Ticketed event: $25.00 advanced registration and $35.00 on site registration
$25.00 advanced registration and $35.00 on site registration
For the fifth year in a row, the Community Engagement Division is coordinating a local community engagement event prior to the ASEE Annual conference in Tampa. This year, participants will contribute to the on-going collaborations between University of South Florida engineering faculty and the Florida Aquarium in Tampa. This event will be an outreach activity, bringing students from local communities in for the day to explore many of the exciting links between engineering and the aquarium. In addition to engagement with local students, participants will have some time to explore and share how faculty at the University of South Florida and others are connecting with their local communities through curricular and co-curricular community engagements. This event will provide an opportunity for novices to community engagement to interact with and learn from experts with decades of experience exploring the complexities of developing effective and transformative academic-community collaborations. This event will take place on the Saturday afternoon before the conference and will cost $25 to participate.
Dr. Nathan E Canney P.E.
Nathan is a scholar engaged in studying community engagement, social responsibility, and ethics. He is currently a structural engineering, and was formerly an instructor at Seattle University.
Dr. Maya A Trotz
Maya is a professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of South Florida. Her interests are interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, applied and seek to forge non-traditional university partnerships with local and international entities, especially those in the Caribbean. She received the 2014 Award for Outstanding Contribution to Environmental Engineering and Science Education from the Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors (AEESP), partly for her ability to integrate research with K-12 and university education.
Available from Saturday to Wednesday
Leave your thoughts on the ASEE Living Wall. Walls from year to year will be collected and displayed at future conferences.
Join us at this special session, hosted by ASEE President Stephanie Farrell, to learn what's so unique about ASEE and how you can get involved as a volunteer in our dynamic organization.
Now in its third year, this gathering of local gastro-delights has become a conference highlight. Get the conference started as you gather with friends to sample Tampa-created food and drink.
Ticketed event: Engineering and Engineering Technology Chairs Conclave - $200.00 advanced registration and $250.00 on site registration
The ASEE Chairs Conclave is an exclusive forum for engineering and engineering technology chairs to exchange ideas and experiences, talk through challenges, and build working relationships. Designed by chairs, for chairs, this one-day event provides academic chairpersons with the knowledge and opportunities to enhance their leadership skills and encourage the success of their institutional units.
Learn more at https://chairsconclave.asee.org
Free ticketed event
ONLY For First Time Conference Attendees and New Members as of January 1, 2019
Come hear what ASEE Membership and the Annual Conference is all about.
Presented by the VP of Membership Gary Steffen
Seating is limited and tickets will be sold on a first-come, first-served basis.
One of our most popular events.
Mix and Mingle with your friends and colleagues at the ASEE Division Mixer, where the different divisions will be showcased at this special event.
Join your colleagues at the Grand Opening of the Exhibit Hall, new this year with a poster session from the best-paper nominees. Our exhibit hall is packed with exciting products, solutions, and technologies, with new and exciting content year after year. Roam the expansive space while enjoying refreshments, catching up with old friends and making new ones.
Participants to date:
22377 Inclusion of Sustainability Analysis in a National Airport Design Competition Aerospace Division Mary E. Johnson
22596 Student Assessment of Active Learning Elements in 100-level Introductory Biomedical Engineering Course Biomedical Engineering Division Nicole Lauren Ramo
21128 Partnering to Develop Educational Software Applications: A Four-year Retrospective Study Computers in Education Division David Reeping
23850 Improving Vertical Axis Wind Turbine (VAWT) Performance Energy Conversion and Conservation Division Patrick A. Tebbe
22551 Effective Methods of Engineering Information Literacy: Initial Steps of a Systematic Literature Review and Observations About the Literature Engineering Libraries Division Margaret Phillips
23435 Implementing Lean Practices in an Academic Department: A Case Study Engineering Management Division Byron G. Garry
23813 Creating a New Engineering Technology Program Using the UbD Approach Engineering Technology Division Nancy K Sundheim
22069 The IMPACT Mentoring Program: Exploring the Benefits of Mentoring for Emeriti Faculty Faculty Development Constituency Committee Sylvia L. Mendez
22246 Examining the Relationships Between How Students Construct Stakeholders and the Ways Students Conceptualize Harm from Engineering Design Liberal Education/Engineering & Society Division Alexis Papak
23835 Improving Student Engagement in a Senior-Level Manufacturing Course for Mechanical Engineering Students Manufacturing Division Joshua Gargac
21908 Measuring Student Learning of Crystal Structures Using Computer-based Visualizations Materials Division Susan P. Gentry
21730 Competency Based Assessment in Dynamics Mechanical Engineering Division Kurt M DeGoede
21086 The Evolution of College Credit Recommendations for the United States Army by the American Council on Education Military and Veterans Division George D Ford
22911 Lowman's Model Goes Back to the Movies New Engineering Educators Division David A Saftner
21313 The Re-Energize Undergraduate Research Program in the Third and Final Year Two-Year College Division Dan G. Dimitriu
Join your friends and colleagues as we jump-start our day with a renewing stretch and meditation class!
