Observational analysis unveils enhanced skills in bio-inspired robotics for non-STEM students, suggesting broader engagement in technology.
The First-Year Research Experience (FIRE) at the University of Maryland is a three-semester undergraduate program, open to STEM and non-STEM students, that trains students in college-level research practices and then leads them in a faculty-mentored, independent research project. In the Bio-Inspired Robotics Stream, one of the FIRE research groups, students participate in research-based, experiential learning as they work in teams to develop a nature-informed, robotic platform designed to tackle a real-world, field application. Student teams are limited only to developing robots that fall in pre-prescribed field application categories and can create almost entirely open-ended projects. Yet, to do this they must utilize a variety of skills they do not originally possess including biomechanical analysis, prototype concept design and evaluation, robot manufacturing techniques and microprocessor programming. This paper will discuss the development and implementation of class strategies for research-focused, science and engineering education designed to make students capable of designing, developing and ultimately field testing a bio-inspired robotic platform regardless of degree background. These strategies include In-class and In-lab workshops, team assignments, a student-driven skills certification system, collaboration with on-campus maker spaces and the hands-on experience of building a robot platform. Though not all students will leave this experience to pursue a STEM degree, the hope is that by the end of their time in the program they will have increased their confidence in interacting with technology, gained useful project management and presentation skills and expanded their intuitive knowledge and understanding of engineering concepts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
L. A. Johnson (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: