More Like this

1. Adding a “Design Thread” to Electrical and Computer Engineering Degree Programs: Motivation, Implementation, and Evaluation

   Cheville, R. A. ; Thompson, M. S. ; Thomas, S. ( July 2021 , ASEE annual conference exposition)

   null (Ed.)

   This article details the multi-year process of adding a “design thread” to our department’s electrical and computer engineering curricula. We use the conception of a “thread” to mean a sequence of courses that extend unbroken across each year of the undergraduate curriculum. The design thread includes a project-based introduction to the discipline course in the first year, a course in the second year focusing on measurement and fabrication, a course in the third year to frame technical problems in societal challenges, and culminates with our two-semester, client-driven fourth-year capstone design sequence. The impetus to create a design thread arose from preparation for an ABET visit where we identified a need for more “systems thinking” within the curriculum, particularly system decomposition and modularity; difficulty in having students make engineering evaluations of systems based on data; and students’ difficulty transferring skills in testing, measurement, and evaluation from in-class lab scenarios to more independent work on projects. We also noted that when working in teams, students operated more collectively than collaboratively. In other words, rather than using task division and specialization to carry out larger projects, students addressed all problems collectively as a group. This paper discusses the process through which faculty developed a shared conception of design to enable coherent changes to courses in the four year sequence and the political and practical compromises needed to create the design thread. To develop a shared conception of design faculty explored several frameworks that emphasized multiple aspects of design. Course changes based on elements of these frameworks included introducing design representations such as block diagrams to promote systems thinking in the first year and consistently utilizing representations throughout the remainder of the four year sequence. Emphasizing modularity through representations also enabled introducing aspects of collaborative teamwork. While students are introduced broadly to elements of the design framework in their first year, later years emphasize particular aspects. The second year course focuses on skills in fabrication and performance measurement while the third year course emphasizes problem context and users, in an iterative design process. The client-based senior capstone experience integrates all seven aspects of our framework. On the political and organizational side implementing the design thread required major content changes in the department’s introductory course, and freeing up six credit-hour equivalents, one and a half courses, in the curriculum. The paper discusses how the ABET process enabled these discussions to occur, other curricular changes needed to enable the design thread to be implemented, and methods which enabled the two degree programs to align faculty motivation, distribute the workload, and understand the impact the curricular changes had on student learning. 

   more » « less
2. Promoting Computational Thinking in Integrated Engineering Design and Physics Labs

   Lopez-Parra, R. D. ; Subramaniam, R. C. ; Morphew, J. W. ( January 2023 , ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings)

   Computational thinking has widely been recognized as a crucial skill for engineers engaged in problem-solving. Multidisciplinary learning environments such as integrated STEM courses are powerful spaces where computational thinking skills can be cultivated. However, it is not clear the best ways to integrate computational thinking instruction or how students develop computational thinking in those spaces. Thus, we wonder: To what extent does engaging students in integrated engineering design and physics labs impact their development of computational thinking? We have incorporated engineering design within a traditional introductory calculus-based physics lab to promote students’ conceptual understanding of physics while fostering scientific inquiry, mathematical modeling, engineering design, and computational thinking. Using a generic qualitative research approach, we explored the development of computational thinking for six teams when completing an engineering design challenge to propose an algorithm to remotely control an autonomous guided vehicle throughout a warehouse. Across five consecutive lab sessions, teams represented their algorithms using a flowchart, completing four iterations of their initial flowchart. 24 flowcharts were open coded for evidence of four computational thinking facets: decomposition, abstraction, algorithms, and debugging. Our results suggest that students’ initial flowcharts focused on decomposing the problem and abstracting aspects that teams initially found to be more relevant. After each iteration, teams refined their flowcharts using pattern recognition, algorithm design, efficiency, and debugging. The teams would benefit from having more feedback about their understanding of the problem, the relevant physics concepts, and the logic and efficiency of the flowcharts 

   more » « less
3. Designing, launching, and implementing high quality learning opportunities for students that advance scientific thinking

   https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21329  

   Kang, Hosun ; Windschitl, Mark ; Stroupe, David ; Thompson, Jessica ( May 2016 , Journal of Research in Science Teaching)