Join your friends and colleagues at our Monday Plenary.
As we close our “125 Years at the Heart of Engineering Education” anniversary celebration, an acting troupe will offer a dramatic representation of ASEE through its recent years. The troupe is directed by Jeffrey Steiger, known for his unique theatrical presentations of academe-themed issues, and who presented ASEE’s early years at the 2018 Monday Plenary.
An engaging keynote speaker will follow the acting troupe.
National Student STEM Winners
Dr. Emily Boyd
Washington University of St. Louis
ASEE’s exhibitors welcome you back for food and drink to start the day. Whether it's lab equipment, quality textbooks for your classes, or cutting-edge software, you'll likely find something interesting in the hall.
This event is complimentary for all attendees.
Two Year Model Design Competition
Stop lecturing about active learning! Integrating good teaching practices into ASEE conference sessions
As a leading organization in the field of engineering education, ASEE and its members continue to support advances in engineering education scholarship and research. We have helped to change learning environments in many engineering classrooms to support more active and engaging experiences for our students. How might we explore incorporating a similar range of presentation modes and styles at ASEE?
Join us at the 2019 Interdivisional Town Hall to discuss strategies for changing the culture of the ASEE Annual Conference by incorporating more active and engaging sessions, such as the recent trend toward having Postcard Sessions. In this spirit, and in keeping with the tone of past meetings, the Town Hall Meeting will be an interactive workshop that will cross divisions. We will begin addressing the items below:
• Share suggestions for ASEE technical sessions that incorporate modern and exciting presentation techniques.
• Generate ideas for making ASEE presentations more audience-focused
• Compile different session types that foster interactivity and engagement (lightning talks, round tables, demonstrations, live polling, postcard session, etc.)
The Interdivisional Town Hall has been an exciting way for us to unsilo our communities and work together across the entire ASEE membership. Please join us this year to share your thoughts and ideas.
Interdivisional Town Hall Planning Committee
Lynn Albers (ECCD)
Atsushi Akera (LEES)
Doug Bullock (Math)
Alan Cheville (ERM, TELPhE)
Stephanie Cutler (Assessment)
John Estell (First-Year Programs)
Mary Frank (Architectural Engineering)
Steve Frezza (TELPhE)
Gnaneswar Gude (Graduate)
Herbert Hess (ECCD)
Susannah Howe (DEED)
Timothy Kennedy (Community Engagement)
Elien Lane (ECCD)
Jim Lewis (CoED)
Deanna Matthews (E&PP)
Russ Meier (ECE)
Mani Mina (TELPhE)
Daniel Oerther (Engineering & Public Policy)
Rick Olson (Industrial Engineering)
Gurlovleen Rathore (Student Division)
Beena Sukumaran (WIED)
Joe Tranquillo (Biomedical)
Susan Walden (Diversity)
Julia Williams (LEES)
Escape the Tampa heat with a late-afternoon treat! Nothing says summer like a refreshing glass of sweet, cold lemonade. Escape the hot June temps and see what's “hot” on the Exhibit Hall Floor.
This event is complimentary for all attendees.
Join your friends and colleagues as we jump-start our day with a renewing stretch and meditation class!
Free ticketed event
Annual Academy of Fellows breakfast
This event is for ASEE Fellows only
Join your friends and colleagues as we recognize the 2018 Best Overall PIC Paper, Best Overall Zone Paper and Best Diversity Paper Winners!
BEST OVERALL PIC PAPER
Case Study of a Blind Student Learning Engineering Graphics
Dr. Steven C. Zemke, Whitworth University
BEST OVERALL ZONE PAPER:
Assessment of Progressive Learning of Ethics in Engineering Students Based on the Model of Domain Learning-
Dr. Ivan E. Esparragoza, Penn State University
Dr. Sadan Kulturel-Konak, Penn State University
Dr. Abdullah Konak, Penn State University
Dr. Gül E. Kremer, Iowa State University
Dr. Kristen A Lee, Menlo College
BEST DIVERSITY PAPER
Translating theory on color-blind racism to an engineering education context: illustrations from the field of engineering education
Authors: Alice Pawley, Purdue University, Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego, Renata A Revelo, University of Illinois at Chicago
MOST OUTSTANDING TEACHING AWARD WINNER
FEATURING KEYNOTE SPEAKER
SaLisa L Berrien
Founder and CEO of COI Energy, has over twenty-five years of experience in the electric power and smart grid space. From working in vertically integrated utilities (PP&L and PECO Energy) prior to deregulation to ConEdison Solutions a deregulated energy services company, and then on to Smart Grid, Clean Tech, Big Data Analytics, and SaaS Solutions, SaLisa has had a diverse career in the energy space. In her early career, she sold the first electric vehicle (G-Van) in the NE region. She later went on to help EnerNOC move to #1 Demand Response company in the industry. She believes if you do the right thing for your customers, they will remember you for that. She and COI Energy practice the Platinum Rule, "Do unto your customer as they would have you to do unto them.”
SaLisa is also the Founder and Board Chair of STRIVE Inc. A 501c3 charitable organization founded in
1995 which focuses on STEM leadership development training for students in 3rd thru 12th grades. In 2013, she established COI Ladder Institute to focus on delivering leadership and empowerment services to millennials and women. Annually, COI Ladder Institute hosts a Women’s Business Leadership Retreat Conference in Martha’s Vineyard.
Since 1996, SaLisa established several scholarship funds for high school and college students. Her first scholarship was named in honor of her maternal and paternal grandparents for paving the way so that she might have a better chance at life. In 2004, she established the Karl H. Lewis Engineering Impact Endowment at the University of Pittsburgh for students of African descent enrolled in Engineering.
SaLisa holds a degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh and an Executive MBA from Saint Joseph’s University. She’s been a guest speaker at various conferences and events including SXSW, NSBE, the University of Pittsburgh, Florida’s Women in Energy Leadership Forum, and Morgan Stanley’s Sustainable Futures Summit.
One of SaLisa's core values is philanthropy. She believes that to whom much is given, much is required. Her mission in life is to positively impact the space she occupies by leaving it better off than it was when she found it.
ASEE Division Poster Sessions are available for perusing over lunch. And if there's a booth you've yet to explore, this closing Exhibit Hall session will be your last chance.
This event is complimentary for all attendees.
Join your friends and colleagues as we jump-start our day with a renewing stretch and meditation class!
The world faces ever increasing challenges, and engineering holds the key to the solution of many of them. But the nature of the challenges is such that they cannot be solved by the same kinds of minds that created them. Fortunately, the fields of engineering are ripe for a reformation that could lead to genuine change. Engineering education has opened up new horizons for interdisciplinary thinking, but more than a diversity of disciplines is not only necessary, but keenly wanting.
Gender and ethnic diversity in engineering has faced challenges over the last 50 years, with undergraduate engineering programs averaging about 18% female and less than 10% African American/Native American/Latinx over much of that time. Women and minorities in engineering, recruitment and retention, has been the subject of research nearly as long. In fact, we know what to do to increase the percentage of women engaging in engineering. We have some pretty good ideas about what we need to do to change our field and ourselves so that we are welcoming to people of different ethnicities. What we need to do now is find ways to get people to convert the research to actual practice. Starting in pre-kindergarten, in both formal and informal education, and continuing to and through university programs, educators must embrace the techniques that our own research has shown us are effective.
As a Teaching Associate Professor of Engineering and Education, Director of Women in Engineering and Director of The Engineering Place for K-12 Outreach as NC State University, Dr. Laura Bottomley has engaged in teaching in every grade K-20. At each of these levels, in and outside of class, she has made it a practice to use research-based practices aimed at encouraging gender diversity. As an example, engineering summer camps under her tutelage have between 35-50% females and 30-40% underrepresented minorities, and the incoming engineering class has risen in its percentage of women to 28% with no change in admission processes.
