AC 2007-857: IMPROVING LEADERSHIP AND COMMUNICATION SKILLSUSING DEPARTMENT-CONSISTENT LABORATORY TEAM EXPERIENCESteven Burian, University of UtahPedro Romero, University of UtahSteven Bartlett, University of Utah Page 12.856.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Improving Leadership and Communication Skills Using Department-Consistent Laboratory Team ExperienceAbstractThe Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Utah hasimplemented a coordinated team approach into the laboratory components of the requiredundergraduate Soil Mechanics, Hydraulics, and Materials courses to deliver team buildingexperiences
AC 2007-2802: STUDENT FEEDBACK AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM ADDINGLABORATORY EXPERIENCES TO THE REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGNCOURSEMicah Hale, University of ArkansasSeamus Freyne, Manhattan CollegeStephan Durham, University of Colorado at Denver Page 12.1311.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Student Feedback and Lessons Learned from Adding Laboratory Experiences to the Reinforced Concrete Design CourseAbstractIn an effort to demonstrate lecture course material, a class project was added to the seniorlevel Reinforced Concrete Design course that incorporated beam testing. The concept ofbeam testing is not new. Many universities test reinforced concrete
include interdisciplinary engineering, asset management, decision-making, GASB#34, economic development, performance assessment, policy, performance-assessment, organizational assessment, and public relations. Dr. Orndoff’s research incorporates economics, public administration, public policy, political science, public finance, planning, and sociology aspects Page 12.1618.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 “Making Statics Dynamic!” -Combining Lecture and Laboratory into an Interdisciplinary, Problem-based, Active Learning Environment.AbstractThe new U.A
personnel involved in the design and maintenance of concrete structures. This problemcan be effectively addressed by educating those who are already in the transportation industry aswell as those who will work in that industry in the future. This paper describes an attempt madeat the University of South Alabama to introduce civil engineering undergraduate students, manyof whom will work for the transportation industry in the future, to the premature cracking ofconcrete bridge decks and pavements. In the summer of 2005, a group of undergraduate students,under the supervision of a faculty member, made significant efforts to enhance the CivilEngineering Construction Materials Laboratory to increase its capacity for the purpose ofstudying the early age
results demonstrated thatthe new teaching improvement is capable of adding students’ GIS knowledge.1. INTRODUCTION The GIS courses for graduate and undergraduate students are offered in Old DominionUniversity (ODU) via distance education mode. The distance courses are delivered to 15 states,50 higher education centers, and 4 oversee navy bases (Japan, Koera, Mid-East, and Canada) viaboth the regular classroom and ODU’s TTN (Tele-Tech-Net) system (active satellites, streamvideo, video tapes, DVD, etc.). One of the problems in the distance courses is that the remotestudents have difficulty to access the large volume of geospatial data for their homework anddistance laboratory via internet. The GeoBrain system, which is funded by NASA
) promoting student enthusiasm, and 3) providingexposure to real-world engineering. The remainder of this paper discusses theseprinciples and provides examples of how they have been implemented into the hydraulicstructure design course.Lab and lecture integrationIt is apparent that the learning environment within the engineering classroom is enhancedand engineering concepts (the big picture) are more adequately retained when in-classlectures are coupled with related hands-on experience, such as laboratory exercises.When the topics and assignments of the lectures and laboratories are integrated, thelearning in the lab reinforces the principles taught in the classroom and vise versa. Aneffective inductive/deductive learning environment is
, there was a period of time during which very littleresearch was conducted at Fears Structural Engineering Laboratory. Between 2001 and 2003,only two students completed thesis-based Masters of Science degrees with a structuralengineering focus. While the undergraduate program in structural engineering had beenrelatively unaffected, the graduate program was virtually non-existent.The new faculty realized that there was a pressing need to generate excitement about structuralengineering at OU and to fill Fears Lab with research activity. Kyran Mish, the new seniorstructural faculty member, suggested that the structural group should be considered as similar toa start-up company during the rebuilding period. By this he meant that risks often avoided
). In this example, there were two questions from existing surveys that support this outcome. The performance standard is at least an average student response of 4.0 on a 1 to 5 scale (1: Strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: neutral, 4: agree, 5: strongly agree). The benchmark was the average response by students to the same question over the previous five years. Four specific laboratory experiences were chosen as embedded indicators, with the students’ laboratory reports specifically requiring the analysis and interpretation of data. Two of the indicators involved designing experiments, which are difficult to find in most civil engineering programs. In this program, there is an annual course assessment process, in which both the
environment is typically a passive Page 12.174.2experience such as in a lecture hall (with the exception of the laboratory courses), whereasengineering practice is an active experience. Students in a classroom setting need more activeand engaged experiences6. Real life engineering projects, that encourage active participation andphysical exposure to real structures such as buildings and bridges, can significantly improvestudent understanding of the applied principles of engineering analysis and design, and can helpbridge the gap between engineering education and practice.In a junior level structural analysis course, a project was introduced into the
enter professional practice. Students whopursue graduate school directly upon graduation are recruited by a number of schools andhave been very successful. The department faculty is a relatively young, dedicated, and col-legial group that is regarded as exemplary throughout the university in terms of teaching ef-fectiveness and in professional development.The existing curriculum at UWP is typical of conventional CEE curricula. Students completebasic mathematics, science, and general engineering courses in the first two years followed bycivil and environmental engineering courses in the remainder of their studies. The CEE pro-gram includes a significant laboratory component and practical design projects in the upperlevel classes. The program
educational experience we hope toprovide?”. This decision was driven principally by equivalency concerns, since the course wasto be listed in the student’s transcript as if the course were taken at USMA. Thus, it was decidedthat the content and workload must be similar to that of the students at the home institution. Thelaboratory component posed a problem, but it was judged that the lab load was relatively light,with only 4 laboratory periods (one of which was principally a demonstration), and could thus bewaived. Further, the principle laboratory experience for the student within the major wouldcome in the follow-on semesters.The second driving decision was “How will we evaluate the student’s work?”. This was aparticular problem at USMA, since the
. USMA (Avg) C&ME (Avg) CE300 (Avg) Page 12.217.8 Figure 3. Assessment results for interpersonal rapport 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 In this course, laboratory exercises contributed to my learning. My instructor used visual images (pictures, demonstrations, models, diagrams, simulations, etc.) to enhance my learning. My instructor gave me timely and accurate feedback on my learning progress. Your grades accurately represented
AC 2007-2846: BRIDGING BEAR HOLLOW: A SERVICE LEARNING CAPSTONEDESIGNNorman Dennis, University of Arkansas Norman D. Dennis, Jr., is a Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He is active in both ASCE and ASEE, currently serving as a member of ASCE's committee for faculty development and as a program coordinator for the EcCEEd teaching workshop. Dennis is also a director of the CE division of ASEE and past chair or the Midwest section of ASEE. His research interests include laboratory and field determination of geotechnical material properties for transportation systems and the use of remote sensing techniques to categorize geomaterials
recognized excellence in the academic community. ‚ The history of these institutions generally indicates that they earned their reputations for educating engineers at the undergraduate level; research emphasis ordinarily came later as the programs developed, and as scientific and technological advances dictated the need for more research within the academic community. ‚ Comprehensive doctoral programs usually have considerably larger and more comprehensive laboratory facilities. ‚ Many of comprehensive doctoral programs actively engage undergraduates involvement in research ‚ Undergraduate class sections at comprehensive doctoral institutions tend to be larger. The
AC 2007-502: USING THE SENIOR DESIGN JURY TO DIRECTLY ASSESSPROGRAM OUTCOMESMichael Bronzini, George Mason University Michael S. Bronzini currently holds the Dewberry Chair in Civil, Environmental, and Infrastructure Engineering (CEIE) in the Volgenau School of Information Technology and Engineering at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and is also the Chair of the CEIE Department. Prior positions include Director of the Center for Transportation Analysis at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Chair of the Department of Civil Engineering at Penn State University, and Director of the Transportation Center and Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Tennessee. Dr
, science, consistent with systems, geo-spatial representation, and the program educational information technology objectives; Understand fundamentals of several apply knowledge of recognized major civil engineering areas four technical areas appropriate to civil engineering.2. An ability to Design and conduct field and laboratory 3(b) An
this disaster, civil engineers will be responsible for therebuilding, but a 113 year old civil engineering department, in the middle of what has beendescribed as a vast living laboratory, is a casualty of the storm.References[1] “Tulane history”, http://www2.tulane.edu/about_history.cfm, accessed Jan 15, 2007[2] “History of UNO”, http://www.uno.edu/history.cfm, accessed Jan 15, 2007[3] Boutwell, Gordon, ppt presentation: “Failure of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System”, ASCE SEI LA Chapter Sept, 2006 meeting[4] “Tulane University Hurricane Plan”, 2006[5] Staff, “How much water did you get?” Times Picayune, Metro Section, Sept 22, 2005[6] “UNO Hurricane Emergency Plan”, 2006[7] CHART, “Disaster Resistant
projects and laboratory exercises within a course and especiallyduring a capstone design experience. The development of the ability to function as a memberof a team may not be limited to the classroom or even to engineering. Additionally, studentsshould seek opportunities and faculty members should encourage students to work as membersof team in a myriad of other activities, such as student government, civic and serviceorganizations, employment opportunities, etc.CommunicationEffective communication is a critical skill for civil engineers and the BOK-2 states that upon Page 12.1371.11graduation from a baccalaureate program, an individual must be
concrete with a unit weight less than water. To do this teams must investigatenumerous lightweight aggregates both naturally occurring and commercially made, includingpumice; expanded shales, slates and clays; glass beads; and ceramic microspheres. Variousadmixtures to improve workability, permeability, and setting time as well as fibers that areused as secondary reinforcement are also considered by the teams.Once the ingredients have been thoroughly researched, concrete mixtures are formulated andan extensive laboratory testing program is implemented. For many undergraduate students,this is the first time they have been introduced to the preparation of test cylinders, cubes andbeams, and conducting slump cone, unit weight, and strength
Ludlow, D. K.., Schultz, K. H., “Writing across the chemical engineering curriculum at the University ofNorth Dakota,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 83, pp. 161, 1994.19 Newell, J. A., Ludlow, D. K., Sternberg, S. P. K., “Progressive development of oral and writtencommunication skills across an integrated laboratory sequence,” Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 31,pp 116-119, 1997.20 Van Orden, N., “Is writing an effective way to learn chemical concepts?,” Journal of ChemicalEducation, Vol. 67, pp 583, 1990.21 Riddell, W., Jansson, P., Dahm, K., Benavidez, H., Haynes, J., Schowalter, D., “Conservation of Energyfor Campus Buildings: Design, Communication and Environmentalism through Project Based Learning,”Paper 2006-153 in the
set-ups including laboratoryexperiments. Carrying out laboratory experiments and generating experimental data, visiting aproject site, and using pencil and paper to produce a schematic, are gradually fading away. Thesetraditional tools were instrumental in developing an engineering common sense. It is argued herethat generating data from physical models is potentially a great learning tool, particularly whenthe model is built by the students. Building a model, testing a model, generating physical datafrom the model, and analyzing said data, help students alternate between inductive and deductiveprocesses, thus broadening their design vision and understanding the experimental approach toengineering design. There is potentially a real need to