of writing iscurrently emphasized in this discipline pedagogically? Two, are there significant writing styledifferences in the discipline that that require faculty in the discipline to guide the student thoughtand writing process? The current emphasis in engineering and engineering technology programsis placed on highly formatted technical and scientific laboratory reports.1 The problem with thistype of technical writing in the discipline is that it doesn't really prepare students to communicate1 It is interesting to note that students have had a difficult time writing the conclusions in their laboratory reports. Page
-cutting skills of communication, teamwork, life-long learning,research experience, and laboratory experience will be woven throughout the curriculum.Students will build their ePortfolios around the theme of sustainability and the supportingprinciples and cross cutting skills. Students will be asked to select artifacts (assignments,laboratory reports, project presentations and exams) that illustrate the theme, principles, andskills. Periodically, students will be asked to reflect on a component of the ePortfolio and write areflection paper describing their knowledge in that component and identifying gaps in theirknowledge. These papers will serve several purposes. Students will have the opportunity to seeclearly how courses in the curriculum
numbers, thereby offering a unique environment for engineeringeducation. The Picker Program’s faculty of eight, five of whom are women, share a commonvision for engineering education reform.Within the Department of Education and Child Study at Smith, research programs focus oneducation in the sciences, mathematics, and technology. The Department’s undergraduate andgraduate teacher preparation programs and the Smith College Campus School (preK-6), whichserves as a laboratory for education research, provide fertile ground for developing and field-testing K-12 engineering education initiatives. Department of Education and Child Study facultymembers are working closely with the Picker Engineering Program to ensure that besteducational practices are
Tapping Hidden Talent Ronald A. L. Rorrer1, Daniel Knight2, Richard Sanders3 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center/2Integrated Teaching and Learning Laboratory, University of Colorado at Boulder/3Department of Music and Entertainment Industry Studies, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences CenterAbstractWe have developed a summer program intended to tap the talent of high school students whohave the capability to succeed in college, but are currently not on a college bound path. Thecourses in the program consist of a merging of
Trans 6 17 Numerical Tech Elective Water Chem & Water & WW Sustainabilty Methods + + & the Built Laboratory* Tmt* Environ * 7 15 Environ Environ Engrg Environ Engrg Engineering Tech Engrg Microbiology * Design * Economics+ Elective/ Processes * Sr Thesis 8 15 Option Air Pollution * EDC Projects
the design process. Also in many cases, students, through working on projects,often perceive the relevance of mathematics and science and see how what they have learned inthese courses might be applicable to their current project. Another, less frequently usedalternative is a first-year course built around discipline, laboratory-based learning experiences[10]. The goal of this alternative is to help first-year students better understand the nature of thedifferent engineering disciplines through carefully crafted experiential learning experiences.Given that one of the challenges faced by the first-year engineering curricula at TAMU was thelack of understanding of engineering practice, EAPO selected the project-based approach. Thedesign
mechanisms; and to facilitate communication between the group of users that constitutethe ‘learning community’ at which the product is focused” (p. 2). Providing interactiveopportunities is always problem in education, either because of resources required or resourcesnot available. Usually laboratories are seen as the principal method for fostering interactivity. Asall educators know, laboratories require equipment, constant maintenance, and upgrading.Instructional designers recognize that physical laboratories are not the only method for fosteringan interactive environment. Hallet (2001) writes, “Flexible, web-based tools allow decision-makers to interact with data. New Java-based visualization tools allow decision- makers tointeract with the
generated for this project are directly linked tothermodynamic principles and to the educational modules being developed. The simulations areto be used for just-in-time demonstrations as multimedia animations. With the use of theseanimations and presentations, fluid flow phenomena and thermodynamic processes that occur incomplicated engineering systems could be demonstrated and explained using a virtual laboratory.Students would benefit from having these presentations available to them to view and reviewwithout having to be in a laboratory, or to repeat an experiment. In addition, modules will beincorporated into these presentations that would require students to interactively performhomework assignments and to test their knowledge in
satisfaction with academic facilities, such as classroom and Academic Facilities laboratories, and services, such as academic advising. Since engineering is and Services an applied science, satisfaction with academic facilities and services plays a critical role in persistence. Seymour identified inadequate advising; concerns with teaching, labs, or recitation support; and poor facilities as persistence factors [9,10]. Astin also found that engineering majors reported poor satisfaction with individual support services, such as career counseling, academic advising, and academic assistance [17
in the top half preferconcrete experience (feeling).These results raise questions related to the design of the learning environment in fundamentalengineering courses. Thermal and Fluids Engineering I is typical of many analysis-basedcourses, which tend to dominate engineering curricula, while being distinctly different fromtypical laboratory and design courses. Clearly, the skills emphasized by all four learning stylesare useful in engineering practice. Yet, a curriculum which systematically “weeds out”imaginative and intuitive thinkers does a disservice to the field of engineering in particular and tosociety in general. Page 10.508.13
theory course. While they can demonstrate frequency-dependent behavior with analog circuits in the laboratory, they find it difficult to (a) conceptuallymap time-domain signal character to frequency-domain spectra and (b) describe the effect of a Page 10.976.1frequency-domain filter on the shape of a time-domain signal, even if they understand the Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition Copyright ©2005, American Society for Engineering Educationfundamental concept of a Fourier series. Finally, linear systems students find it hard to correctlyinterpret the
. Page 10.867.3 Excerpt from Analog Electronics Standard Course Outline Program Outcome #31: Students should be able to plan and conduct experimental measurements, use modern test and data acquisition equipment, and be able to analyze and interpret the results. (Outcome 31) Course Course Outcome Statement Outcomes Students will be able to assemble and demonstrate2 the correct operation4 of standard-design op-amp circuits and, using standard laboratory test 3a equipment3 (i.e., oscilloscope, DMM, etc.), measure their DC
“Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education”physician’s education as opposed to creating a perception of engineering as a profession of itsown. The report stated directly that applications-based activities and education were sub-professional. The report went on to enumerate recommended changes to the curricula whichwould remove the sub-professional content. The report recommended that students developscience from scratch as opposed to investigating and iterating an existing artifact. It furthersuggested that shop classes and hands-on laboratories be removed. Grinter stated that in theprofessional role, an
Laboratory in 1999 to serve as a model TTE training and research facility. ISU currently operates an NSF- funded Project ProBase, a pre-engineering curriculum development project. • University of Wisconsin-Stout (UW-Stout): Technology Teacher Education Program, School of Education. UW-Stout, a 2001 Baldrige Award recipient, has the largest TTE program in the nation with more than 350 undergraduates preparing to become technology teachers, in addition to more than 60 students pursuing technology education teacher certification through a master’s program. • North Carolina A & T State University (NCA&T): Department of Graphic Communications and Technological Studies, School of
intuitive powers. Tesla loved thepublicity and deliberately cultivated his image as an eccentric genius.1 Over the years, Tesla has enjoyed a curious and mixed legacy. On the one hand, he isacknowledged by engineers as the father of the AC motor and in 1956, "Tesla" was adoptedas the name for the unit of measure for the flux density of magnetic fields. Tesla’s legacy ishonored and promoted by the Tesla Memorial Society of New York and a group on LongIsland is working to establish a science museum in Tesla's laboratory at Wardenclyffe.2 Onthe other hand, thanks to the many colorful and exaggerated predictions he made about hisinventions, Tesla has become a patron saint for New Age groups. Fascinated by Tesla'sclaims of using mystical powers