Dr. Laura Bottomley
To understand the persisting gender and race disparities found in bodies of engineering students and professional engineers, engineering education equity researchers have mostly drawn on theories and methods of psychology. But increasingly, and from necessity, they are now engaging theories coming from the humanities and cultural studies. These include gender, race, and class theories, and less commonly, queer, crip, and intersectionality theories. Such disciplinary boundary crossing between engineering education and cultural studies research provides a rich opportunity to rethink the directions of not only engineering education equity research, but engineering education research altogether. Not coincidentally, it occurs at a time of a global awakening to inequities spurred by the #metoo movement, #BlackLivesMatter organizing, and youth mobilizing against gun violence, particularly that inflicted on communities of color. But the ideas emerging from this work are profoundly unsettling in their questioning of long taken-for-granted assumptions, resulting in increased targeted harassment of STEM equity scholars, including engineering education equity scholars.
In this talk, I outline where attention of the field of engineering education equity research has so far been directed, and what it has accomplished. I then show how research that isn't intended to focus on engineering education equity paradoxically results in making arguments about equity (or its absence) through its very silence on these issues. Standard practice in such studies is to acknowledge their reliance on demographically limited populations (usually predominantly White and Asian/Asian-American men). But also standard is the failure to explain the implications of making research claims on such limited populations. This practice turns the voices of these limited populations into a voice representing engineers in general. This effect problematically elevates the voices of majority people over minoritized people, casts the issues of diversity, inclusion and equity as "not our problem," and solidifies the logics that maintain colorblind or genderblind theories as hegemonic. This amounts to an effective and insidious cultural program to maintain power relations in engineering education as profoundly inequitable.
Drawing on analogies from other fields, and supported by my recent work funded by NSF CAREER and published in JEE, I will demonstrate how important it is for majority researchers -- people who identify as men, white, cis-gendered, class-privileged, able-bodied people, citizens, settlers, and individuals at the intersection of these and other categories -- to analyse the majority position of power overtly in their research that they explicitly focus on other topics. Those of us in such majority social positions need to position ourselves in a visible, audible, and functional coalition with broader equity efforts and movements in order to disrupt the dominant logic that functions to maintain minoritized groups in an oppressed position while simultaneously blaming them for their oppression. I call on those who are positioned in majority groups, as I am, to "come get your people," to join me in turning our collective research attention on articulating and theorizing majority positions such as whiteness, masculinity, ableism, and a settler mindset to see how we devastatingly maintain engineering education as a predominantly white, male, and inequitable space. We must do this in order to then reconceive engineering education in more liberative and just ways. Because, folks, it's about power relations, and we are the ones who maintain them thus.
Dr. Alice Pawley
Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education and an affiliate faculty member in the Gender, Women’s and Sexuality Studies Program and the Division of Environmental and Ecological Engineering at Purdue University. Prof. Pawley's goal through her work at Purdue is to help people, including the engineering education profession, develop a vision of engineering education as more inclusive, engaged, and socially just. She runs the Feminist Research in Engineering Education (FREE, formerly RIFE, group), whose diverse projects and alumni are described at feministengineering.org. She received a CAREER award in 2010 and a PECASE award in 2012 for her project researching the stories of undergraduate engineering women and men of color and white women. She has received ASEE-ERM’s best paper award for her CAREER research, and the Denice Denton Emerging Leader award from the Anita Borg Institute, both in 2013. She was co-PI of Purdue’s ADVANCE program from 2008-2014, focusing on the underrepresentation of women in STEM faculty positions. She helped found, fund, and grow the PEER Collaborative, a peer mentoring group of early career and recently tenured faculty and research staff primarily evaluated based on their engineering education research productivity.
Via the medium of interactive theater, experience a culturally Deaf engineering education space conducted primarily in American Sign Language (ASL). What might engineering look like if Deafness and signing were the norm - i.e. what different insights or approaches might Deaf engineers have taken in developing it as a field? What would it be like if hearing/speech was an exception to be “accommodated” in engineering classrooms built for visual communication?
Participants will experience firsthand how cultural assumptions, communication mediation, and other factors impact the conference for them. the audience will then have the opportunity to reflect on and discuss that experience together. The audience will explore our own habits and assumptions around what engineering education is, who is able to participate, and in what ways participation is enabled, extending the conversation beyond Deafness/disability to broader issues of representation and engineering culture.
Feedback from attendee evaluations of a similar session at FIE 2018 shared with permission:
"This is one of the best sessions I've ever been to, out of maybe 50 conferences over 25 years... I'd do this again - every few years."
"I have attended FIE for seven years and have won the Helen Plants Award [for best special session]. This is - unequivocally - the best FIE session that I have attended."
"The presenters were authentic and transparent, willing to share and synthesize their experiences into lessons."
"A completely different experience to anything I've seen before. Placed in a world where I am a hearing minority, then a chance to have an honest conversation about that experience... relevant for all diversity, not just Deaf."
