This card has been created to help you create cards! You'll find tips for some sections right here in this Description box; other tips will be contained in their own sections. You can also follow along with the Card Authoring Guide if you prefer.Before we begin: After you save your card for the first time, new sections will appear at the top: Author Notes, and Review. Author Notes are for all authors and editors on your card to talk and collaborate. These notes are not visible to the public.The Review section is for you to submit your card for a peer review. This includes a rubric that the card reviewers use. Feel free to click on that rubric at any time to help craft your card! Tip: Click Save early & often! Now: In a new tab, create a new card or click Edit on an existing card, and... **Card TitleYour title is your first opportunity to draw people into your card. Do: Be descriptive, yet accurate, such as this title: "The Journey to the Top: Board Game to Instill Entrepreneurial Mindset"Do: Avoid using internal course names/designations.Do: Avoid single-term titles such as "Statics." **Summary What would make you click to see your card? Use this field to write a brief, catchy summary of your content. Tip: Think of how Google Search tells you at a glance which among the 1000s of results you want to click on first. **Description (The box you're in right now.)This expandable box comes with a Rich Text editor so you can add headings, lists, links, and more to make your content visually appealing and easily scannable.Tip: For best results, either type in the Description box from scratch, or paste information only from a text editor like Notepad. This will eliminate errant formatting that will show adversely when you (and others) view your card. Think about your audience as you write this card. You're sharing your work for other faculty to use and adapt. Include details and explanations someone else will need to teach your class, insert your activity, and so forth.**Featured Image Your card’s image is a great way to capture interest and deliver visual cues as to its content. Do: Try to use your own imagery, such as diagrams or student projects.Do: Aim for high-quality, clear pictures. Don't have a good photo? Engineering Unleashed provides a selection of stock photos, or you can search for royalty-free images that convey what your card is about. You'll find a list of websites with royalty-free images in the folders below. Rectangular photos that are wider than they are tall will work best.**Engineering DisciplinesSelect up to 3 disciplines that best align with your content. Or pick one of the 1-click options: Does your card cover all the disciplines, including non-engineering? Choose “Comprehensive.”Does your card cover all engineering disciplines - and only engineering disciplines? Choose “All Engineering Disciplines.” **Card CategorySelect up to two categories to help others understand at a glance what your card can be used for.1. Campus & Outreach – Cards in this category typically contain resources to communicate about EM to faculty on campus, such as book studies and faculty guides. They can also include cards related to implementation strategies that a campus has used. These can have an external focus and communicate EM to the community, K12, or even industry audiences. 2. Classroom & Courses – Cards in this category share resources, activities, and examples of EM within the classroom context. These can include teaching resources, individual activities, entire courses, or approaches to bringing EM to students within a classroom setting. 3. Co-Curricular & Extra Curricular – Cards in this category can be shorter activities that could work in a club setting, but might also include write-ups of student organizations that focus on EM or hackathon/design sprints, or even EM speaker series.4. Engineering Unleashed Resources – Cards in this category are general resources for the community. Examples include branding guides, card templates, or how-to guides for Engineering Unleashed. This broad category is meant for resources and tools that connect to the community and mission. 5. Professional Learning – Cards in this category are focused on sharing faculty development approaches, professional development resources, or other items connected to faculty professional growth and development. Do you have tips, tricks, techniques, or examples of how faculty can grow professionally with EM?6. Workshops & Events – Cards in this category are connected to events like the KEEN National Conference as well as techniques for how to showcase EM with a workshop or at an event. **Tags & KeywordsTags supplement your card's other fields, plus can help people find your card in search! Enter words and phrases that describe your content and approach, such as: active learningstudent engagementstaticsicebreakers **ContributorsWhen you first create a card, add yourself as the author! Then add any additional authors you wish.All authors will be able to edit the card, submit the card for review, and use the Author Notes section for private chat. All authors will be listed on the card publicly. ** Entrepreneurial Mindset When you get to this section, select from the three Cs - Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value - the concepts that best fit your card. Then use the additional fields beneath your selections to expand upon why you chose them. This is a great way for you to provide details specific to your experiences as related to your card. Example: John Estell's Introducing Personas and Scenarios to Introductory Programming Students. Look on the right side for the expanded mindset outcomes. ** Complementary Skillsets Choose from among the Design, Opportunity, and Impact skillsets which concepts best fit your card. ** Related Groups Does your card align with or reference a group on Engineering Unleashed? You can link it to that group in the Related Groups section.You can add as many groups as you like for your card to be associated with. **

Suppose you concretely quantified a student's degree of CURIOSITY. How might their learning, their engineering solutions, their career (and life) change if their curiosity were, say, doubled? Certainly, there would be upsides and downsides. Thinking might be less linear, less patterned, perhaps even controversial. But controlled, directed, and productive curiosity is at the root of discovery. The good news is that research shows that CURIOSITY can be increased. Curiosity is invaluable for uncovering essential and unexpected information that shapes engineering solutions to their maximum potential. Indeed, that's the aspirational goal of partner institutions in KEEN.This card is about understanding CURIOSITY in depth and within an entrepreneurial mindset. The KEEN Framework provides a starting point for two student outcomes related to curiosity. Students should:Demonstrate constant curiosity about the changing world around us.Explore a contrarian view of accepted solutions. Turning the CURIOSITY outcomes into questions is also helpful. Students achieving these outcomes will ask: • "What changes affect our future?" • "How can we __________ differently? better?" These are likely elements of an entrepreneurial mindset but they are not intended to be a complete description of curiosity. Rather, within KEEN, these form a "starter set" for curiosity-related outcomes. To reach these outcomes, design exercises so that students: • Investigate trends, • Generate their own questions, • Challenge assumptions, • Investigate areas of their own choosing, • Assume the role of a “futurist,” supporting predictions, • Act on their curiosity, • Consider multiple points of view, • Create a positive atmosphere of constructive criticism, • Offer considered, pertinent feedback to peers and authorities, • Examine data that supports unpopular solutions.If curiosity is going to become part of a mindset, part of a disposition, then the goal of educational interventions is to exercise situational curiosity to increase a student’s dispositional curiosity.To dive deeper, research literature describes characteristics of curiosity itself, including:Epistemic vs. Diversive CuriosityEpistemic curiosity investigates underlying reasons, asking "Why?" while diverse curiosity considers possibilities, asking "What if?". For example, see Berlyne or Litman, et. al. in the research folder.Situational vs. Dispositional CuriositySituational curiosity is generated from surrounding circumstances while dispositional curiosity describes an attitudinal propensity to be curious. For example, see Kashdan and Roberts in the research folder.Reductive vs. Inductive CuriosityReductive curiosity is motivated by "wanting" while inductive curiosity is characterized by "liking" new information. For example, see Litman below.See the folders below for the following:An expanded description of the curiosity-related outcomesResearch references and perspectives on curiosityOne short example of "curiosity" in curriculumA collection of websites and cards that you can use to promote "curiosity" connected to your educational goalsTools for Curiosity