innovative undergraduate classes whichinvolve active learning laboratories for the students in each of their freshman, sophomore, junior andsenior years. This program received the 1999 Boeing Outstanding Educator Award, in recognitionof its quality and effectiveness in providing a well-rounded engineering design education.The program objectives were developed in response to the call by industry for baccalaureateengineers to possess a broader set of skills beyond their analytical and computer skills. This call wasstrengthened by the Engineering faculty’s observation of the students’ experiences in senior capstonedesign during the late 1980’s and 1990’s. These students, who had had no prior experience with adesign process, struggled with the issues of
material1.A tensile test is often used as a demonstration of material property determination in a strength ofmaterials class. Viewing a tensile test from start to finish makes for an interesting demonstrationof tensile fracture and failure of a material specimen. The failure of the specimen can then beextrapolated by use of example to other mechanical members. This can help the student gain afeeling for the mechanism of tensile failure in mechanical components.A tensile test is performed as one of the initial laboratory exercises in strength of materials classat the authors’ location. Students gather around the universal testing machine (UTM) as aspecimen is pulled to failure. It can be difficult for the students to observe the test. Thespecimen is
how the program was applied:the engineering clinic set-up (”Satisfaction with Engineering Clinic”), the emphasis on teamwork(”Satisfaction with Teamwork”), and the laboratory work (”Satisfaction with Labwork”). Thelast two factors dealt with satisfaction with the interpersonal climate as related to fellow students(”Satisfaction with Peers”) and student-faculty relations (Satisfaction with Faculty-StudentRelationships) (see more detail in the Appendix).Leavers are less satisfied than are stayers with the opportunities the program offers and thechoices within the program (Table 6). However, they do not show more dissatisfaction with thecourse workload than stayers. Further, leavers are not less satisfied with the clinic program ingeneral,nor
., “An Interwoven Multisemester Dynamic Systems Project To Integrate Stem Material,” Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.3 Ganter, S. and Barker, W., Curriculum Foundations Project: Voices of the Partner Disciplines, Mathematical Association of America, 2004.Stephen Pennell is a Professor in the Mathematics Department at the University of Massachusetts Lowell.Peter Avitabile is an Associate Professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department and the Director of the ModalAnalysis and Controls Laboratory at the University of Massachusetts Lowell.John R. White is a Professor in the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Massachusetts Lowell
attainable in a traditional classroom or laboratory environment.IntroductionTechnology has allowed instructors to introduce visual elements into the traditional classroom.Visualization through custom animations can provide a very realistic insight into thefunctionality of digital systems. Visualizing the dynamic behavior of physical systems is animportant part of the learning process for engineering and technology students.LearningLearning is the active process, or experience, of gaining knowledge 1 . Knowledge can be gainedthrough reading, listening, or interacting with new material. The basic premise of learning is thatnew information is related to existing knowledge 1 .Research suggests that learning is hierarchical in the sense that complex
bediscussed.AssessmentDuring the spring semester of 2004, this teaching technique was used in a class of 63chemical engineering juniors. During the fall semester of 2004, an assessment form wasdeveloped and distributed to the students in the senior laboratory. There were 36 studentresponses (a 57% response rate) to the questions within one of five levels: strongly agree(5.0), agree (4.0), ambivalent (3.0), disagree (2.0), and strongly disagree (1.0). Thequestions were developed to assess if the intended consequences of using the tool weresuccessful, and are as follows: 1. I found the questions to be a good review of topics that we had covered in a previous class session. 2. I found the questions to be a good break from class. 3. I found the questions to be
adding any additional courses to expand coverage of the BOKvery difficult. The West Point paradox is that while this broad-based curriculum probably makesUSMA more compliant with the BOK, the inflexibility of the core curriculum and the paucity ofcourses allocated to the major will make any necessary changes more difficult to implement.V. How USMA is the Same… and DifferentIn many respects, the USMA CE curriculum is indistinguishable from any other school in thecountry. Students start with the standard regimen of calculus-based math (four semesters),chemistry (two semesters) and physics (two semesters). Basic engineering theory is providedthrough Statics, Dynamics, Fluids, and Mechanics of Materials. The program requires coursesand a laboratory
