Integrating sociotechnical content into foundational engineering courses is a critical, but often overlooked, goal of engineering education. To accomplish this goal, we developed several one-hour modules for the Introduction to Circuits course that include learning objectives, pre-class activities, detailed class guides (with presentation slides, in-class activities, and instructor talking points), and post-class homework and exam questions. We have successfully implemented two initial modules in small and large classes, and in Summer 2024 we collaborated with a diverse cohort of graduate students from across the U.S. to create seven new modules. The modules address issues including sustainable development and energy efficiency, environmental and social impacts of lithium mining, global energy access, and$\text{CO}_{2}$emissions. In this paper, we describe the seven emerging modules.

In this session, a panel of members of the current Fellows Committee of the IEEE Education Society will share advice on preparing nominations for Fellow of the IEEE and Fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education. The panelists will also provide advice on applications for competitive national and international awards. The panelists will explain how to enhance career planning to become eligible for awards and honors.

This work-in-progress research paper describes the development and pilot administration of a survey to assess students' perceptions about sociotechnical issues in engineering. After refining the survey through iterative rounds of review, we piloted it in an “Introduction to Circuits” course at a large, public university in the Midwestern USA in which we deployed a short module addressing technical and social issues. In this paper we document our instrument development process and present descriptive statistics and results of paired t-tests used to analyze the pilot data. We also describe ways our instrument can be implemented by instructors and researchers in multiple contexts.

In this work-in-progress, we outline a new National Science Foundation-funded project to help engineering instructors integrate sociotechnical issues into their circuits' classrooms. Inspiring electrical engineering (EE) instructors to implement our sociotechnical modules has the potential to achieve far-reaching influence on the field. The modules address the need for sociotechnical curricula in the middle years, when students are forming their engineering identities, and can be used to help students achieve key ABET outcomes related to ethical, global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic considerations that are often challenging for faculty to address. Working with a team of EE graduate students and applying proven principles of backward course design, we aim to develop and test several sociotechnical modules for the Introduction to Circuits course. Each module will be linked to technical topics addressed in the course and emphasize a different sociotechnical issue such as conflict minerals used for electronics components or recycling electric vehicle batteries. We will assess the effectiveness of the modules at reinforcing the technical content of the course and at promoting students' sense of social responsibility and we will prepare detailed teaching guides that will allow instructors to easily use the modules in their own contexts.

This workshop aims to help individuals write constructive and insightful reviews for scholarly work in engineering education research while considering aspects of diversity, equity and inclusion in the work. The topic, goal and activities of this workshop align with the conference theme of "Grand Challenges in Engineering Education" as it will help participants identify and overcome the challenges involved with equitable and inclusive peer review practices in engineering education research.

This is a full Innovative Practice paper. Engineering professionals are increasingly called on to serve as “public welfare watchdogs” by paying heed to ways in which complex technologies can impact society and intervening when ethical issues arise. Though it is a goal of engineering education to train engineers to recognize and understand their responsibilities to the safety, health, and welfare of the public, research suggests that students are inadequately prepared to address such issues in practice. To address this concern, we designed and piloted a course module for electrical engineering master’s students to help them better address their public welfare responsibilities. In this paper, we provide a detailed description of the course module, including reflection prompts, in-class presentations, breakout group activities, discussion prompts, and post-class assignments. We also present results from our pilot, including a summary of student responses to the reflection and discussion prompts and an overview of students’ course feedback.

With the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts focusing on student engagement in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses have shifted towards engagement in online instruction, resulting in a need for increased understanding of how instructors adapt active learning from in person instruction to online learning. Active learning occurs in many different formats across different classrooms. Despite these broadly different formats, a common thread across all active learning is that using it in classrooms results in greater student engagement as compared to passive listening to lectures. Educational researchers have found that active learning has a positive impact on student outcomes, especially for underrepresented students in STEM.The research outlined in this paper seeks to understand how instructors are adapting from in person courses and the strategies they use to engage students in online STEM courses. To do this, we interviewed 20 instructors who were using active learning in teaching an online STEM course about the strategies they were using to engage their students in online activities. We coded these interviews using a grounded theory approach. After several rounds of coding, we found six overarching themes about how instructors viewed active learning in their online classrooms: Instructor Emotion, Instructor Strategy, Instructor Goal, Active Learning Example, Instructor Barrier, and Student Behavior. This paper focuses on the instructor strategy theme and its 55 individual codes.

This workshop invites discussion about peer review of journal manuscripts in the field of engineering education. The aim is to generate advice for reviewers on how to make effective reviews, which can help editors make appropriate decisions and support authors in improving their manuscripts. The workshop is facilitated by editors of three leading engineering education journals.