What if every engineering graduate approached their work by focusing first on CREATING VALUE? Engineering solutions would inherently become more impactful to the beneficiaries, presumably collections of individuals, customers, citizens, and society as a whole. What if CREATING VALUE became a graduate's mental habit, part of their perceived locus of control, and an instinctual driver? Indeed, that's the aspirational goal of partner institutions in KEEN.This card is about understanding CREATING VALUE in depth and within the context of an entrepreneurial mindset. The KEEN Framework provides a starting point for two student outcomes related to creating value. Students should:Identify unexpected opportunities to create extraordinary value,Persist through and learn from failure. Alternately, the CREATING VALUE outcomes might be phrased as questions. Students achieving these outcomes will ask:"Do my solutions merely solve an apparent problem, missing an opportunity?""What solutions would be most valuable? In other words, how is 'value' contextualized? To whom, and does my solution satisfy a long-term need?""What can I learn from my setbacks and mistakes? What should I have done differently? What will I do differently next time?"Because the term "creating value" has such broad meaning, this list is not intended to provide a complete definition. Rather, within KEEN, the following forms a "starter set" for creating-value-related outcomes.To reach these outcomes, design exercises so that students:Become observers of unmet needs, empathetic ethnographersHabitually reframe problems as opportunitiesAsk questions that reveal authentic demandDevelop archetype users of engineering solutionsOffer solutions to problems, testing novel ideas with others to obtain formative feedbackCreate value from underutilized resourcesExtend existing solutions to new situations If habitually creating value is going to become part of a mindset, part of a disposition, then the goal of educational interventions is to create mental habits, akin to mental muscle-memory, that has an inclination to identify the value proposition of proposed work.To dive deeper, here's a sampling of directions that you might take CREATING VALUE:For Your Toolbox: A Process That Helps Establish a Mindset to First Focus on Creating ValueThe practice of specific skills can help establish a mindset, and a mindsets shapes the potential application of those skills. As heard recently "We don’t think ourselves into a new way of acting, we act ourselves into a new way of thinking." In the card titled Creating Value Means Going Beyond Problem Solving, author Bill Kline offers a tool that gets students thinking about features of a product or system, and about stakeholders, even unexpected ones. The process leads to a comparison of the features in terms of value, i.e. preferred by stakeholders. The process start focuses students on the essential ideas and conversations. With practice, the ideas are likely to become integral to the way engineers think about their role as an engineer, part of a mindset.Action Required: Creating and Delivering ValueWhen interviewed about her writing, the late, wise-cracking American detective author, Sue Grafton, offered a truism that equally applies to entrepreneurial thinking. She said, "Ideas are easy. It's the execution of ideas that really separates the sheep from the goats." In other words, actual value creation implies complete follow through, including execution of a process to deliver value. You might want to explore this idea in through a chapter of The Coming Jobs War by the CEO of Gallup organization, Jim Clifton. The author's opinions on the topic of delivering value are captured in the chapter controversially titled "Why Entrepreneurs Matter More Than Innovators." An Interesting Classroom Conversation: The Meaning of "Value"You can't talk very long or very deeply about "creating value," without addressing what "value" means. One definition is the ratio of benefits to sacrifice (in dollar, time, effort, etc.) But who determines benefits? Embracing the discussion leads to a rich discussion of perspectives, some conflicting or in tension. If you decide to lead a discussion about value, try highlighting at least two perspectives an let students explore that tension. Here are a few suggested questions to kick off the conversation with students:Extrinsic Value: A Market-based DeterminationQ: How do you determine what is valuable to others? Is value based upon what someone is willing to pay?Q: More specifically, how could we determine the value of things that are less utilitarian, say art and culture? Is the value of a work of art only based upon what the market will bear?Q: More pointedly, is the determination of value solely the purview of the customer (stakeholder, market)?Q: What are the benefits and drawback of a market-based view of value?Intrinsic Value: From The Heart of Ethics and PhilosophyYour students might enjoy a discussion that has caused debate among philosophers for millennia. What has intrinsic value? It's an important question for engineers, especially as they emphasize creating value, were the determination of value involves judgment about what is good. Student discussions are likely most valuable when they afford the opportunity to introduce philosophy, ethics and research data.Q: As professionals, we are constantly making decisions about our engineering solutions. How do we decide what is good for an individual? Good for society?Q: Since antiquity, people have offered the ingredients for human flourishing and well-being. Recent examples include the Subjective Well Being indicator, the Gallup organization's measurement of five elements of well-being, and the area of research dubbed "Happiness Economics." Let's try to assess the impact on well-being to our particular topic in engineering. When thinking about the value of our work on [e.g. wireless communications] , would you discuss how it is connected to human flourishing and well-being?Perception is Quirky: Value in Behavioral EconomicsBehavioral economics differs from traditional economic theory by introducing the human element of economic decision making. Economic decisions are not entirely based upon a traditional utilitarian value, but rather, are influenced by identifiable psychological behaviors, often associated with a contextualized relative perception of value. Behavioral economists suggest that people employ a mental-computational engine that's constantly performing a rough estimate of the return-on-investment for a large majority of daily decisions for routine and non-routine situations. The results are routinely skewed based on context and biases. It's quirky and whether illogical or not, influences value (of the extrinsic type described above).See the folders below for the following:(more coming soon)An expanded description of the creating-value-related outcomesResearch references and perspectives on creating valueOne short example of "creating value" in curriculumA collection of websites and other cards that you can use to promote "creating value" within your educational goals

What if every engineering graduate understood the CONNECTIONS to their work? Engineering is seldom within a vacuum; context matters. In other words, engineering solutions are only successful and sustainable when they meet economic, political, cultural, legal, technical requirements — they live and die within complex contexts and systems. If your graduates' instincts are to habitually assess an engineering solution's CONNECTIONS, the likelihood of success increases. Indeed, that's the aspirational goal of partner institutions in KEEN.This card is about understanding CONNECTIONS in depth and within an entrepreneurial mindset. The KEEN Framework provides a starting point for two student outcomes related to connections. Students should:Integrate information from many sources to gain insight.Assess and manage risk. Turning the CONNECTIONS outcomes into questions is also helpful. Students achieving these outcomes will ask: • "How do my experiences, my knowledge, and new bits of information relate?" • "What else might be relevant, especially within the larger landscape and longer timeline?" • "What are all the implications and consequences of my work?" Because the term "connections" has such broad meaning, this list is not intended to provide a complete description of connections. Rather, within KEEN, the following form a "starter set" for connections-related outcomes. To reach these outcomes, design exercises so that students: • Mentally integrate technical topics, relating one to another, • Contextualize technical solutions, esp. in non-technical domains, • Create diagrams that illustrate relationships among a group of items or concepts, • Investigate the intersection of seemingly disparate ideas, • Use current affairs in discussions of technical solutions, • Think about the potential unintended consequences of their work, • Plan for decisions associated with increasing scale or production, • Evaluate the unanticipated impact due to reuse of designs, • Habitually assess “What if?” with regard to connections to key people, organizations, political environments, regulations, competitors, processes, and design changes. If habitually making connections is going to become part of a mindset, part of a disposition, then the goal of educational interventions is to create mental habits, akin to mental muscle-memory, that has an inclination to investigate and draw connections.To dive deeper into connections and associated research literature, first consider relevant variants of the term as it relates to mindset. Here's a sampling:Integrative LearningIntegrative learning is often described as making connections across curricula. Sometimes the integrative concept is linked to project-based learning, problem based learning, and is undoubtedly related to entrepreneurially minded learning because the pedagogy relies upon finding opportunities and assessing potential impact, a necessarily interdisciplinary endeavor. Assessment tools like those from the Rubric AAC&U on Integrative Learning are valuable for designing and assessing educational interventions.Within the KEEN Framework, CONNECTIONS is related to an ability to assess risk. This takes on particular meaning when solutions are seen within the context of a system. An entrepreneurially minded individual will assess risks associated with a technological solution, risks within a business model, risks that are associated with the human element. Integrative learning connects different disciplines. The Greater ContextEngineering activities that affect lives are always done within some context, whether they impact a large sector of society or a small market. Whether considering the broad context of societal needs, as in UNESCO's Engineering Report, or using a tool like the Business Model Canvas to situate a specific value proposition, engineering educators are developing mental habits for "heads-up" engineering. In a JEE editorial by Charles Vest, the former NAE President concludes by encouraging engineering educators to "design curricula, pedagogy, and student experiences will profitably contemplate the new context, competition, content, and challenges of engineering."The PhysiologyNeurologists say that learning is a biological process. Encouraging neural connections is the most fundamental aspect of teaching and learning. With increased understanding of the brain connectivity from studies using a functional MRI, specifically using a method called diffusion-spectrum-imaging, some researchers suggest that within the brain establishes paths, a "wiring diagram" which has been dubbed the Connectome. It's the central subject of study in the NIH-sponsored Human Connectome Project. What does that mean for an educator? A great deal. An appreciation for the physical processes associated with making mental connections are reminders of the importance of learning environment and culture, repetition, perspective, and the use of multiple modes and multiple senses. Findings reinforce the notion that mindset (the collective of habits of mind, attitudes, dispositions, worldview, and affective traits) are learnable and important within the learning process. For example, there is evidence, both performance and electrophysiological, that supports a causal connection between beliefs and learning. That connection is seldom a surprise to an experienced educator, but reinforces the how fundamental the connection is at a physiological level. See Mangels, et. al. in the research folder.See the folders below for the following:An expanded description of the connections-related outcomesResearch references and perspectives on connectionsA collection of websites and other cards that you can use to promote "connections" within your educational goals (this section will continually be updated, so check back for often)

Dr. Kim Bigelow and Dr. Ken Bloemer of the University of Dayton developed this series of short videos and accompanying course material to introduce opportunity recognition and ideation techniques that can supercharge the early stages of the design process. The videos and supplemental materials detail how you can use painstorming for opportunity recognition and bisociation and biomimicry to augment traditional brainstorming to dramatically increase the quality and quantity of potential design solutions for project teams.