"This was personal and the whole room cared. Which I think is really attractive in this space where academics often don't interact about deeply and humanly caring about what we talk about... this format worked so well."
"Interactive, fun, thought provoking. Totally new topic and innovative. Wow! One of the best conference sessions I've ever attended."
Mel Chua is an electrical/computer engineer and engineering education researcher who is also an auditory low-pass filter and multimodal polyglot. In other words, she’s Deaf and uses ASL. Mel also spends a lot of time explaining that she does not study hearing aids. She does not develop sign language gloves. She does not do research on how to support Deaf engineering students. She thinks all these things are important and is glad other people are doing that work. This is not the work Mel does.
Mel wholeheartedly agrees that ASL is a beautiful language, and that it’s important to discuss accessibility… and would like to spend more time geeking out with people about teaching electrical/computer engineering or doing research on open source communities, faculty development, and engineering education ontologies instead. Mel has been at Olin College and Purdue University’s PhD program in Engineering Education as a student as well as Olin College and Rochester Institute of Technology as a researcher. She is working to develop the practice of prototyping alternate-universe engineering curricular cultures and occasionally draws engineering education research comics.
Mr. Ian Smith
Ian Smith works as a software engineer in San Francisco. He is Deaf and a wheelchair user. Ian studied Computer Science at MIT and Linguistics at Gallaudet University, and recently served as the content expert in Computer Science for the ASLCore project, an initiative to develop academic vocabulary in ASL for college-level subjects and beyond. Ian is the engineer behind elevatoralerts.com, a project using public transit APIs to notify disabled riders of real-time station accessibility. He also co-founded Project Alloy, a nonprofit that sponsors conference attendance for people who are early in their careers and from groups historically underrepresented in technology.
Given the recent focus on emerging technologies, the anticipated shift in engineering education is toward a more socially-relevant, outward-facing engineering curricula. Such curricula emphasize multidisciplinary learning, societal impact, experiential learning (within and outside of the traditional classroom), and a global mindset. The discussion will introduce the ethical, legal, and social impacts of autonomous vehicles and include an overview of some of the following topics: privacy, security, licensing, infrastructure, mixed automation, workforce disruption, economic impact, failure with human takeover, safety, and ethical deployment of automated vehicles.
The session will focus on the values of a liberal arts education in developing solutions for 21st century emerging technologies, particularly the implications associated with a driverless future. Relevant topics, including, but not limited to the following, will be addressed:
• Growth in driverless technologies
• Explosion of data-driven software development
• Innovation in vehicle design (electric, composite bodies that are 3D printed)
• Societal disruption involving vehicle ownership/parking, auto industry employment, privacy, and business models
Edward Straub is the Director of the SAE Office of Automation, where he is tasked with coordinating industry and internal business units involved with issues and technology related to highly automated and connected vehicles. His office provides a holistic view of emerging technologies, business models, and impacts on the socio-technical landscape.
Prior to joining SAE, he was one of the first employees hired at the American Center for Mobility, a bespoke proving ground for connected and automated vehicles, where he served as the technical program director and chief safety officer. Dr. Straub was also a civilian program manager and researcher for the US Army where he designed and led an SAE Level-4 automated vehicle program deployed on a US military base.
Dr. Straub served two combat tours in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom as a Marine Corps Officer with the 1st Marine Division in Ar Ramadi and later attached to the Army Corps of Engineers, where he served as the senior program manager responsible for the country-wide reconstruction of healthcare infrastructure, government buildings, and schools.
Dr. Straub earned his Doctor of Management from Case Western Reserve University in 2015, an MBA 2002, and his Bachelor of Science in 1994. His primary area of interest is system design and “non-user” interaction with automated vehicles.
We all hold mental models of educational systems and to some extent these models affect both our day to day activities and the ways we envision the future of engineering education. Such models include the metaphor of a leaky pipeline common in policy documents about STEM education. This model along with engineering beliefs about rigor give rise to concerns about the efficiency of education. For example this pipeline model has led to the view that retention issues (leaks) can be fixed through appropriate investments (patches). Such models are very organization or system focused, drawing attention to how educational programs are constructed and, if broken, repaired. Other models give rise to different belief systems. One of these views education in which students follow a diverse set of learning pathways to a degree. This model is increasingly popular since it helps to explain ways in which the rapidly growing population of non-traditional students assemble credentials. By focusing on students and identifying how individuals navigate existing systems it steers attention to potential opportunities to make educational systems work for individuals.
