Category Archives: Universities

Engineering for the Americas Symposium

Engineering education, innovation trends and perspectives on the knowledge-based economy will top the agenda in the four-day Engineering for the Americas Symposium, which opens November 29 in Lima, Peru.

The forum is a joint initiative of the Organization of American States (OAS) Office of Education, Science and Technology, the US Trade and Development Agency, the World Federation of Engineering Organizations, several professional associations, academia, governments and industry, including Hewlett-Packard Company (HP), National Instruments and Microsoft.

Among other objectives, the organizers hope the four-day meeting will produce a clear understanding of the role of engineering education and capacity building in developing countries and a “country roadmap” to that end as well as information on potential funding sources to implement country plans. The organizers also hope to chart a “way forward” for the Engineering for the Americas program.

Importance of TAs to Science Education

TA’s as the Key to Science Teaching via Confessions of a Science Librarian:

In 1997, Elaine Seymour was one of the authors of Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences. She found that a reason cited by student after student — at a range of institutions — was poor teaching. And at many institutions, teaching assistants were a major part of the problem.
…
What should colleges be doing to help teaching assistants? Seymour offers several strategies that are discussed in her book:

Creating semester-length courses that teach pedagogy. “You have to show them how to do it.”
Involving science faculty members demonstrating techniques of teaching so that the pedagogy is not just theoretical.
Scheduling regular meetings — at least once a week — for teaching assistants to talk about how their sections are going and the issues that are coming up. “You have to troubleshoot,” she says.
Providing support for teaching, so that TA’s dissertation committees and advisers know that their teaching duties should be taken seriously.

These ideas are very important.

Also see, Teaching Quality Improvement by Quality Improvement in Teaching by Ian Hau. This paper describes how students and the instructor worked as a team to improve the quality of teaching in a class.

New book by Elaine Seymour due out in January- Partners in Innovation: Teaching Assistants in College Science Courses.

Schoofs Prize for Creativity

Photo of interlocking bowl baby tray

Photo: “Tara Jo Schiltz designed the interlocking bowl and tray system for use with a baby’s high chair. The system locks the bowl in the tray preventing the child from throwing the bowl to the floor.”

The Schoofs Prize for Creativity is open to undergraduate students at the University of Wisconsin – Madison.

Other winners included:

First place and $10,000 — Nick OBrien, Chandler Nault and Mitch Nick for “The FireSite:” A transmitter/receiver system designed to guide firefighters out of smoke-filled buildings.
Second place and $7,000 — Ben Jaeger, Natalie Meagher, Mark Webb, Lynn Daul, Dominic Kasten for the “Baseboard Booster:” A collapsing stool that fits in the space behind the baseboard of a cabinet
Third place and $4,000 — Sean McHone for “RoboMouse:” A fishing lure that replicates the appearance and movements of a live animal in the water.

More details on the 2005 competition.

July 2005 Wall Street Journal article on the 1996 award winner: For This Inventor, The Perfect Beer Is All About the Tap:

He was not the first college student to dream of ways to get to his alcohol more quickly. What set Mr. Younkle apart is that he chose, soberly, to follow through.

Ten years later, Mr. Younkle, 31 years old, is president and chief technology officer of TurboTap, a company marketing a finger-sized nozzle that attaches to standard beer faucets and pours draft beer at least twice as fast as traditional systems do, and with less spillage. The company, based here, has installed about 1,000 TurboTaps at bars, restaurants and ballparks—including Chicago’s two major-league baseball stadiums and Cleveland’s Gund Arena.

Red Blood Cell’s Amazing Flexibility

Scientists Discover Secret Behind Human Red Blood Cell’s Amazing Flexibility:

The human red blood cell membrane skeleton is a network of roughly 33,000 protein hexagons that looks like a microscopic geodesic dome.
…
a team of UCSD researchers describe a mathematical model that explains how a mesh-like protein skeleton gives a healthy human red blood cell both its rubbery ability to stretch without breaking, and a potential mechanism to facilitate diffusion of oxygen across its membrane. “Red cells are one of the few kinds of cells in the body with no nucleus and only a thin layer of protein skeleton under their membrane: they are living bags of hemoglobin,” said Amy Sung, a professor of bioengineering at UCSD’s Jacobs School of Engineering

Worldwide Science and Engineering Doctoral Degree Data

graph showing doctoral degrees awarded by region The graph shows doctoral degrees awarded by region in science and engineering (graph from the United States National Science Foundation Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 report). The data used to make the chart is included in this spreadsheet on the NSF site.