This CardDeck links to a variety of innovation challenges developed by Saint Louis University. The goal of the innovation challenges is to promote the entrepreneurial mindset through multiple exposures to innovation process in a competitive, multidisciplinary, team-based, creative environment. Just as everyone is encouraged to exercise everyday to keep the body fit, innovation challenges are designed to keep the mind fit. It’s a mind workout. The Innovation Challenges help participants to exercise their creative side, work in multidisciplinary teams, and experience the team dynamics. They learn to tackle a novel situation under intense competitive time pressure, while networking with others outside their disciplines, and most importantly, fine-tuning their entrepreneurial skills.In this CardDeck, each of the challenges are linked in folders below. At the bottom of this card you will find a link to the entire pdf and ibook that features all the challenges in one place.Note: The pdf does not contain rich media like videos and scrolling images. All assets have been uploaded to the individual cards and can be downloaded/viewed.

3D particle equilibrium is one of the first techniques that you will likely cover in your course. In its most theoretical form, 3D particle equilibrium applies several known force vectors at a single point in space. You may have used this theoretical vector analysis to solve example problems such as suspending traffic lights or potted plants. However, if you want your students to see an even bigger picture and connect with the course content, this EML is for you! By integrating an EML-based project into one of their first core engineering courses, students learn from the get-go that engineering is not an exact, straightforward process. There are high levels of complexity that require the integration of a broad range of skills.In this project, students are calculating tensions in cables used to hold a floating wind turbine in a given location. The basic underlying fundamental skill is 3D particle equilibrium, but the project is designed to give students the opportunity to solve a technical challenge that is directly linked to social and financial factors. It allows students the chance to see the potential effects that their decisions have on the people whom their design is serving. This version of the project is contextualized within a sub-Saharan rural community, but this context could easily be modified to other locations or other structures. The exciting part of the project is the map which is used to provide a framework for both social and financial interactions. See the KEEN'zine article about the project here: https://engineeringunleashed.com/keenzine5/46/The project's deployment is described in the Timing and Logistics document provided.

Context This card describes course modules that were developed to introduce the global challenges facing society in the 21st century. These modules are linked below in the first folder and they are stored on a Canvas site that anyone can access. The modules are currently used in a 3-credit 7.5-week Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) offered through Arizona State University's (ASU) Earned Admissions (EA) program (now part of ASU Universal Learner Courses (ULC)), a program that offers both college credits at scale and a pathway for students to earn admissions into ASU. The on-ground version of this course is currently offered over a 15 week semester to students in the Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) at ASU, , recognized by the National Academy of Engineering, and most of these scholars take this course during their first year and it counts toward the multidisciplinary competency of the program. While these modules are interrelated, they have been packaged to also stand alone to allow for easy adoption, adaptation, and implementation by faculty members in their own courses and/or programs, in both face-to-face settings and in an online environment. Each module as well as the specific material within it can be used independently from the others. Course Modules Introduction These modules are centered on the NAE's Grand Challenges for Engineering and they help students develop an interdisciplinary systems perspective on global challenges related to the Grand Challenges themes of sustainability, health, security, and joy of living. One of the modules provides an overview of the global challenges and four subsequent modules each focuses on one of these four theme areas. To show variations of the challenges and solutions, within each theme area, different scales are discussed, including developing communities, developed communities, and global scale; or personal level, national level, and global scale. These modules aim to increase students' awareness of the social complexities involved in meeting the needs of local and global challenges through engineering and technology. Many different types of activities were designed based on best practices to engage students and incorporated in these modules to provide students with opportunities to actively consider and evaluate the reciprocal relationship between engineering solutions or technologies and aspects of society including economics, politics, ethics, environment, culture, and human behavior. Examples of these activities include mind mapping activities, simulation-based role play, design activity, pros and cons lists, game, case studies, etc. Besides activities and discussions, different types of video material are also included in these modules. These video material consists of instructor-led video lectures, application videos with voiceover animations, video clips and/or static images, expert talks that feature research faculty members and industry professionals from across the nation discussing challenges related to their fields and their current research and industry-related work to address these challenges, and video montages of interviews conducted with various experts and NAE GCSP alumni on various topics. Besides modules that allow students to broadly explore the global challenges in different theme areas, one of the remaining modules focuses on a research assignment that provides students with the opportunity to learn about examples of current research efforts related to one of the theme areas that they are most passionate about. Students are also introduced to a few frameworks which they can apply to analyze the potential societal impact of these research efforts from multiple perspectives. In addition to developing an interdisciplinary systems perspective about the challenges and their solutions from these aforementioned modules, students also start to develop an entrepreneurial mindset needed to tackle these challenges. One of the modules describes an open ended Entrepreneurially-Minded Learning (EML) based project that invites students to find their passion, exercise their entrepreneurial mindset, and develop a future solution to fulfill a need or opportunity related to the NAE’s vision for Engineering in the 21st century: Continuation of life on the planet, making our world more sustainable, secure, healthy, and joyful. In this project, students identify an opportunity to create added value for society, develop a futuristic solution, and research current technologies and trends to show that their solution will be technically feasible in the future. Students also consider various nontechnical aspects such as social, cultural, global, legal, economic, and political factors when developing their solution. When considering these societal factors, they identify the challenges they may face in developing and implementing a solution that will be technically feasible and economically viable while also creating value for society. They are also asked to imagine the impact their solutions would have on society if they were to be developed. This project can be implemented in both an online environment and a face-to-face setting. It can be done by students individually or as a group (suggested group size: 3-4 students). Various assignments are included to help students work through the design and development process and their work is showcased in a project poster. To help students make sense of their learning using the dynamic, active learning, discussion-based, guided self-exploratory material, digital portfolios are introduced in one of the modules, and they provide students with opportunities to reflect on their learning, connect their knowledge and experiences, infuse that knowledge and experience with meaning, and intertwine it with their own personal identities, interests, and values. Last but not least, there is one module that focuses on the competencies, skills, and/or mindset that is needed to tackle the challenges. It introduces the NAE GCSP competencies and shows examples of ways to achieve each of them. There are also discussions and assignments that ask students to reflect on their interests and goals, and determine the next steps they will take toward achieving them. In video montages, experts and GCSP alumni also share their perspectives about competencies, skills, and/or mindset that they feel are important and offer suggestions for students that are working to achieve these competencies to realize the goals for engineering in the 21st century. List of Course Modules The complete list of modules and sub-modules can be found below. 1. Module - Goals for engineering in the 21st century in an interdisciplinary, global context o Vision for engineering and specific goals o Developing solutions to interdisciplinary societal challenges o Customer discovery, needs analysis, and opportunity identification · 2. Module - Developing solutions to make our lives more sustainable o Introduction to sustainability o Sustainability challenges and solutions in developing communities o Sustainability challenges and solutions in developed communities o Global sustainability challenges · 3. Module - Developing solutions to make our lives healthier o Introduction to health o Global differences in health o Health challenges and solutions in developed communities o Health challenges and solutions in developing communities · 4. Module - Developing solutions to make our lives more secure o Introduction to security o Personal security challenges and solutions o National security challenges and solutions o Global security challenges and solutions · 5. Module - Developing solutions to make our lives more joyful o Introduction to joy of living o Education-related challenges and solutions o Challenges and solutions in joy of living o Challenges and solutions related to engineering the tools of scientific discovery and exploration 6. Module - Impact of engineering solutions o Societal impact of technology frameworks · 7. Module - How can you make an impact? o Realizing the goals for engineering in the 21st century: competencies o Taking action · 8. Module - Future solutions project o Future solutions project overview o Assignment: needs analysis part 1 o Assignment: needs analysis part 2 o Assignment: developing a solution o Assignment: identifying technology development milestones o Assignment: project poster · 9. Module - Research assignment · 10. Module - Professional portfolio o Professional portfolio o Digital portfolio reflections · 11. Module - Additional resources o Gathering information How the Course Modules are Used in the 7.5-week MOOC The first 7 modules listed above are each covered in a week when they are used in the MOOC that was previously mentioned. Within the MOOC, the Future Solutions project is conducted over the entire duration of the 7.5 week course. It is introduced at the end of week 1 and students work on one project assignment during each of the subsequent weeks. The project poster is submitted at the end of the course. The research assignment listed in the 9th module is introduced at the beginning of week 6 (Module - Impact of engineering solutions) and is submitted at the end of the same week. The digital portfolio mentioned in the Module - Professional portfolio is introduced and set up by students before the start of week 1. They then complete a reflection at the end of each of the theme modules (Modules 2-5) and complete a final reflection and showcase their accomplishments at the end of the course. Link to EM EM is introduced and its importance in tackling the challenges presented is addressed in one of the modules and it is also instilled throughout all other modules. More specifically, these course modules cover the three C's in the following ways. Curiosity Students are encouraged to view the challenges presented as opportunities. There are discussions about stakeholders and target customers, the importance of customer discovery, how to solicit voice of the customers in order to identify specific customer needs, how to organize customer needs and extrapolate customer needs in larger contexts for opportunity identification. These concepts and techniques are practiced in the Future Solutions project. Besides the project, many of the activities and discussions also provide students with opportunities to explore the role the customers play in the development of technologies to address the challenges. One such example is the case study about PlayPumps, which are merry-go-round type devices that pump water as children play on them. The solution was implemented in South African countries without proper sociocultural considerations of the communities and this has led to the failure of the solution. Another example is the You Decide! activity where students are asked to rank nanotechnologies based the importance and usefulness to them and again to their assigned characters. This activity helps students better understand how people's value shapes the development and implementation of technologies. Some of these activities also help students explore a contrarian view of accepted solutions, by critically considering the many non-technical challenges that these solutions might face during their development and implementation and possible negative impact they could have on society from multiple perspectives. Examples of these challenges include economic barriers, public opinion, ethical concerns, to name a few. And social relationships, economics, politics, environment, are among some of the examples of ways these technologies might impact society negativelyConnections Throughout the modules, an interdisciplinary systems approach is emphasized as students explore the challenges and consider potential technological solutions that address them. Students are encouraged to view technologies as part of larger systems, and consider both technical elements and non-technical elements that interact with these technologies. Students are encouraged to consider and make connections between technologies and aspects of society including people and different organizations, economics, politics, ethics, environment, culture, and human behavior, and integrate information from these multiple perspectives as they develop technologies. Students practice this in their Future Solutions projects as well as many activities and discussions. Some example activities that help students make connections include the Climate Policy activity, the Energy Economics activity, the National Security Role Play activity, and the Advanced Technology Mind Map activity, etc.. For example, in the Climate Policy activity, students make connections between technologies and public policy to help them understand the role public policy plays in the diffusion of innovations. The Energy Economics game provides students with an opportunity to make connections between various factors including tariffs, tax credit, political conflicts, weather events, infrastructure degradation, technology advancements, and the success of various technologies in the energy market. In the National Security Role Play activity, students play the role of a governor who makes a series of decisions about the actions they would take in response to a security threat affecting multiple states. As students make decisions, they factor in interactions and connections between engineers, businesses, local, state, and national government, humanitarian aid organizations, media, citizens, and others that are necessary not only to detect and mitigate the current threat situation but also to prevent possible future threats. The Advanced Technology Mind Map activity asks students to critically consider the implication of the development and implementation of an advanced technology and use a mind map to show its connection and interaction with various aspects of society. Besides making connections between technology and various aspects of society, students also make connections between the themes introduced in the modules, including sustainability, health, security, and joy of living, recognizing that many of the challenges are related to more than one theme area and thus efforts from multiple disciplines must be integrated in addressing them. Creating Value These course modules emphasize the importance of considering the impact of technologies on society from multiple perspectives, including sociocultural, economic, environmental, global, political, etc., and introduces multiple frameworks that help students analyze/predict the societal impact of technologies. Students consider and articulate the value proposition of their Future Solutions project and identify multiple ways their future technology would create value for their stakeholders, target customers, and society. In the Research Assignment, students also analyze the potential societal impact of examples of current research efforts that address challenges within a theme area they are most passionate about from multiple perspectives.ASEE Papers about this workThe paper that discusses the design and development of the course modules and insights gained from the initial offering of the MOOC was presented in the F341A Multidisciplinary Learning Experiences Session at the 2020 ASEE Annual Conference. An additional paper assessing the use and effectiveness of these open access course modules shared with faculty via an online platform was presented at the 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference. These papers can be found in the folders section of this card. What is Included in this Card Included in the folders below is the link to the Course Modules description page (enrollment instructions are found on this page) and two ASEE papers that describe the design, development, and initial offering of the MOOC in which these course modules are currently used at ASU, and the use and effectiveness of the open access course modules available on the online platform. Connection to other work These course modules were developed by faculty and staff at ASU as part of a GCSP "Toolkit" to benefit students at other institutions as well as ASU. Other opportunities and resources developed as a part of this toolkit include a Grand Challenges focused Speaker Series, a three week project-based Entrepreneurial Experience for undergraduate students in GCSP, and Industry workshop(s) focused on understanding and communicating the value of entrepreneurially minded GCSP students in addressing challenges faced by Industry. See Related Cards sections for links to cards about the toolkit and its components.

This project is described in a presentation at ASEE 2020 "Best of First-Year Programs Division" session.Background and IntroductionHands-on team-based open-ended design projects in freshman engineering courses have been shown to significantly improve student retention due to the benefits of active hands-on learning, self-directed acquisition of knowledge, development of skills and confidence necessary to succeed in engineering and a growing sense of community. Open-ended design projects can range from highly structured to theme-based to free choice. Combining entrepreneurial thinking and maker technology, student-driven free-choice open-ended design projects allow students to generate their own idea, take ownership of their design project, and results in significant gains in creativity and entrepreneurial intentions. This card describes a free-choice open-ended design project that supports student autonomy, one of the three basic psychological needs from self-determination theory (SDT). SDT postulates that individuals will adopt more internalized/autonomous forms of motivations, resulting in more optimal learning outcomes, when three basic psychological needs are satisfied: autonomy, a sense of choice and control; relatedness, a sense of positive and supportive connections to others; and competence, a sense of mastery and self-efficacy. The introduction to engineering course is a freshman level 2-credit 15-week lecture and lab course consisting of a 50-minute lecture and a 2-hour 50-minute lab each week. Most students enroll in this course during their first semester in college. The course aims to provide students with an introduction to engineering, introduces the broad topics of the engineering design process, engineering modeling and drawing, teamwork, technical communication, project management and an entrepreneurial mindset. In addition, technical knowledge such as computer-aided design including 3D printing and programming a microcontroller is introduced to help students with their two multidisciplinary design projects, i.e., a well-defined project during the first half of the semester (See Card "Project: Autonomous Mail Delivery System") and an open-ended project during the second half. The course is a required course for students majoring in aerospace engineering, chemical engineering, electrical engineering and mechanical engineering. Project Description and ImplementationThis card provides all of the materials needed to implement a nine-week long team-based open-ended multi-disciplinary design project in an introduction to engineering course. Students, in teams of four, work on their project in class during lecture and lab for nine weeks. There are two lecture periods dedicated to introduce the project before students work on the project during the labs. The project description and grading are in the "Project Description" folder. The project uses the following "theme" statement: "Design an automated solution for a space such as a home, campus building including dorm, office, retail, restaurant, hospital, library, and factory. Your design should add value in an economic, environmental, and/or societal sense. For example, your design might help reduce costs, increase efficiency, reduce pollution/waste, and/or improve accessibility, among other things. Your design must incorporate an Arduino or other microcontroller." Research results from SDT (See paper in the "Publications" folder) showed that, compared to other project definitions which further place constraints on scope and materials, this autonomy-supportive version of the project statement results in more positive student motivational responses. Another interesting finding from the research suggests that the provision of more choice and control seems to have a more dramatic positive impact on women compared to men. The schedule of the project is shown below along with brief descriptions: Week 1 (Lecture 1): Pain Point Investigation and Information Collection (worksheet, group discussion)Week 2 (Lecture 2): Information Synthesis and Opportunity Identification (worksheet, group discussion) Week 3 (Lab 1): Problem Definition, Brainstorming and Solution Prototyping (worksheet, group discussion, hands-on building) Week 4 (Lab 2): Design Decision and Project Management (worksheet, group discussion) Week 5 (Lab 3): Proposal Presentation (oral presentation) Week 6/7/8 (Lab 4/5/6): Prototype Construction & Testing (hands-on building) Week 9 (Lab 7): Final Presentation and prototype demonstration (video, oral presentation and demo) The two lectures help students identify pain points, and collect and synthesize information. Ideally, they should be given at least two weeks before the start of the project so that students have plenty of time to decide which project to work on. The worksheets used in the two lectures are in the "Lecture Worksheets" folder. Lab 1 and Lab 2 give students the opportunity to go through the engineering design process: define the problem, gather information, generate alternative concepts, evaluate the alternatives, select the most promising concept, plan and manage the project. The problem definition and planning documents used are in the "Supplemental Lab Materials" folder. During the three project construction labs, a lab agenda is used to help students track their progress. It is in the "Supplemental Lab Materials" folder. Students are asked to complete a business model canvas for their project (assigned during the second construction lab, instructions and template are in the "Supplemental Lab Materials" folder). They are also asked to write a testing plan for their prototype (assigned during the last construction lab, instructions and template in the "Supplemental Lab Materials" folder). Students have to submit five project deliverables. Instructions, due dates and grading rubrics are in the "Project Deliverables" folder. Evaluation and Future WorkIn the SDT research conducted, for every week of the nine-week project, students were given a Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS) survey, which is an instrument to measure different types of motivations on a continuum ranging from autonomous (internal) to controlled (external) motivations. This continuum includes intrinsic motivation, a deeply internalized state of engagement based on interest, enjoyment, satisfaction and passion; identified regulation, a state in which actions are based on an internal sense of self and perceived value, importance, or usefulness of a task; external regulation, a state of compliance with external pressure, prompted by contingent reward or punishment avoidance, and amotivation, state of impersonal or non-intentional action due to learners finding no value and no desirable outcomes in a learning activity. This survey provides useful diagnostic information and practical insights into course design to support more positive forms of student motivational responses. The survey reveals, for example, that the open-ended design project focusing on automation described in this card seems to result in higher external motivation signals and lower internal motivation signals for chemical engineering students. How to come up with remedies to reach this population is an urgent next step in the project design. The weekly motivation survey also shows a dip in positive motivations during Week 2. How to modify the activity to better support positive student motivation is another future improvement. Furthermore, given that the SIMS profile from this project shows both higher average amotivation and external regulation values compared to the “truly autonomous” motivation profile, identifying strategies to further motivate students to adopt more positive forms of motivation is one more important future work. A Basic Needs Satisfaction Scale (BNSS) survey was given at the end of the semester, which measures the degree to which three basic psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness and competence are satisfied. Survey results show that competency may play a role in shaping the motivational responses of students. Therefore, if you do plan to implement an open-ended automation project like the one described in this card, make sure to give students a tutorial and sufficient practice on Arduino, sensors and actuators to make students feel confident in their ability to completing the project. Tutorial and examples on using Arduino, sensors and motors can be found in the Card "Project: Autonomous Mail Delivery System". Both the Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS) survey and the Basic Needs Satisfaction Scale (BNSS) survey can be found in the "Surveys" folder.

