This panel answers the question: how might we bridge technical and humanistic disciplines? Further, how might we use the emergent properties of these combined disciplines to cultivate humanistic impulses in our students? The panelists all teach in an Engineering Design program, where students take two years of studio classes co-taught by engineering, computer science, and English faculty. We share examples from our co-teaching experiences over the last few years that illustrate how we’ve bridged disciplines traditionally viewed as divided.

This Research to Practice Full Paper outlines the use of an ABET-based engineering self-efficacy scale (ESE-ABET) to successfully measure changes in engineering self-efficacy pre-to-post over a course term. This scale can be used to measure learning progress toward the "instructor's intent" for learning in a class, which will likely be unique to each engineering classroom experience. This scale also shows the differing changes in engineering self-efficacy for groups of students generally underrepresented in engineering education - women, ethnic minorities and first-generation college students. A discussion of the value of having a valid and reliable ABET-based self-efficacy measure is included.

This Research to Practice Full Paper outlines the process of converting the ABET Criterion 3 - Student Outcomes into an engineering self-efficacy scale (ESE-ABET) and in this format compares the current ABET 3.1-7 items with the previous ABET 3a-k items with undergraduate engineering students. In total, survey responses were collected from undergraduate engineering students (n =561) attending five institutions ranging from larger public universities to smaller private universities. Mean comparison, correlation and regression suggests that the ABET Criterion 3 do make valid and reliable measure of overall “engineeringness” self-efficacy and that self-efficacy scales based on ABET 3.1-7 and ABET 3a-k produce nearly identical results. Factor analysis and hierarchical clustering show that the ABET Criteria 3 items tend to form two groups - “Technical Skills” and “Professional Skills” - and this finding may make it easier to use the criteria as an organizing curricular structure and/or a measure of program effectiveness. Support was also found for a short form version (ESE-SF) of this scale when survey capacity is limited. A discussion of the value of having a valid and reliable ABET-based self-efficacy measure is included.

Capstone design is the "bridge'' from school to industry. It is important that this engineering experience is rich in the creative approaches which are valued there. In particular, the capstone class should model the need for exploring divergent solution paths, for listening to alternative opinions, and for stepping back from a problem. Skills in these creative areas typically are not emphasized in the rest of an engineering curriculum. At the 2016 Capstone Design Conference, we participated in a panel on "Encouraging Creativity in Capstone Design.'' The ideas presented were based on our own experiences in using creativity techniques in design classes. This paper shifts down to the roots of those discussions, describing our individual efforts in applying those creativity techniques. We conclude with a list of situational options, for other practitioners to use in their design classes.

Teaching students in teams presents challenges. A panel discussion concerning methods for supporting successful teams was held at the 2014 Capstone Design conference. This paper summarizes the main discussions from the panel and interprets those discussions using Self-Determination Theory. Self-Determination Theory addresses the internalization of extrinsic motivators, particularly through the experience of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. The panel members represented diverse areas: engineering practice, medical environments, academic, and military teams. Detailed notes from the panel discussion were distributed to and analyzed by all panel members. That analysis revealed eight research-to-practice findings: promote real world experiences, match teams and projects to empower success, teach students to work in teams, develop leadership for more effective teams, encourage regular assessment of team functioning, promote individual accountability, remediate team dysfunction, and train and monitor team mentors. Each finding is discussed, linked to the literature, and to the elements of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Finally, a suggested approach to implementing team work in a capstone class is presented. The approach synthesizes the research-to-practice suggestions, and attempts to describe, model, and scaffold teamwork-and leadership-related professional skills. The panel participants offer the suggestions because of their belief that students benefit from focused teamwork-related support throughout the capstone experience.

This paper describes a project used for a mechanical engineering, freshmen design course. Its focus is on how this project was used to introduce design methodology through practice with a project-based implementation. Four sections of a freshman design course with approximately 32 students each were divided into 4 person teams and were all given the same design task: design a device which would use a dropping weight to transport a small wooden block while attempting to optimize a number of other design constraints. The design course was structured to introduce and walk the students through the design process, thereby demonstrating systematic examination of the design problem, generation of design ideas, analysis and comparison of different designs, and the process of narrowing down and making the final selection of a design. The design project was capped by having each team construct their final design and compete against each other in a contest to determine which team designed and built the superior project. This paper explains the design problem used and how the design steps were integrated with the project to develop both teaming skills and an understanding of the design process. The paper concludes with subjective feedback on the effectiveness of this design project and its implementation from both student and instructor feedback.

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract Session 2325 35 Design Activities to Try in an Engineering Design Class. Clark Merkel, Patsy Brackin Department of Mechanical Engineering Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Abstract: Fresh New Ideas! Are you looking for new design activities to try out in your engineering design course? This paper provides a description of 35 different ideas for in- class activities that you might find appropriate for use. While our target was for use in a mechanical engineering freshman design course, many of these ideas may be applied just as easily for other disciplines. Each of these activities help students explore different aspects of the design process and are short and concise enough in duration to be used in a single lecture period. From this list of activities, the reader will perhaps find several ideas that fit their teaching goals and style; ideas that they may want to adopt, adapt, and/or just tryout in their classroom. In addition, exploring these varied design activities is likely to help the reader trigger some of their own ideas on how to use some of their current activities in different ways. This paper is intended to be a resource of interactive, in-class activity ideas that support and reinforce the concept of engineering design. Introduction: One of the most important aspects of attending the annual ASEE conference is to take home a number of new inspirational ideas that you can try in your own classroom. That's exactly what this paper is attempting to offer. Within the following pages are ideas that have been created or repackaged to provide a source of potential activities for your engineering design classes. Some of these ideas are our own originals; some are not. Many of these activities have been modified so much that we're not sure who to credit for their origin. We don't claim all the ideas here are all new. Nor do we claim that they are all our own original ideas. However, if you haven't seen them, then maybe they are new to you. It is hoped that perhaps they'll provide you with an idea that you will want to adopt for you own use. The activities of design really do cover such a broad spectrum of topics. Creativity, idea generation, team building, decision making, consensus building, documentation, project management, device specification, and design modeling are just a few of the many different types of skills that need to be developed. It's not always easy or desirable to separate one topic from another, however to try and categorize the listings in this paper we have grouped the activities into six different categories: Design and Creativity Activities Decision Making Activities Communication Activities Team-Building Activities Documentation and Specification Activities Other Activities “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education”