member who is an engineering educator, the “home time” willexperience some intrusion. When that household has two engineering educators, the family willhave to make frequent adjustments and “home time” will be under full-fledged assault. Whenthat household has two engineering educators in the same department, personal time is oftenoverwhelmed by the professional. Make that two “new” engineering educators in the samedepartment. “Help us, Kemo Sabe”. The problem is not that two educators in the samedepartment work more or harder. The problem is that both careers and their associated issues areso intertwined, it is hard to “get away from work”. Two research programs. Two sets ofgraduate students. Two laboratories. And often one name. “Why are there
Design. McGraw-Hill. 2000. 3. Chang, M. “Teaching top-down design using VHDL and CPLD.” Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference. 1996. 4. Chu, P.P. “A Small, Effective VHDL Subset for the Digital Systems Course.” Proceedings of ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. 2004. 5. Electronics Workbench. www.electronicsworkbench.com. 6. Floyd, T.L. Digital Fundamentals with VHDL. Pearson Education. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. 2003. 7. Fucik, O., Wilamowski, B. M. and McKenna, M. “Laboratory for the Introductory Digital Course,” Proceedings of ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. 2000. 8. Greco, J. “Designing a Computer to Play Nim: A Mini-Capstone Project in Digital
design experience ofbuilding an autonomous robot proved successful in the first version of the course, wefound that the time and frustration involved in programming autonomous robotsprevented students from being exposed to a wider array of engineering problems andskills. Through the development of wireless communication and tele-operationlaboratory modules, we hope to shift the focus away from the programming complexitiesinvolved in an autonomous robot competition and towards the robotic system itself,allowing students to more fundamentally explore both component and system issues. Atthe component level, students in the second course are more substantively exposed toelectronics and modeling while the coupling of the new laboratory modules with
Design Projectsand Laboratory Exercises To Increase Retention”, Proceedings of the 2004 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition,Salt Lake City, Utah3. Mountain, Jeffery R., “Method and Experimental Based Design: An approach to Freshman And SophomoreEngineering Design Projects”, Proceedings of the 2001 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Albuquerque, NewMexico.4. Anneburg, Lisa, Roger Ferguson, “Freshman Engineering Course Utilizing a 3 D Modeling Tool”, Proceedings ofthe 2001 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Albuquerque, New Mexico.5. Zang, Paul H., Dale Eddy, and Judson Singer, “Implementing 3-D Modeling for Engineering Freshman”,Proceedings of the 2000 ASEE Annual Conference, St. Louis, Missouri.6. Tromans, G. P., Workshop: “Rapid
Fall 2003, students enrolled in ENGR 101, “Introduction to Engineering & Technology,”designed and built instructional devices to support hands-on learning of electromagnetism atWoodward Elementary School. ENGR 101 students initially engaged in laboratory exploratory“play” to learn about the electromagnetic phenomena. They then performed a web-basedliterature search to identify a design team’s top three choices of activities for a design project andthe associated science benchmarks, from which one activity would be selected for the team todesign and build an instructional device to support the activity. The design specifications for theactivity and instructional device included the following: must illustrate a set of concepts or oneconcept
. 4148–4151, May 2002. Paper 4024 (invited).[6] C. H. G. Wright, T. B. Welch, D. M. Etter, and M. G. Morrow, “Teaching DSP: Bridging the gap from theory to real-time hardware,” ASEE Comput. Educ. J., vol. XIII, pp. 14–26, July 2003.[7] T. B. Welch, C. H. G. Wright, and M. G. Morrow, “Experiences in offering a DSP-based com- munication laboratory,” in Proceedings of the 11th IEEE Digital Signal Processing Workshop and the 3rd IEEE Signal Processing Education Workshop, (Taos, NM (USA)), Aug. 2004.[8] Texas Instruments, Inc., “C6713 DSK,” 2004. http://focus.ti.com/docs/toolsw/folders/ print/tmdsdsk6713.html.MICHAEL G. MORROW, P.E., is a Faculty Associate in the Department of Electrical and Computer En-gineering at the University of
DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COURSE FOR UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE STUDENTS Ganesh K. Venayagamoorthy Real-Time Power and Intelligent Systems Laboratory Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Missouri – Rolla, MO 65409, USA gkumar@ieee.orgAbstractThis paper presents the design, implementation and experiences of a new three hourexperimental course taught for a joint undergraduate and graduate class at the University ofMissouri-Rolla, USA. This course is unique in the sense that it covers the four main paradigmsof Computational Intelligence (CI) and their