In this project-based learning experience, students are asked to design and optimize an artificial tree trunk to support an “epic” treehouse for a fictitious, eccentric but innovative, Aunt Ada. It was implemented in a Strength of Materials course at Lehigh University to a class of 52 students in their second, third, or fourth year. This module may be suitable for use in a Strength of Materials class or any finite element analysis class. The project has both individual and team based assignments completed outside of class. When implemented, it took a total of two 50-minute class periods dedicated to assignment explanations and team discussions spread over the course of five weeks. The module has a total of five parts including defining parameters, writing pseudo code for a finite element analysis, creating a design proposal, and completing a 1D finite element code and analysis. It is suggested to modify this project in the future to be condensed into three parts. This project provides a platform for exploration of some of the course learning objectives in an experiential format; furthermore, a number of in-class active-collaborative exercises support the project and further enhance the course content.

To better serve the engineering entrepreneurship community, we sought to develop a "master" entrepreneurial mindset (EM) concept map that captured faculty insights as to what properties are relevant to the term "entrepreneurial mindset". Development ProcessThe "master" EM concept map was developed from content included in the EM concept maps of 26 faculty members that attended a concept map workshop at the 2019 KEEN National Conference. Terms from the faculty concept maps were abstracted and literature was used to provide additional concepts that were missing from the original maps. Concepts were then grouped into categories using an iterative process similar to thematic analysis to allow development of a working copy of the "master" EM concept map. This working copy of the EM map had only hierarchies present and no cross-links to avoid researchers' biases influencing the relationships the maps should portray. The working copy of the EM concept map was shown to seven faculty experts in the Engineering Entrepreneurship field for review and comment. Changes suggested and cross-links identified were then incorporated into the final "master" EM concept map."Master" EM Concept Map OverviewThe "master" EM concept map (attached below) captures the "who", "what", "why", and "how" aspects of an entrepreneurial mindset within the context of engineering education. The "who" branch focuses on what type of individuals may exhibit an entrepreneurial mindset such as entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs, the organizations within which these individuals may work, and the processes they may use to enact their EM. The "what" branch captures knowledge, skills, and attributes that are associated with having an EM. The "why" branch focuses on providing insight as to the motivation behind individuals developing an EM or enacting an EM. It includes elements like creating value and stakeholders relevant to work in this area. Finally, the "how" branch is very useful to educators since it documents ways through which students may develop an EM while mainly being in an academic setting. Examples include both formal and informal education experiences as well as personal experiences.Curiosity: The "master" EM concept map provides an opportunity for faculty to explore deeper what is meant by EM and how it manifests itself within academic environments. It can also be a starting point for faculty to explore motivations associated with an EM and use this knowledge as the basis for course and lesson planning. Faculty can consider asking their students to make a map of EM and then compare to the "master" concept map included to see where their students are in the development of an understanding of this complex construct.Connections: The "master" EM employs connections through its use of cross-links to reinforce the relationships that exist between different facets associated with an EM. It provides an opportunity for faculty to understand the framing of different aspects of an EM and how they could be related through academic courses or activities.Creating Value: The "master" EM concept map provides significant value to the engineering entrepreneurship community as it provides a snapshot of faculty's perception of EM as there has been much debate in the literature over how to define this complex construct. It will also serve as a reference tool that faculty can use in their own course planning or as an assessment tool for faculty that might be interested in measuring their students' perception of EM.Details for Implementation and UseThe "master" EM concept map can be used in a variety of settings and with different target populations ranging from first-year undergraduate students to post-docs. The flexibility of concept mapping as a course activity or assessment tool allows for it to be modified depending on the faculty's instructional environment. For instance, in class, concept maps can be constructed individually using sheets of papers and post-it notes or in a remote/digital setting, concept maps can be built using a variety of online technologies that are freely available such as CmapTools. Concept maps can be used anytime throughout a class or activity but have been most often used as a pre/post assessment. In these implementations, they should be used with a significant length of time in between the assessments since it can take time for students to integrate knowledge and be able to display it in this manner.This card includes a copy of the ASEE paper discussing the design and development of the "master" EM concept map and more examples of how concept maps could be implemented in EM modules or courses. The card also has an image of the final "master" concept map as this may be an easier reference tool than to look at the paper itself. The "master" concept map is meant to serve as a reference for faculty so that when they go about scoring / assessing their students' concept maps they have a broad understanding of what terms should be present in the map and the linkages that should exist between these concepts.

This CardDeck provides a link to each of the 18 e-learning modules created by the University of New Haven that help develop an entrepreneurial mindset in students. The modules are designed to be integrated into existing engineering and computer science courses. Our efforts, as part of KEEN, are aimed at fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students. An entrepreneurial mindset applies to all aspects of life, beginning with curiosity about our changing world, integrating information from various resources to gain insight, and identifying unexpected opportunities to create value. We believe that an engineer equipped with an entrepreneurial mindset will be able to create extraordinary value within any type of organization. Development of 18 e-learning modules supporting entrepreneurially minded learning is part of this effort. The University of New Haven, a KEEN partner institution for over 7 years, aims to instill an entrepreneurial mindset in its engineering students by integrating the 18 e-learning modules into existing engineering and computer science courses. The e-learning modules are interactive, structured in a way that will allow integration into regular courses or utilization as supplementary resources, and each are accompanied with a teaching guide. The modules are generic enough to allow their deployment in various courses and majors.The length of each module is 3-9 hours of online student work. Online student work includes the amount of time a student is expected to spend reviewing material in a module as well as the average time needed to complete module assignments, activities or exercises.The development and implementation of the e-Learning Modules has taken placed over the past several years. Several papers and conference presentations document that effort and we invite you to read them - including 2 related papers at the most recent ASEE 2020 conference. Please scroll down to the resources section for direct links to the papers. E-Learning Modules Overview Videos You can see about a two-minute video in the following links to learn more about each module. Adapting a Business to a Changing Climate Applying Systems Thinking to Complex Problems Building Relationships with Corporations and Communities Building, Sustaining and Leading Effective Teams and Establishing Performance Goals Defining and Protecting Intellectual Property Determining Market Risks Developing a Business Plan that Addresses Stakeholder Interests, Market Potential and Economics Developing Customer Awareness and Quickly Testing Concepts Through Customer Engagement Cost of Production and Market Conditions Financing a Business Generating New Ideas Based on Societal Needs and Business Opportunities Innovating to Solve Problems under Organizational Constraints Innovative Client-Centered Solutions Through Design Thinking Learning from Failure Resolving Ethical Issues Role of Product in Value Creation The Elevator Pitch: Advocating for Your Good Ideas Thinking Creatively to Drive Innovation

Showing engineering students the significance and utility of bio-inspired (or biomimicry) design is easy, but teaching them how to do bio-inspired design is much more difficult. When not scaffolded, students tend to create bio-inspired concepts that are pure science fiction or closely resemble biological imitation, meaning the concepts look or act like the biological system observable characteristics. This card shares an instructional technique for teaching bio-inspired design to engineering students based on the concept-knowledge (C-K) theory of design that scaffolds the discovery and knowledge transfer processes involved in using natural designs to inspire engineering solutions. The hallmark of this technique is the BID canvas (formerly called the C-K map template) that visually structures the thought processes or mindset of bio-inspired design. We have found conclusive evidence of learning impact of design theory based bio-inspired design pedagogy. It has been shown with statistical significance to help students create bio-inspired concepts that are of higher quality than other methods as published in the ASEE 2019 manuscript linked below. With scaffolding, students tend to successfully abstract biological system principles to create concepts that more closely resemble biological inspiration, meaning learning from nature to innovate rather than copying, that are also feasible. This technique has been successfully integrated within a second-year engineering design course, but could be adapted to a capstone design course or an engineering science course with a project. Materials: The Instructional Resource folder contains the complete set of documents needed to adopt this technique for teaching bio-inspired design. They are the following: - A 100 min. lecture (could be split into two 50 min. lectures) in 3 file formats that includes two learning activities - A blank BID canvas and instructions for filling it in - A partially filled in BID canvas for the Flectofin example - A rubric for evaluating BID canvases - An example assignment- Four student work examplesThe Papers / Posters folder contains multiple published manuscripts on our C-K based approach. Context: This technique is used in a second-year engineering design course. These students are in the first semester of the engineering design sequence of the curriculum and are learning the engineering design process while applying the tools and methods to a course project. The topic of bio-inspired design is taught during the concept generation phase of the design process. All students receive a lecture on bio-inspired design in a single 100 minute class period. The lecture has three parts: (1) design by analogy, (2) fundamentals of bio-inspired design with many examples, and (3) the C-K instructional approach with individual and group active learning activities. All assignments in the course tie to a year-long course project of developing a human powered vehicle for a client in the community that has cerebral palsy, including the bio-inspired design assignment. To integrate bio-inspired design into the human powered vehicle design project, each member of a team applies bio-inspired design to a different sub-system (e.g., propulsion, steering, braking) of their design to showcase a variety of design problems and analogies that enable bio-inspired design. All students complete the BID canvas three times, twice in class as part of learning activities to understand the process of bio-inspired design and again in their assignment to scaffold application to the human powered vehicle.Connections to the KEEN Framework:Curiosity: The process of bio-inspired design requires identification of biological inspiration sources using a search technique or database, intuitive knowledge, or communicating with experts. Once a set of inspiring biological organisms or phenomena are identified, they are studied further to facilitate knowledge transfer to the problem task. Engaging in bio-inspired design evokes reductive curiosity (wanting to know) and situational curiosity. As the process continues, the type of curiosity changes. Analysis of biological systems leads to a deeper understanding of the inspiration sources which can then result in abstractions for analogy mapping. The final step is to generate concepts and select those that can be moved forward to the embodiment phase of the traditional engineering design process. It is in the feedback loop of transfer and apply–investigating a biological inspiration source and applying the learned knowledge by generating new concepts–that the discovery of innovative bio-inspired solutions occurs. These later process steps evoke the epistemic curiosity (asking why) and diverse curiosity (asking what if). Connections: Making connections is a necessity in bio-inspired design. Specifically, the investigation of the intersection of seemingly disparate ideas from biology and a technical domain such as engineering. Incorporating other STEM disciplines into complex engineering problems will create a new context for undergraduate students to apply knowledge that they already have. Most students that go into engineering have high school level training in biology. Adding bio-inspired design into the engineering curriculum encourages students to utilize and build off their prior knowledge, which fosters making connections and recognizing interrelationships across STEM disciplines. Moreover, requiring knowledge transfer across domains as well as organizing that knowledge into logical constructs helps to develop future flexibility and adaptive expertise that will facilitate innovation and efficiency. Having to retrieve and transfer knowledge from domains outside of engineering forces students to adapt to unfamiliar languages and content formats (which addresses non-technical skills) in order to apply the biological information intelligently to engineering problems (which addresses technical skills). C-K theory is known for integrating multiple domains of information and facilitating innovation through connection building. Innovation is the direct result of moving between the two spaces by using the addition of new and existing concepts to expand knowledge, and using knowledge to expand concepts. Knowledge is therefore not restricted to being a solution space, but rather is leveraged to improve understanding of the innovative designs. C-K theory thus provides a framework for a designer to navigate the unknown, to build and test connections between the K and C spaces, and to converge on a solution grounded in theory combined with new knowledge.Creating Value: Bio-inspired design is a disruptive approach to innovation and can lead to the discovery of of non-conventional solutions to problems that are often more efficient, economic and elegant. Biological systems often have solved similar problems in an opposite way to traditional engineering approaches. This allows the identification of unexpected opportunities to create extraordinary value across the engineering landscape.Bio-inspired design touches on many areas of engineering including electrical, mechanical, materials, biomedical, chemical, manufacturing and systems, which makes it applicable in a wide range of engineering programs and courses, from discipline-specific to general ones.

The increasing complexity of the challenges facing our society and world suggests that engineering graduates must be outstanding problem solvers, designers, and value creators in a variety of settings. The solutions, designs, and systems created must solve technical problems and provide benefit to a variety of stakeholders who may have broad interests in financial, social, and environmental outcomes.Engineering education often focuses on the quantitative skills of problem solving yet solutions to many of the most challenging problems require higher level design, entrepreneurial mindset, and value creation skills. The opportunity to create value, or to fail to, occurs in many settings with engineers commonly called upon to create value in design settings. While being a good designer is a hallmark trait of an engineer, current approaches to teaching design need improvement because a high percentage of products and services introduced to the marketplace fail to find success. An engineering education with emphasis on employing an entrepreneurial mindset would improve the odds of success. Applying methods from systems engineering, this work extends the idea of developing a product to developing a successful solution within a system. That system includes stakeholders, features, and a series of views representing the designed system or product. It is shown that these results are highly complementary to existing conceptions of ‘creating value’ as part of the 3 C’s. Tools and views are presented for classroom use to support the 'creating value' objective through case studies of successful and unsuccessful products. Results from a first run of a class exploring these new approaches are provided in a 2018 ASEE paper.The elements of a ‘value creation’ mindset in an engineering education entrepreneurial context includes:1. Value is a relative concept and is illustrated through selection or choice.2. Creating and capturing value at the enterprise or organizational level can be illustrated in the completeness and alignment of product, business, and execution models. (customer desirability, technically feasible, business viability, organizationally implementable)3. The value of a product or offering can be studied by a. identifying important stakeholders and features and b. developing a product or offering to perform and exhibit the important features identified. 4. Products and systems are successful when they provide capabilities and characteristics that a significant number of stakeholders find attractive and choose over competing options.