Another model that is gaining increasing interest in engineering educations is that of an ecosystem. Ecosystem models arise from intersubjective and ecological views of education. These perspectives recognize that learning occurs in networks that span scales from the cellular neural networks of the brain up to distributed knowledge embodied in social networks of people. Such networks can be broadly characterized as complex adaptive ecosystems in which individuals occupy and transition between different niches and information flow and diversity maintain organizational resilience. Emergence, or novel forms of self-organization with new patterns and properties, can arise in complex systems. Such emergence challenges conventional notions of education; the idea of education as emergence implies unpredictability, a perspective anathema to the view that engineering education produces engineers with defined capabilities who can serve societal needs.
Dr. Alan Cheville
R. Alan Cheville received degrees in electrical engineering at Rice University, specializing in ultrafast optical spectroscopy. After postdoctoral work in ultrafast optoelectronics, he joined the faculty of Oklahoma State University in 1998. He continued his work on high speed THz optoelectronics—supported by funding from the Department of Energy, the Army Research Office, and the National Science Foundation including a CAREER award—in areas such as THz time domain spectroscopy of molecular vapors and flames, pulsed ranging, and optical tunneling. During his time at Oklahoma State University he slowly transitioned his research interests from optoelectronics to engineering education, with an initial focus on effectively integrating research-based pedagogies into engineering curricula in the areas of photonics and electromagnetics. He led a five year, $1.2M NSF-sponsored department-level reform project at OSU that sought to integrate relevant design experiences and mathematical competencies across the curriculum. Following the conclusion of this project, he served for two and a half years as the program director for engineering education in the National Science Foundation’s Engineering Directorate. During this time he developed several funding programs, served as NSF liaison to a Federal working group on games, as well as on several internal working groups. He was recognized by the Director’s Award for Program Management Excellence. He currently serves as chair of the Electrical & Computer Engineering at Bucknell University, an associate editor of IEEE Transactions on Education and the Journal of Engineering Education, and on several advisory boards. He is currently interested in engineering design education, engineering education policy, and the epistemology of engineering.
The body of literature about community engagement in engineering and the benefits for student learning has grown significantly in recent years. Additionally, more and more students are participating in engineering service projects that place them in direct contact with communities oftentimes very different from their own. In some cases, these projects also end up assigning to students positions of authority as the technical ‘experts.’ Voices of diverse publics --speaking to community experiences with engineers and visions of what constitutes ‘beneficial’ community engagement--have continued, however, to be starkly absent from the literature.
This panel is based on the following premise: That the engineering profession’s systemic silencing of community voices can have severe and adverse impacts, reaching well beyond engineering education. These impacts can play a foundational role in shaping engineers’ understandings of questions as basic as a) who “the public” is, b) who engineers are vis-a-vis “the public,” and c) what it means and looks like to “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.” If engineers lack a platform that highlights community voices, a mindset that supports engineers to listen to those voices, and a toolkit that allows engineers to refine their practice on the basis of those voices, they are left vulnerable to carrying out interventions that the very publics they aim to serve deem inadequate, inappropriate, or even harmful. This means that engineering education and, by extension, the culture of the engineering profession at large can place engineers in a paradoxical bind by, on the one hand, instructing them to “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” while, on the other hand, leaving them sub-optimally equipped to engage with diverse communities in a manner that these communities experience as beneficial. Such a bind can perpetuate paternalistic engineering practice and, we suggest, is especially dangerous when communities are in crisis and the power differential between experts and publics tends to be greatest (e.g., during environmental contamination events, post-natural-disaster catastrophes, and product recalls).
Dr. Nathan E Canney P.E.
Licensed professional engineer (civil engineering), with extensive experience researching social responsibility and ethics education among students, faculty, and practicing engineers
Dr. Yanna Lambrinidou
Yanna Lambrinidou is Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Science and Technology in Society at Virginia Tech. She is the founder of the non-profit organization Parents for Nontoxic Alternatives. Her research on the 2001-2004 Washington, DC lead-in-water crisis and its aftermath helped expose wrongdoing on the part of engineers and scientists in local and federal government agencies. Dr. Lambrinidou co-founded Virginia Tech's graduate class "Engineering Ethics and the Public." Her "Learning to Listen" module - which employs an ethnographic approach to ethics instruction - was recognized by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) as exemplary in infusing ethics into engineering education. In 2014-2015, Dr. Lambrinidou served on the EPA National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC) Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) workgroup, and was the group's sole dissenting member. In 2016, Dr. Lambrinidou testified at the US House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing on "The Flint Water Crisis: Lessons for Protecting America’s Children." She serves on the Policy and Infrastructure subcommittees of Michigan Governor Rick Snyder's Flint Water Interagency Coordinating Committee (FWICC), which aims to develop long-term solutions to Flint's drinking water crisis.