   Instructional tasks are key features of classroom practice, but little is known about how different components of tasks—such as selecting or designing tasks for a lesson, launching, and implementing them with students—shape the conditions for students’ intellectual engagement in science classrooms. Employing a qualitative multiple case study approach, we analyzed 57 science lessons taught by 19 first‐year teachers. We examined the potential for students’ intellectual work built into the tasks across the phases of instruction, and how the demand of the unfolding task deepened (or failed to deepen) students’ engagement in science. The findings suggest the importance of beginning a lesson with high quality instructional tasks—complex tasks that bear appropriate levels of epistemic uncertainty for a particular group of students in a particular moment. Beginning a lesson with high quality tasks; however, was insufficient by itself to ensure rigorous learning opportunities. With the use of complex tasks, higher quality opportunities to learn were observed in lessons in which: (i) the tasks were framed as a process of understanding contextualized phenomena; (ii) the specific disciplinary concepts in the task were related to big science ideas that transcended the activities themselves; and (iii) students’ implementation of these tasks were structured using tools that supported changes in thinking. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 53: 1316–1340, 2016

    

   more » « less
4. Defining and Assessing Systems Thinking in Diverse Engineering Populations

   Mosyjowski, E.A. ; Daly, S.R. ; Lattuca, L. ( January 2019 , Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Conference)

   Engineers are called to play an important role in addressing the complex problems of our global society, such as climate change and global health care. In order to adequately address these complex problems, engineers must be able to identify and incorporate into their decision making relevant aspects of systems in which their work is contextualized, a skill often referred to as systems thinking. However, within engineering, research on systems thinking tends to emphasize the ability to recognize potentially relevant constituent elements and parts of an engineering problem, rather than how these constituent elements and parts are embedded in broader economic, sociocultural, and temporal contexts and how all of these must inform decision making about problems and solutions. Additionally, some elements of systems thinking, such as an awareness of a particular sociocultural context or the coordination of work among members of a cross-disciplinary team, are not always recognized as core engineering skills, which alienates those whose strengths and passions are related to, for example, engineering systems that consider and impact social change. Studies show that women and minorities, groups underrepresented within engineering, are drawn to engineering in part for its potential to address important social issues. Emphasizing the importance of systems thinking and developing a more comprehensive definition of systems thinking that includes both constituent parts and contextual elements of a system will help students recognize the relevance and value of these other elements of engineering work and support full participation in engineering by a diverse group of students. We provide an overview of our study, in which we are examining systems thinking across a range of expertise to develop a scenario-based assessment tool that educators and researchers can use to evaluate engineering students’ systems thinking competence. Consistent with the aforementioned need to define and study systems thinking in a comprehensive, inclusive manner, we begin with a definition of systems thinking as a holistic approach to problem solving in which linkages and interactions of the immediate work with constituent parts, the larger sociocultural context, and potential impacts over time are identified and incorporated into decision making. In our study, we seek to address two key questions: 1) How do engineers of different levels of education and experience approach problems that require systems thinking? and 2) How do different types of life, educational, and work experiences relate to individuals’ demonstrated level of expertise in solving systems thinking problems? Our study is comprised of three phases. The first two phases include a semi-structured interview with engineering students and professionals about their experiences solving a problem requiring systems thinking and a think-aloud interview in which participants are asked to talk through how they would approach a given engineering scenario and later reflect on the experiences that inform their thinking. Data from these two phases will be used to develop a written assessment tool, which we will test by administering the written instrument to undergraduate and graduate engineering students in our third study phase. Our paper describes our study design and framing and includes preliminary findings from the first phase of our study. 

   more » « less
5. Student views of what counts as doing physics in the lab

   https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.Stump  

   Stump, Emily M. ; Holmes, N. G. ( September 2022 , 2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings)

   Frank, Brian W. ; Jones, Dyan L. ; Ryan, and Qing (Ed.)

   Numerous studies have identified gender inequity in how students divide roles in lab courses. Few studies, however, have probed how these inequities impact women's experimental physics identity development. In this work, we used closed-response surveys to investigate which lab tasks students view as part of "doing physics" and how these designations varied by gender. In both courses, we found that most students viewed working with the experimental apparatus, taking lab notes, doing data analysis, and thinking about the physics theory behind the experiment as part of doing physics. Only 50% of students, however, viewed managing the group progress as part of doing physics. While men and women's views did not vary in the first-semester lab course, in the third-semester course women were more likely to view notes and managing as part of doing physics than were men. Given that previous research has indicated that women are more likely to take on managing and note-taking roles than men, our results suggest that women may be receiving less recognition as physicists from their peers, which may hinder their experimental physics identity development. 

   more » « less