A first-year engineering course at the University of New Haven was redesigned to add the benefits of learning in the makerspace into an existing design and customer-awareness term project. This card focuses on the specific training materials used to introduce students to the makerspace equipment at a first-year student level. Three 100-minute class periods were used, with one of the following technologies introduced during each class period alongside EM objectives: 3D Printer -> Rapid Prototyping for Risk ManagementArduino -> Resiliency and Learning from FailureLaser Cutter + Hand Tools -> Exploring Creativity and AssumptionsThe 3D-Printing class introduces the history of the technology, pros/cons of using 3D printers, and then walks through an introduction to Inventor. Students pass-around example of 3D printed success and failures for various design features, and discuss how rapid prototyping can minimize risk and cost for a project to quickly enable stakeholder feedback. The class period ends with students learning how to transfer a design to a 3D printable file for the Makerbot printers available on our campus, and the faculty member beginning a print of a design. The Arduino class starts with a brief overview of microprocessor technology and basic coding structures, but the bulk of a class is a hands-on 3-part lab in which students use the Arduino to code various LED light patterns, buttons, and a photoresistor. Students practice developing resiliency to failure as the guidelines are intentionally vague and students often ask multiple questions to prompt just-in-time logic pedagogy and teamwork development as they try to accomplish the tasks as a team. The lasercutter + hand tools class introduces the idea of rapid prototypes with cheap materials by asking students to create a ring-toss game. Left to their imaginations with only 5 minutes, students often reach for a popsicle stick to mount upright and a pipecleaner to bend into a circle. After first creating with craft supplies and discussing various design decisions made (what size rings? how many poles? any game rules? why horizontal and not vertical?), students are taught how to use hand-tools to create a more-refined prototype out of wood. The class ends by introducing the science and pros/cons of laser-cutting, specifically highlighting how the technology could be used if they wanted to mass-produce or engrave designs on their prototypes. This card includes the materials for each makerspace classroom training, including the powerpoint slides and lesson plans, as well as various hand-outs that may be useful to your students as they work with makerspace technologies.The partner-card focusing on the EM-infused makerspace project itself (designing a customer-focused prototype of a puzzle with makerspace technology) is available at #DIY Puzzle: Makerspace Technology for Rapid Prototyping, available here.

A traditional electric circuits course can spark the entrepreneurial mindset with just a few key enhancements.1.) Question Formulation Technique (QFT): [Targets Curiosity]The QFT is a pedagogical approach, created by the Right Question Institute, to improve the ability of students to formulate their own questions, refine and prioritize the questions, and ultimately use the questions for some purpose. It involves a question focus (QFocus) developed by the instructor to direct the question generation process. Divergent thinking is encouraged, where students brainstorm to create questions (called question-storming) in groups of 3-5 students in order to generate many questions on the QFocus topic. Students then analyze and refine the questions, and then prioritize them based on relevance to the QFocus, propensity for exploration, and student interest. A QFT exercise is used in 10 of the labs as a kickstarter for the laboratory experiment. From the ten sets of QFT exercises, each student selects three questions from different labs to use in three short exploratory research papers on the selected questions. Finally students write a brief reflection on the QFT exercises and exploratory research assignments. See the Circuits QFT Resources folder for files supporting this tool.2.) Circuit analogies related to real life experiences or familiar topics: [Targets Connections]Connecting new topics to established student knowledge and understanding is a well-researched pedagogical approach firmly grounded in the science of learning. Given the abstract nature of electric circuits to students, it is even more critical for this subject. Toward the end of the course, students have the option to reflect on one of the analogies given throughout the course and connect it to a personal life experience, or to create their own analogy that connects the circuit content to a life experience or other topic. See the Circuits Analogy Resources folder for files supporting this.3.) Entrepreneurially Minded Learning (EML) circuit design-build-test with value proposition: [Targets Creating Value]Students organize into groups of two to four students (from at least two different majors, if possible, as the circuits course has students from up to 5 different majors) to design and build a circuit to interface two electrical components: a position sensor that provides a signal with one voltage range and an Analog-to-Digital Converter (ADC) that accepts another voltage range. The mapping of the voltage must meet certain constraints and the circuit must be able to source at least 10mA to the ADC. There are four deliverables for the project: a team charter, design alternatives document, written product proposal, and 5-minute prototype demonstration.In the team charter, students list the set of rules and expectations for their team to try to avoid the common pitfalls and submit the team charter during Lab 6. The design alternatives document requires students to demonstrate that at least two unique solutions are viable. They must define relevant design criteria and evaluation metrics, mathematically analyze their designs, simulate them in PSPICE, select one circuit component supplier, and find all parts necessary to construct the circuit. The bill of materials must have supplier part numbers and the correct number of parts to construct 10,000 circuits. Feedback from the instructor on the design alternatives document must be incorporated in the written product proposal, which should compare 2 suppliers for each design and identify one distributor who would reasonably sell the circuit, convey the value proposition for the circuit design selected, and describe the testing and implementation. The value proposition section should use the Need-Approach-Benefits/Costs-Competition (NABC) framework to organize the value proposition. The NABC framework is a tool developed by SRI International to improve the value propositions generated internally. Finally, students describe the design and prototype in a 5-minute pitch in the final lab.See the Circuits EML Design-Build-Test Project with NABC Value Props folder for files supporting this.--Note: Featured Image is a personalized PCB created by ONU student Gabriel Russ.

Are you teaching a first year engineering course, or the engineering design process? Are you looking for an assessment tool for the design process? Do you want to implement 'connections' out of the 3C's in your course? This card describes the use of concept maps as a tool to assess first year students' understanding of the engineering design process in a design-based introduction to engineering course at Arizona State University. It requires students to identify and make connections of various design process related topics and demonstrate their comprehensive understanding of the design process. Even though this card describes the use of the tool in a specific context, i.e., the assessment of engineering design process knowledge, its use can be extended to help students make connections of any other topics within a course, or across curricula, either as an instructional tool or assessment tool. Background Information The engineering design process has become one of the essential topics for first year engineering courses. Many such courses now incorporate design activities for students to practice applying the design process in either simulated or real world situations. The assessment of design process knowledge is usually done through the evaluation of design deliverables, or close or open-ended questions. Traditional assessment methods exhibit many flaws, for example, some of them may not be individual or process based, and others are only connected to lower levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. Concept maps, i.e., graphical node-arc representations that depict relationships among concepts, on the other hand, used as an assessment tool, is open-ended and it requires students to internalize the knowledge, identify key concepts that are relevant, and document relationships between the concepts, demonstrating knowledge of the engineering design process at multiple levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Context This tool was utilized in the freshman-level 2-credit 15-week introduction to engineering course taught during the Fall 2019 semester at Arizona State University, three times throughout the semester to study changes in students' understanding of the design process. Each time, students were instructed to create a concept map that demonstrates their understanding of the design process. More specifically, students must identify key phases (steps) of the design process, as well as any relevant information and details related to each phase, including goals, key tasks, strategies and tools involved, and possible outcomes. And they must use a concept map to show connections of different (specific) concepts identified. The first assessment was done at the beginning of the first class period and it was not graded. The goal of the first assessment was to learn about their understanding of the design process before engaging in any course activities. The other two were each done during a 50-min lecture as in-class assessments and both were included in their final course grades. The second one was done during the middle of the semester after the introduction of the design process and completion of a two-week team-based design challenge where students applied the first few phases of the design process to create a conceptual design. While the last assessment was done at the end of the semester after a 10-week large hands-on team-based multidisciplinary systems-design project. In the first folder included below, a description of the course, including its format, outcomes, and a list of weekly topics can be found. In that folder, a link to another card describing the two-week design challenge, and a link to another ASEE paper describing the 10-week design project can also be found. In the second folder below. detailed instructions provided to students for the assessment, along with the grading rubrics can also be found. Outcome Through the analyses of the concept maps generated by students, it was learned that there is no difference in students’ understanding at the start of this course regardless of whether they had prior knowledge and experiences about engineering design or not; and through this course, the two-week design challenge in particular, students’ understanding of the design process in all aspects has greatly improved; and students’ understanding was further improved after the ten-week design challenge in areas of ‘customer involvement throughout the design process’, ‘research/information gathering’, ‘model/analysis’, and the ‘iterative characteristic’ of the design process.The concept maps generated by students were also categorized based on their complexity and the inter-connectedness of concepts included. It was learned that at the end of the course, 83% students were able to successfully make connections of various engineering design process concepts introduced during the semester. In the third folder included below, four examples of concept maps generated by students can be found. Link to EMConnections Throughout the semester, many specific concepts and tools are introduced that are related to the engineering design process. Students should not leave the course with many small pieces of information, without having a complete picture of how they relate to each other. This tool provides an excellent opportunity for students to think deeply about how the specific concepts are related to each other, through the construction of a complete picture around a central topic. For example, 'design criteria' is one of the concepts introduced in the course about the design process. Instead of just knowing that 'design criteria need to be identified' in the design process, this tool requires students to think about what specific goals, tasks, and outcomes in the design process are related to 'design criteria', and when does the 'design criteria' matter. For example, it can be connected to the 'define the problem', 'brainstorm', 'evaluate design options', 'test design' phases in the design process as well as other specific topics including 'customer wants', 'AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)', 'decision matrix', 'test procedure', etc. There is also an important connection between 'design criteria' and 'customer'. Through this example, it can been seen that this tool helps facilitate the development of connected thinking. ASEE Paper The paper that is the focus of this card was presented in the Best of First Year Programs: Best Paper Session at the 2019 ASEE Annual Conference. The paper can be viewed at: https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/140/papers/27035/view. It is also included as a link under the folders section of this card.Materials Included In the folder, the following documents are included:- course information including weekly topics - slide that shows the engineering design process introduced in the course - link to the card describing the team-based design challenge - link to the 2018 ASEE paper that describes the team-based multidisciplinary systems design project - assessment instructions- assessment rubrics - example student work