This Innovative Practice, Full Paper describes a graduate course we developed to introduce students to the field of engineering education research (EER). The 3-credit course - EER 601: Foundations of Engineering Education Research - is the first required course of a brand new EER graduate program at the University of Michigan. The graduate program is part of a unique initiative that includes five tenured/tenure-track EER faculty who are embedded in traditional engineering departments. The primary area of scholarship for these faculty is EER, but they teach courses in and support the goals and mission of both their home engineering departments and the EER program. EER 601 is designed as a required course for students in the EER program, for other students supported by the EER faculty, and for interested students across the university. In this paper, we provide details of the course content, assignments, structure, and logistics for EER 601. We also present several sources of evidence to demonstrate how the course achieved two key course goals. Finally, we describe revisions we plan to make to the course.

This full “research” paper presents an overview of results of a systematic literature review of students' affective responses to active learning in undergraduate STEM courses. We considered 2,364 abstracts of conference papers and journal articles published since 1990, and 412 studies met our inclusion criteria. The studies span the STEM disciplines and report various types of active learning. Their research designs include primarily quantitative methods (especially instructor-designed surveys and course evaluations), and they find that students' affective responses are overwhelmingly positive. Few studies excelled on our quality score metric, and there few statistically significant differences by discipline (but biology studies and chemistry studies scored significantly higher in quality than electrical engineering studies). We include several possible directions for future work.

This panel session combines principles from graduate student socialization and intergenerational mentorship to provide a unique opportunity for early career scholars and pioneers in engineering education to interact face-to-face. Pioneers will serve as panelists and give their personal tips and reflections on networking and mentorship. Session attendees will then meet with the pioneers in a roundtable format, to ask questions, seek advice, and get feedback. This work builds on the National Science Foundation-funded Engineering Education Pioneers Project, which documented the stories of more than 40 engineering education pioneers through online profiles. The intended audience for this panel includes graduate students, junior faculty, and other individuals interested in the engineering education community. Expected benefits include better understanding, increased belonging, and new or enhanced interest in engineering education. Future efforts associated with this session include understanding the impact of such exposure to the pioneers on attendees and exploring the possibility of offering this event at future engineering education conferences.

The purpose of this Research Full Paper is to investigate the role of pre-college characteristics, resources, and experiences in shaping engineering students' experiences in college. Previous research has shown that students' pre-college characteristics (e.g., socioeconomic indicators, race/ethnicity, gender) inform their experiences in college, as well as their academic and social outcomes. For example, research suggests that students from low-socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds participate in co-curricular activities at lower rates than their high-SES counterparts. In this study, we hypothesize that precollege characteristics (e.g., race, gender, legacy status), resources (e.g., access to college counselors or private tutors), and experiences (e.g., participation in pre-college engineering programs) combine to inform how students are socialized into college broadly, and into engineering specifically. Using survey data collected from 998 undergraduate engineering students, we conducted a set of nested multiple regression models to investigate the relationships between students' pre-college characteristics and both their college experiences and outcomes. Results offer some support for our hypotheses that some precollege characteristics, resources, and experiences, such as gender and college course taking in high school, are significant predictors of undergraduate engineering students' college experiences, such as students' general socializing experiences and feedback seeking behaviors. However counterintuitive findings suggest a need to further investigate how some characteristics, resources, and experiences inform students' experiences and outcomes in college.

This Research to Practice Full Paper investigates how student performance during a low-stakes evaluation of conceptual understanding relates to performance during a high stakes evaluation. Concept inventories, like the Dynamics Concept Inventory (DCI), are used to assess student understanding of a specific set of concepts, typically in a low-stakes setting. The DCI was offered for very modest course extra credit at the beginning and end of an introductory dynamics course at a large, research-intensive public university. This represents the low-stakes evaluation. By contrast, a midterm examination administered 12 weeks into the 15 week semester included: 1) a set of short-answer concept questions related to the concepts covered by the DCI and 2) two traditional long-answer problem-solving questions. This midterm examination represents the culmination of student understanding of rigid body dynamics, which is primarily what the DCI covers. It also represents the high-stakes evaluation as this examination strongly influences the students' final grade in the class. The synergy of the relationships between these three evaluations indicate the low-stakes DCI assessment is a valid measure in quantifying student conceptual understanding.

There is ample evidence about the positive benefits of active learning, but lecture continues to be the prevailing pedagogy in most undergraduate engineering courses. Conventionally, students' first exposure to course content happens in the classroom, and the main goal of class time is to deliver information. This paper describes one instructor's efforts to flip that convention by shifting first exposure to occur before class, thereby allowing the integration of active learning pedagogies into the class. We hypothesize that two factors will contribute to the success of this “flipped” classroom: (1) a new digital textbook, which ensures that students prepared meaningfully for class, and (2) a flexible classroom space, which helps to facilitate in-class active learning activities and student-instructor interaction. This paper discusses data, preliminary analyses from one semester, and plans for future work that address these hypotheses.