It seems to me the claims of the NY Times article discussed in our previous post are wrong. I would trust this NSF data to be fairly accurate. The full report includes a great deal of related data and is worth looking at.

The data from the NSF 2004 report (the data is from 2000 and 2001 [the most recent data they have access to]) show a total of 24,409 science and engineering doctoral degrees granted in all of Asia. How many in the USA? 25,509.

International Mobility of Doctoral Recipients from U.S. Universities by Jean M. Johnson, NSF, 2000, provides some good discussion of related issues. For example, the paper explores country of origin of the students as well as where the students go to work once they receive the degrees.

The percentage of foreign doctoral recipients planning to stay in the United States may
return to the lower 50 percent level that existed until 1992. The 60-70 percent stay rates of the 1993-99 period may have been driven by the expanding U.S. economy and employment opportunities.

In any discussion of the impact of the United States failing behind in science and engineering graduation, and the resulting economic decline, it is critical to understand where the graduates go to work. There are real changes going on:

For example, in the last 5 years, Chinese and Korean students earned more doctoral S&E degrees in their respective countries than in U.S. universities. And in 1999, Taiwanese students, for the first time, earned more doctoral S&E degrees within Taiwanese universities than from U.S. universities.

This is important information. It is also important to see that it was just 1998 when more doctoral degrees were granted in the US than in Taiwan to Taiwanese students.

It seems there are at least two critical issues that people are considering when quoting figures (or related statements about the decline of US science and engineering status). One is getting scientific and engineering workers working in the economy. Another is the actual education of students, which relates directly to the first issue and has many “spin-off” benefits.

One measure used to look at creating future science and engineering workers is the number of those earning degrees (undergraduate and graduate degrees). That is a sensible thing to look at, though it should be noted that such a measure provides a limited view (it is an input measure and not an outcome measure, which would be preferable).

I believe the graduate measure is used as a way to project into the future by many of the future health of the science and engineering success of countries. It seems a sensible measure to pay attention to: we cannot measure today the number of high wages scientists and engineers employed in specific countries 20 years from now (or the jobs those scientists and engineers create for others in the economy or the useful patents written, scientific discoveries made, engineering breakthroughs achieved…).

The number of graduates has some value in trying to predict that outcome years from now but it is only a proxy measure and not at all definitive. The United States has been remarkably effective at getting those who graduate with advanced science and engineering degrees in the United States to say (and even in getting those granted degrees elsewhere to move here during their careers and gaining tremendous benefits to the United States economy). Where students receive degrees (and where they grew up), I believe is correlated to where a person ends up working during their career, but that correlation is not perfect. And that correlation may change in the future – in fact I believe it will do so significantly.

I believe the correlation will decrease – movement will increase and much of this may not even make sense as work flows without much regard for national boundaries (while physical location is one factor if essentially workers in Singapore, India, Mexico and Germany all our working on the same project for a company based in Japan and owned 40% by Canadians… how all this is analyzed gets very confusing).

Looking at where they work immediately after graduation is a sensible thing to do, however we should also look at where they work 10 or 20 years in the later if we are interested in long term impact.

The actual education of the students is also seen as critical to many, and I agree. One reason this is important is you have many good jobs educating the students. But there are many other benefits. The students often do research which if they are in you country is much more likely to benefit your economy than if they are earning there degree elsewhere and supporting research elsewhere.

Also the leading educational hubs create a climate for technological innovation (proximity to the leading experts in the world often provides benefits in tapping that knowledge for purposes that often have economic advantages). If the students are educated elsewhere it is likely those hubs of technological innovation will move also (or at least the lure of the local hub will loose some to another hub that grows in importance). So measuring the number of graduate, post graduate and doctoral degrees granted in your country makes sense (again it is not a perfect measure but a valuable one).

While there is a great deal of worry about the importance of improving science and engineering education to capture economic benefit I think the understanding of the actual situation is lacking. I think we need to have a clearer idea of what the data actual shows. Then I think we can start looking at where we would like to improve. I am to explore related issues with this blog.

Engineering Education and Innovation

Are U.S. Innovators Losing Their Competitive Edge? by Timothy L. O’Brien, New York Times:

He fears that corporate and public nurturing of inventors and scientific research is faltering and that America will pay a serious economic and intellectual penalty for this lapse.