Goal of this card: This card was created to orient new KEEN Partners once they have signed and executed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Kern Family Foundation (which is operating in this sense on behalf of KEEN). Reviewing this card will provide you with information about how to get started, how to communicate about joining KEEN, how to begin the work on your campus, and how to start coordinating with the Kern Family Foundation and the KEEN Leadership Council. This card has been written specifically for KEEN Leaders and other faculty championing entrepreneurial mindset at new partner institutions. STEP 1: The AnnouncementWe are excited to announce your institution joining KEEN to the rest of the Network and want to work with you to broadcast that message to your campus community and beyond. Let’s coordinate on this! Foundation staff will contact your KEEN contact person (identified in your application) to schedule a virtual meeting. Who should attend: Anyone responsible for communications about KEEN within your college, as well as those you’ve identified as KEEN contacts on your campus. What is the agenda? Announcement of KEEN partnership to your campus community (you can see example press releases in the communications folder below) Announcement of KEEN partnership through our newsletters Publishing your institutional partner page on EngineeringUnleashed.com. Branding permission (see link below in communications folder) Miscellaneous topics such as KEENews subscriptions, upcoming events, etc. STEP 2: Building Awareness and ChampionsBuilding awareness and champions for KEEN among your staff and faculty is essential for this work to take hold. Let’s get started by sharing KEEN Leader Essentials - what others in the Network have developed and learned as promising practices. Foundation staff will contact your KEEN contact person to schedule a virtual meeting. Who should attend: You likely have a group of engineering faculty and staff serving as your KEEN Leader group. This will be a valuable meeting for this group. What is the agenda? Why regular internal meetings of your KEEN leaders and goal setting are important. How to grow your faculty engagement in KEEN. How to grow your student engagement in EM. How can EM be messaged to students, staff and faculty. What funding is available through the Kern Family Foundation and other sources. Are there a couple Network partners to connect to and mechanisms to do that. What are the next KEEN events or deadlines of which you need to be aware. STEP 3: Reaching Your FacultyFollowing these two introduction meetings, you have the opportunity to engage with other Network partners to launch the KEEN initiative on your campus and introduce more of your faculty and staff to EM and the Network. Please reach out to Foundation staff if we can help with these follow up meetings: KEEN launch, so your engineering faculty and staff become familiar with their roles internally and the opportunities to connect across the Network Engineering Unleashed demo, so your faculty become familiar with the website content and best practices for finding and creating useful resources. STEP 4: The Summer WorkshopYou will be selecting two KEEN leaders from your institution to attend a summer Engineering Unleashed Faculty Development (EUFD) program specifically for new KEEN leaders. These faculty or staff leaders will work on a KEEN-related project on your campus for a year and will receive support from coaches and mentors. STEP 5: Staying Up to Date Lastly - stay up to date on current opportunities and deadlines offered to KEEN partners. The KEEN Leader Group highlights current information that you’ll need. Bookmark it and be sure to check it regularly. Check your Engineering Unleashed profile to make sure you are subscribed to all newsletters.

This project was described in a presentation at ASEE 2019 in the Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 2Background/IntroductionProduct archaeology is the study and dissection of products in order to arrive at a deeper understanding of the global, societal, economic, and environmental impacts of the design. Engineers research various products, investigating the technical aspects of the design as well as the sociocultural implications that are attached to them. Over the course of a four week project, first-year students perform a “dig” on a consumer product (e.g., bluetooth speakers, coffee mugs, flashlights, shampoo, paper towels, etc). Much like an archaeological dig is a process, so is product archaeology for engineers. Therefore, each week students complete a phase of the product archeology process: preparation, excavation, evaluation, and explanation. PreparationArchaeologists do not just go around digging in any old spot looking for something interesting. Instead, they do some background research and look for places that seem especially interesting or likely to yield worthwhile findings. Similarly, during the preparation phase, students conduct research on the background and history of the product, noting interesting developments or important events that provide a historical context for the product today. This phase will require that information be integrated and cited from credible sources (connections), including those found in the University library. Excavation/Experimentation:Once initial research is done and students know what to look for and where to look, they can begin to dig. During the excavation phase, students conduct experiments with their products and explore the form, function, and other important aspects of the design. With a curious mind, students design describe at least 3 experiments they will conduct on their products to explore differences and determine which is “optimal” for their purposes. Here, students will look at differences between designs and begin thinking about why they might be that way. Evaluation:Once the products have been dissected and students have explored the nuances of the product and its components, they need to make some evaluations. Much like an archaeologist uses the information about the excavated artifact to make conclusions about what they found (e.g., the size and dimension of a bone leads to the conclusion that it was a tooth and not a femur), students will evaluate the processes involved in the creation and manufacturing of this product. Importantly, students will also consider alternatives to what their teams determined as they explore this phase. Explanation:In the explanation phase, it all comes together. Archaeologists use the research they conduct alongside the artifacts they uncover in the field to explain their findings and provide rationale for their interpretations (e.g., determining an animal’s diet based on teeth, body size, condition of environment, etc.). Here, students engage in a similar process and provide explanations for their findings, while also using the benefit of hindsight to make recommendations for creating value through future improvement and innovation. The attachments to this card include a schedule, possible products to conduct the "dig" on, assignment sheets, an example student paper, and a link to the ASEE paper published based on this work. Note: we are open to feedback about this card and project! Please let us know what you think in the comments section!

In an educational setting it is vital that we as educators are able to assess our learning outcomes and effectively measure student progress towards those objectives. With that being said, what can educators do when they trying to instill a characteristic that they don’t know how to asses? The entrepreneurial engineering community is tackling this issue head on, as the increasing popularity of injecting an entrepreneurial mindset into the engineering curriculum has brought some of these “hard-to-assess” traits into the spotlight. While the KEEN framework has provided a valuable communication tool around which to organize discussion and facilitate action incorporating the entrepreneurial mindset into engineering curricula, it has also raised significant questions around assessment of the framework elements. The constructs captured by the framework are beyond the scope of what engineering faculty are accustomed to teaching and assessing. The abstracted and conceptually overlapping nature of the framework elements further worsens this discomfort. Having a fully vetted example of how the framework might be digested into defined, assessable pieces would be of tremendous value to the network. The purpose of this work is, therefore, to address the need for applied assessment of the KEEN Entrepreneurial Mindset and to explore how the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) VALUE Rubrics might fill these gaps. The first goal for this work was to review the applicability of VALUE rubrics. The guiding research question for this phase was: Are the VALUE Rubrics applicable in regards to assessing the Entrepreneurial Mindset that KEEN promotes? Secondly, after this initial review, the rubric components deemed most applicable were extracted and the goal shifted to answering the question: How might the components of the VALUE Rubrics be reorganized around the elements of the KEEN Framework? Finally, after a thorough review of the resulting rubrics, the question again shifted to: How might these reorganized rubrics be modified and/or appended to better evaluate the KEEN Framework?A set of three rubrics has been developed based on a modification of the sixteen VALUE rubrics, reframed to fit the KEEN Framework. As previously stated, there are gaps in each of the three rubrics, some with more than others. Work is still needed to distribute, revise, and polish the text of the rubric rows, as well as to evaluate gaps in the rubric coverage. Additionally, while direct application of these exemplars is not the intended use case, there are some faculty who may opt to do so. Significant work remains in terms of validation of the rubrics. While they have been developed from highly reliable and validated source material, some revalidation is necessary to ensure good reliability and applicability of the rubrics as redesigned. This work was initially presented at ASEE 2019, as part of the ENT division.