At FIE 2002, 13 engineering educators assembled to address a variety of topics and predict the “Future of Engineering Education.” Larry Shuman organized and moderated the session [1]. Topics included the changing demographics and economics of the country, technological advances, the engineering pipeline, the state of the University and forces driving change, engineering as a liberal art, the accreditation process and faculty reward system, the role of technology in delivering engineering education, educating for higher levels of performance, research in engineering education, research applications, and outcomes assessment. This panel includes five of the original authors and some new contributors who are active in FIE. We will examine the predictions made in 2002, and ask where we were right, where we were wrong, what has come to pass, what is still in progress, and what concerns have faded from view. Many of the issues previously discussed are still hot topics 15 years later.

Engineering and Computer Science (E&CS) Education is an emerging discipline and is a subset of the larger field of STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education. E&CS Education has a relatively brief history, and many individuals who are not directly involved in the discipline are often confused about its purpose. In this special session, we will use up to two background stories to frame the larger questions around E&CS Education goals and help draw the conversation from practice to philosophy while creating a safe space for open conversation addressing issues of change in our discipline.

This Work In Progress describes a NSF funded project to revise/simplify our research instruments used to measure ethical development of engineering undergraduates and make them useful for practical applications. Results of this project will provide a way for institutions, programs, and faculty to assess the impact of ethics initiatives at the, course, co-curricular, or single intervention level. As such, it has the potential to transform the way in which undergraduate engineering education is delivered by allowing individual institutions, programs, and faculty to assess and improve on their own ethics initiatives. In this paper we describe the method for reducing the full instrument to a more practical tool and initial steps at pilot testing.

Engineering and Computer Science (E&CS) Education is an emerging discipline with a brief history and the unfortunate particularity that many folks outside our discipline are confused as to our purpose. In this special session, we will use two case studies to frame the larger questions around E&CS Education goals and help draw the conversation from practice to philosophy while creating a safe space for open conversation.

Student resistance is often cited as a major barrier to faculty's use of active learning, but there are few research-based strategies for reducing this barrier. To address the need for such strategies, we have initiated a project to identify specific, research-based strategies to significantly reduce student resistance to faculty's use of active learning practices. In this work-in-progress paper, we describe the first phase of our research - the development and pilot testing of a classroom observation instrument to assess student responses to faculty's use of active learning. This instrument, which draws upon other published observation protocols, will allow us to capture data about faculty's use of and students' response to active learning as we undertake our larger research project.

Engineering education research is a broad-based, rapidly-evolving, diverse, interdisciplinary, and international field. There is a clear need for a standardized terminology and organizational system - a set of keywords - to map the field and communicate research initiatives. Such a taxonomy could provide multiple benefits, including: better connections between research and researchers; more accessible research results; recognition for and identification of emerging research areas; a way to describe the diversity of engineering education research areas; and a common terminology with which researchers could frame their efforts. This pre-conference workshop will allow attendees to use the taxomony and assist in planning for its wide dissemination.

Engineering education research is a diverse, rapidly-evolving, international field in which scholars apply the methods of educational research to address a variety of issues pertaining to teaching and learning in engineering. As the field has grown, so has the need for a standardized terminology and an updated taxonomy to map and communicate research initiatives. Refining a U.S-centric taxonomy is the focus of this workshop. Participants will engage in activities to reflect on a draft taxonomy and offer suggestions to refine it. Participants are encouraged to bring a computer, and interested participants at any experience level are encouraged to join this dialogue.

This workshop will be conducted by members of the Exploring Ethical Decision-making in Engineering (E3) Team. The workshop will be an interactive exploration of the meaning of “ethical development” for engineering students. We will introduce participants to a variety of teaching strategies and co-curricular activities that may enhance a students' ethical development as identified through the Survey of Engineering Ethical Development (SEED) project. The SEED project was a multi-year national holistic assessment of ethics education in engineering that included measurements of a students' ethical knowledge, ethical reasoning, and ethical behavior. The investigation included 19 diverse partner institutions and over 4000 engineering undergraduates. In addition to the presentation of research results and analysis, the audience will be asked to share personal experiences and discuss strategies for adapting identified best practices in different institutional settings. Finally, breakout groups will identify challenges and opportunities for improving ethical decision-making on a national scale.

A time-sequenced adaptive filter has been developed to predict beats of the intracardiac electrogram (i.e. signals recorded within the heart) for purposes of morphological comparison by implantable devices. After adapting to electrogram morphology during normal sinus rhythm, the filter exhibits an abrupt increase in mean-squared error at the onset of ventricular tachycardia, an abnormal and often life-threatening cardiac rhythm. This marked increase in error can be used to identify the abnormal rhythm and may lead to faster medical treatment than that provided by many existing schemes for arrhythmia detection.>