Please note: Best Overall PIC, Zone and Diversity Paper will be presented at the Tuesday Plenary
BEST PIC I PAPER:
Immersive Virtual Training Environment for Teaching Single and Multi-Queing Theory Industrial Engineering Queuing Theory Concepts
Michael Andre Hamilton
Authors: Parker Jones. Emily S Wall, Vidanelage Lakshika Dayarathna, Debisree Ray, Ginnie Shih En Hsu, Raed Jaradat
BEST PIC II PAPER:
Development of a Survey Instrument to Evaluate Student Systems Engineering Ability
Authors: Diane Constance Aloisio. Karen Marais, Hanxi Sun
BEST PIC IV PAPER:
Faculty Perceptions of Challenges to Educating Engineering and Computing Students About Ethics and Societal Impacts
Authors: Madeline Polmear, Angela R Bielefeldt, Daniel Knight, Chris Swan, Nathan E Canney
BEST PIC V PAPER:
Is There a Connection Between Classroom Practices and Attitudes Towards Student-Centered Learning in Engineering?
Authors: Lydia Ross, Eugene Judson, Casey Jane Ankeny, Stephen J Krause, Robert J Culbertson, Keith D. Hjelmstad, Lindy Hamilton Mayled, Kristi Glassmeyer, James A Middleton, Kara Lea Hjelmstad
BEST ZONE II PAPER
Comparison of Student and Faculty Perceptions of Intent and Effectiveness of Course Evaluations in an Engineering Curriculum-
Authors: John Michael Van Teeck & Thomas P. James Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
BEST ZONE III PAPER
Using the SCALE-UP Method to Create an Engaging First Year Engineering Course
Authors: David J. Ewing-The University of Texas at Arlington
BEST ZONE IV PAPER
Strengthening Community College Engineering Programs through Alternative Learning Strategies Developing an Online Engineering Graphics Course
Authors: Amelito Enriquez. Canada College, Erik Dunmire, Marin College, Thomas Rebol, Monterray Penninsula College, Nicholas Langhoff, Skyline College, Tracy Huang, Cañada College
Over the past two years, through survey analysis and series of workshops, the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), with NSF support, took an in-depth look at engineering societies’ role and contributions to improving the effectiveness and quality of undergraduate education.
The project offered an opportunity to examine our understanding of the ways engineering societies are involved in undergraduate engineering education, including an opportunity for the societies, together with universities and industry, to share insights, learn what others are doing, and explore possible collaborations.
More in-depth workshops included a) planning a joint competition for undergraduate students based on the NAE Grand Challenges for Engineering, b) the role of societies in defining “impact” on the engineering profession as a criterion for assessing faculty success, c) the role of societies in promoting diversity and inclusion, and d) the role of societies in helping align engineering education with the pace and direction of change in industry.
The project provided an important set of insights on the role of engineering societies in engineering education. Through background analysis, a commissioned a survey of engineering societies and a national workshop, the project highlighted what societies are doing with respect to engineering education – and flagged important issues.
Follow-up workshops were held to explore certain topics in greater detail: 1st workshop (Student Competitions) started the process on discussions of a joint competition – one outcome was an AAES database on competitions so that societies know what others are doing.
A 2nd workshop (Faculty Impact) raised awareness of alternative ways of understanding faculty “impact” and the role societies might play.
A 3rd workshop (Diversity & Inclusion) raised awareness of issues of diversity and inclusion – including a deeper understanding of the issue and to highlight actions societies are taking (including the innovative way AGU is addressing the issue of harassment as scientific misconduct.
The goal is to raise awareness of the ways that societies can help better align industry and academia (education).
The lecture is relevant to the activities of academia, industry, and engineering societies. The lecture also advances the goal of the project to share the insights gained with a wide range of stakeholders and thereby stimulate possible follow on activities.
Project Leadership and Steering Committee
Chair (NAE) Ransburg Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
John A. Edwardson
Dean Emerita of Engineering Purdue University
Dean, Frank Batten College of Engineering & Technology Old Dominion University
Principal Investigator & Executive Director FLATE Hillsborough Community College
Professor Emeritus, Counseling Psychology Program School of Education Loyola University
(NAE) Dean Emeritus, College of Engineering Georgia Tech
(NAE) Former President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Technology Officer BEI Technologies Inc.
Tom Perry, PE
Director, Engineering Education (ret.) ASME
Clinical Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Baylor University
(NAE) Vice President and Chief Technical Officer (ret.) Cummins, Inc.
The Stacey Nicholas Dean of Engineering University of California, Irvine
Staff Kenan Jarboe Senior Program Officer
This presentation will discuss the educational needs in electric power systems today. With climate change upon us, of our own making, how we produce, transmit and consume electricity must undergo a radical change. This presentation will contend that this climate-crisis is a great opportunity for us, leading to the renaissance of electric power engineering.
In doing so, we need to take a holistic connotation of “power systems” that recognizes that power electronics, electric drives, economics, public policy, etc. will all play crucial roles in the next-generation power systems. And, therefore, a large number of courses are needed that are synergistic.
This presentation will argue the following: 1) We should teach a university-wide climate-change related course on power/energy to freshman that could also be taught in high school students, 2) To juniors and seniors, we should offer only a very few carefully-designed courses to train them broadly, and 3) At the graduate level, we should be open to allow our graduates to take a few online courses for credits from outside of their home institutions, because no university has neither the required faculty nor the critical mass of students to teach certain courses.
Prof. Ned Mohan
Ned Mohan (LF-IEEE) joined the University of Minnesota in 1975, where he is Oscar A. Schott Professor of Power Electronic Systems and Morse-Alumni Distinguished Professor. He received his Bachelor’s degree from the Indian Institute of Technology-Kharagpur in 1967. His PhD in Electrical Engineering and Master’s in Nuclear Engineering are from UW-Madison. He has written 5 textbooks; all together, they have been translated into eight languages. He has graduated 46 PhDs. His area of research is in power electronics applied to power systems and he holds several patents.
Ned Mohan received the H.T. Morse Distinguished Teaching Award for undergraduate education from the University of Minnesota in 2007. He has received 2008 IEEE-PES Outstanding Educator Award, 2010 IEEE Undergraduate Teaching Award, 2010 UWIG Achievement Award from Utility Wind Integration Group, 2011 Distinguished Alumnus Award from IIT-Kharagpur (India), and 2012 IEEE Power & Energy Society Ramakumar Family Renewable Energy Excellence Award. In 2013, he received the Innovative Program Award from the ECE Department Heads Association made up of over 250 U.S. universities. In 2014, he received the Distinguished Graduate Teaching Award from the University of Minnesota and the IEEE Nari Hingorani FACTS Award from the IEEE Power & Energy Society.
He is a Fellow of the IEEE and a member of the National Academy of Engineering.
Ticketed event: Guest Ticket - $50.00 advanced registration and $60.00 on site registration
ASEE offers awards in a variety of areas, from best paper, to teaching recognition, to professional and technical honors, to a lifetime achievement award. This event showcases some of ASEE's best and brightest, including our national award winners.
Award winners and their guests are complimentary.
Others can attend for $50
The Incoming/Current Program Chairs & Division Chairs’ Meeting continues provide a valuable opportunity for division chairs and program chairs to discuss topics of common interest and to share “best practices” not only with their own incoming program chairs, but with program chairs across the divisions. Given the regular rotation of officers, we have upheld this as an annual event, both to enhance ASEE program practices and to foster communication across the divisions. (It is separate from, and is designed to complement the ASEE HQ session introducing new program chairs to Monolith and the ASEE reviews process.) Our proposed agenda for this year’s meeting is as follows:
• What was the “neatest thing” that you saw at this year’s conference?
• Highlights from last year’s program/division chairs’ meeting.
• Organizing an ASEE report on “Engaging ASEE Sessions.”
• Advice for incoming program chairs.
• Report from the Town Hall Meeting.
• Other topics as may arise.
We invite any and all current and incoming program and division chairs to attend this session.
New Program Chairs, or any current chairs who would like a refresher, are encouraged to attend this session.
We will be discussing the paper management system for the upcoming 2020 Annual Conference in Montreal, Canada
Join your friends and colleagues as we say farewell to Tampa. ASEE President Stephanie Farrell will pass the gavel to President-Elect Stephanie Adams as we look forward to Montreal, site of the 2020 Annual Conference & Exposition.
This session will also feature the Poster Board Presentations from the International Forum.