See previous post, Leverage Universities to Transform State Economy.

The Industrial Research Institute, an organization in Arlington, Va., that represents some of the nation’s largest corporations, is also concerned that the academic and financial support for scientific innovation is lagging in the United States. The group’s most recent data indicate that from 1986 to 2001, China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan all awarded more doctoral degrees in science and engineering than did the United States. Between 1991 and 2003, research and development spending in America trailed that of China, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan – in China’s case by billions of dollars.

In a previous post, Science and Engineering Doctoral Degrees Worldwide, I mentioned that I thought the United States was not in fact leading (and if they still were it would not last for more than a few years) in doctoral degrees in science and engineering though I could not find supporting data. I still can’t, but the NY Times claims IRI does have the data (though I can’t find any such data on their web site).

And I find the claim questionable without the data. Do they mean on a percentage of population basis, that seems unlikely with China? On an absolute basis it seems unlikely for South Korea and Taiwan (at least, if not all countries) especially from 1986-2001. On an absolute basis crediting the degree earned to the nationality of the student (so Taiwanese students in American graduate schools count for Taiwan not the US)? The last version seems the most likely basis of the data to me, though even then I find it questionable. And it is not what I think most readers would believe the statement in the article means (instead believing that doctoral degrees granted by American schools were lower than those granted by schools in Taiwan… from 1986-2001).

I find it hard to believe that the United States trailed Singapore on R&D spending on an absolute basis so I would guess the data the NY Times is quoting on a percentage basis (at least for R&D) though that seems unlikely for China, so I am a bit confused about the claims in the article. They really should state what the data says specifically not just that the United States trails on some undefined measure. And they also really should provide the data that backs up their claim.

About Our Science and Engineering Blog

The title of the blog gives you an idea of the topics we explore. Here we will provide some additional insight into what we aim to do:

Primary education (k-12) in science, math and engineering – we will post about the state of such education (research etc.), news and items of interest to teachers and students. We aim to be a resource that helps teachers and students learn about science and engineering. The K-12 category will be targeted at teachers and students. We are also trying a students category for items we think might be of particular interest to students (and we believe teachers might find useful as items to interest students in science and engineering).
Higher education (college, university, graduate school and other sources of advanced learning) – we will post about news about science and engineering higher education and items of interest to professor, students and those interested in higher education. The higher education category will be targeted at professors, students and those interested in higher education.
Economic impact of science and engineering – we will post about the macro economic and societal impacts of science and engineering: higher education, research funding, investments and political decisions and discussions. We believe science, engineering and technology can serve to improve living conditions around the world. We believe investments in science and engineering, research and higher education, will impact the economic success of countries and the world overall. The economics category contains posts on developments in this are and our thoughts on this topic.
Highlight interesting science and engineering information – we will post about interesting science and engineering news and blog posts as we see it

Rube Goldberg Machine Contest

Rube Goldberg Machine Contest (they broke link so I removed it)

Cut or Shred Into Strips 5 Sheets of 8 1/2″ x 11″ 20lb Paper Individually With a Shredder in 20 or More Steps!
…
Rube Goldberg drew his “Inventions” as contraptions that satirized the new technology and gadgets of the day. His drawings, using simple machines and household items already in use, were incredibly complex and wacky, but somehow (perhaps it was because Rube was a graduate engineer) the “Inventions” always had an ingenious, logical progression as they worked to finish their task.

The annual National Rube Goldberg Machine Contest held at Purdue University in Indiana is organized by the Phi Chapter of Theta Tau, the National Student Engineering Organization. It hosts college and university teams from across the US. Winners of the high school statewide and regional contests are also invited to run their invention machines at the National.

Another site with additional information on the contest. This seems like a great way to make engineering fun.

Engineering the Future

If you want to succeed in today’s hypercompetitive global economy, there are two things Jen-Hsun Huang wants you to know:

The name of the game is innovation, and innovation is a team sport.

“This is the innovation imperative,” he said.

That’s the message Huang plans to deliver this morning, when he will be the keynote speaker for the grand opening of the Kelley Engineering Center at Oregon State University.

In 1993 Huang cofounded Nvidia.

International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering

Purdue is starting a new journal, International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering:

a faculty-reviewed electronic journal offered free, semi-annually, over the World Wide Web. The Journal welcomes manuscripts based on original work of students and researchers with a specific focus or implication for service learning in engineering, engineering entrepreneurship in service, or related service learning pedagogy.