enrolled students will experience ambiguity and instrumentation setbacks alongside their faculty and instructors, and will likely have an opportunity to withstand/overcome challenges in a manner that trains students in complex problem solving and imparts resilience (St John et al., 2019). Based on our experiences, we consider CUREs as a means to create more inclusive and equitable spaces for learning to do research, and a basis for a broadening future WAIS community. Our groups have yet to assess student learning gains and STEM entry in a robust way, but we can report that two presenters at WAIS 2022 came from our 2021 CURE, and four polar science graduate researchers gained experience via CURE teaching. Data obtained by CURE students is contributing to our NSF projects’ aims to obtain isotope, age, and petrogenetic criteria with bearing on the subglacial bedrock geology, tectonic and landscape evolution, and ice sheet history of MBL. Cited and recommended works: Cascella & Jez, 2018, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00705 Gentile et al., 2017, doi: 10.17226/24622 Shanahan et al. 2022, Shortlidge & Brownell, 2016, doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1103 St. John et al. 2019, EOS, doi: 10.1029/2019EO127285.« less
  2. A key feature of the movement to create more entrepreneurial universities is incentivizing researchers to move discoveries beyond the laboratory and into society. This places additional expectations on Ph.D. students and faculty in science and engineering disciplines, who are encouraged to explore the commercialization of their research to promote the role of universities in innovation and job creation. A major barrier to this movement is that traditional Ph.D. training does not prepare researchers to participate in entrepreneurial activity, and as such its relevance to scientific work may not be evident. In this paper, we propose a course model for science and technology entrepreneurship education that has been designed to enable academic researchers to play a more active and informed role in the commercialization of their discovery. Its curricular foundation is a set of 14 factors that address the following four priorities: (1) technology readiness and timing, (2) intellectual property pathway decisions, (3) engagement with the entrepreneurial ecosystem, and (4) personal career choices. We describe the rationale for the course, its content and outcomes.
  3. Abstract

    The main purpose of this paper is to share the Mentoring for INnovative Design Solutions (MINDS) Scholars Program developed by Alpha Eta Mu Beta, the International Biomedical Engineering Honor Society. The program’s goals are to (1) introduce biomedical engineering students to an open-ended design experience as part of interuniversity teams with industry and faculty mentors, and (2) develop the ability to create designs considering clinical translatability on teams with different backgrounds and areas of expertise. MINDS uses an experiential learning approach to (1) enrich student curricular experiences through inter-institutional collaboration, (2) build engineering design skills, including three key design considerations for clinical/commercial success: intellectual property protection, regulatory strategy, and market identification; and (3) emphasize the importance of end-user considerations. From 2015 to 2022, MINDS has involved 131 students from 50 universities and 22 faculty and industry mentors. Pre- and post-program surveys show statistically significant improvements in understanding of the design process, regulatory strategy, intellectual property protection, market definition, and key product requirements and features. Students also improved communication and teamwork skills. Many students indicated that MINDS participation made them more likely to choose careers that involve product development and/or entrepreneurship. Students attained a working ability to integrate market needs,more »regulatory strategy, and intellectual property considerations into the design process. They also further developed soft skills, such as conflict resolution, time management, and effective communication through the challenges of inter-institutional collaboration. Additionally, the program heightened their awareness of how biomedical devices and technologies can benefit society.

    « less
  4. Broadening participation in engineering is critical given the gap between the nation’s need for engineering graduates and its production of them. Efforts to spark interest in engineering among PreK-12 students have increased substantially in recent years as a result. However, past research has demonstrated that interest is not always sufficient to help students pursue engineering majors, particularly for rural students. In many rural communities, influential adults (family, friends, teachers) are often the primary influence on career choice, while factors such as community values, lack of social and cultural capital, limited course availability, and inadequate financial resources act as potential barriers. To account for these contextual factors, this project shifts the focus from individual students to the communities to understand how key stakeholders and organizations support engineering as a major choice and addresses the following questions: RQ1. What do current undergraduate engineering students who graduated from rural high schools describe as influences on their choice to attend college and pursue engineering as a post-secondary major? RQ2. How does the college choice process differ for rural students who enrolled in a 4-year university immediately after graduating from high school and those who transferred from a 2-year institution? RQ3. How do community membersmore »describe the resources that serve as key supports as well as the barriers that hinder support in their community? RQ4. What strategies do community members perceive their community should implement to enhance their ability to support engineering as a potential career choice? RQ5. How are these supports transferable or adaptable by other schools? What community-level factors support or inhibit transfer and adaptation? To answer the research questions, we employed a three-phase qualitative study. Phase 1 focused on understanding the experiences and perceptions of current [University Name] students from higher-producing rural schools. Analysis of focus group and interview data with 52 students highlighted the importance of interest and support from influential adults in students’ decision to major in engineering. One key finding from this phase was the importance of community college for many of our participants. Transfer students who attended community college before enrolling at [University Name] discussed the financial influences on their decision and the benefits of higher education much more frequently than their peers. In Phase 2, we used the findings from Phase 1 to conduct interviews within the participants’ home communities. This phase helped triangulate students’ perceptions with the perceptions and practices of others, and, equally importantly, allowed us to understand the goals, attitudes, and experiences of school personnel and local community members as they work with students. Participants from the students’ home communities indicated that there were few opportunities for students to learn more about engineering careers and provided suggestions for how colleges and universities could be more involved with students from their community. Phase 3, scheduled for Spring 2020, will bring the findings from Phases 1 and 2 back to rural communities via two participatory design workshops. These workshops, designed to share our findings and foster collaborative dialogue among the participants, will enable us to explore factors that support or hinder transfer of findings and to identify policies and strategies that would enhance each community’s ability to support engineering as a potential career choice.« less
  5. Miller, Eva (Ed.)
    The recent outbreak of COVID-19, considered as being a lethal pandemic by the World Health Organization, has caused profound changes in the educational system within the U.S and across the world. Overnight, universities and their educators had to switch to a largely online teaching format, which challenged their capacity to deliver learning content effectively to STEM students. Students were forced to adapt to a new learning environment in the midst of challenges in their own lives due to the COVID-19 effects on society and professional expectations. The main purpose of this paper is to investigate faculty perceptions of STEM student experiences during COVID-19. Through a qualitative methodology consisting of one-hour zoom interviews administered to 32 STEM faculty members from six U.S. Universities nationwide, faculty narratives regarding student and faculty experiences during COVID-19 were obtained. The qualitative research approach involved identifying common themes across faculty experiences and views in these narratives. Some of the categories of emerging themes associated with faculty perceptions on student and faculty experiences included: student struggles and challenges, student cheating and the online environment, faculty and student adaptability, faculty and student needs and support, and university resources and support. Best practices to facilitate online teaching and learningmore »employed by STEM faculty were also discussed. Key findings revealed that students and faculty had both positive and negative experiences during COVID-19. Additionally, there was a greater need for consistent policies to improve the online student learning experiences. Recommendations to improve STEM student experiences include increased institutional resources and collaboration between faculty and the university administrators to provide a coherent online learning environment. Preliminary findings also provide insights to enhance institutional adaptability and resilience for improving STEM student experiences during future pandemics. Future research should continue to explore institutional adaptation strategies that enhance STEM student learning during pandemics.« less