AC 2008-1608: PROJECT-BASED INTRODUCTION TO ENGINEERING FORFRESHMAN STUDENTSGregory Wight, Norwich University Professor & Department Chair, Civil & Environmental Engineering, David Crawford School of EngineeringR. Danner Friend, Norwich University Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering, David Crawford School of EngineeringJacques Beneat, Norwich University Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering, David Crawford School of EngineeringWilliam Barry, Norwich University Instructor, Civil & Environmental Engineering, David Crawford School of Engineering Page 13.1009.1© American Society for
AC 2008-1881: EVALUATION OF INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE ON GROUPPROJECTSJon Carson, Pennsylvania State University - Wilkes-Barre Page 13.580.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Evaluation of Individual Performance on Group ProjectsIntroductionGroup projects have and will continue to be common in Engineering education. As stated inABET Criterion 3 Program Outcomes and Assessment, (d) “Engineering programs mustdemonstrate that their students attain an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.”1Students and instructors are accustomed to group or team oriented projects. Typically the class isdivided into groups that work together toward completion of the
AC 2008-2311: CENTRIFUGAL PUMP DESIGN, FABRICATION ANDCHARACTERIZATION: A PROJECT-DRIVEN FRESHMAN EXPERIENCEMike Swanbom, Louisiana Tech University Dr. Mike Swanbom received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from LeTourneau University in 2002, and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Louisiana Tech University in 2007. His interests include Trenchless Technology and Robotics. He is active in developing online educational tools for instruction of engineering fundamentals. He has been closely involved with the development of innovative project-based curriculum at the freshman and sophomore levels at Louisiana Tech University.David Hall, Louisiana Tech University David Hall
AC 2008-674: COMPARISON OF TWO PEER EVALUATION INSTRUMENTSFOR PROJECT TEAMSKerry Meyers, University of Notre Dame Kerry L. Meyers is an Associate Professional Faculty Member and Co-coordinator of the First-Year Engineering Program at the University of Notre Dame.Matthew Ohland, Purdue Engineering Education Matthew W. Ohland is an Associate Professor and Director of First-Year Engineering in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University and is the Past President of Tau Beta Pi, the engineering honor society. He received his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering with a minor in Education from the University of Florida in 1996. Previously, he served as Assistant Director of the NSF-sponsored
AC 2008-707: IMPACT OF PEER-MANAGED PROJECT-BASED LEARNING INFIRST YEAR ENGINEERINGBrian Frank, Queen's University Brian Frank is an assistant professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Queen's University.James Mason, Queen's University James Mason is Associate Dean (Program Development) in the Faculty of Applied Science at Queen's University. Page 13.691.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008Page 13.691.2Page 13.691.3Page 13.691.4Page 13.691.5Page 13.691.6Page 13.691.7Page 13.691.8Page 13.691.9Page 13.691.10Page 13.691.11Page 13.691.12Page 13.691.13Page
AC 2008-2194: USING MICROSOFT OUTLOOK FOR PERSONAL AND PROJECTPLANNING IN A FIRST YEAR ENGINEERING COURSEW. David Harding, University of New HavenSamuel Daniels, University of New Haven Page 13.1347.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Using Microsoft Outlook for Personal & Project Planning in a Freshman Year Engineering CourseAbstractA great variety of tools are available for use in the planning and organizing of project work.This paper discusses the use of Microsoft Outlook (Outlook) as a primary planning andorganizational tool for a first year engineering course; “Project Planning and Development.” Inthe course, Outlook is
AC 2008-686: FRESHMAN PROJECT: DISCOVERING GLOBAL TRENDS – ASURVEY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES OF THE AEROSPACEINDUSTRYAlexander Friess, Dubai Aerospace Enterprise University Alexander Friess is an Assistant Professor of Engineering at Dubai Aerospace Enterprise University. He received his B.Sc. in Physics and M.Sc. and Ph.D. in Aeronautical Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. His research background includes experimental fluid dynamics, composite materials and performance optimization, and he has been active globally as consultant and design engineer working on a variety of projects, including participating in the design and engineering of South Africa’s yacht for the America’s
Students in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering and Computer ScienceAbstractU.S. enrollment in undergraduate programs in electrical engineering (EE), computer engineering(CE) and computer science (CS) has declined significantly in recent years. Women remainunder-represented in undergraduate EE, CE and CS programs—recently, they comprise an evensmaller proportion of the overall shrinking enrollment. EE, CE and CS are the three primaryfields of interest to the IEEE. IEEE is an international organization with nearly 370,000 membersworld-wide. In 2007, IEEE launched the Real World Engineering Projects (RWEP) programaimed at recruiting and retaining undergraduate students in EE, CE and CS programs. TheRWEP program is a
communicating about their work. The challenge for educators has been to integratethis more holistic view of an engineer’s training with the already demanding curricula already inplace. At the University of Michigan all incoming first-year students are required to take acourse, Engineering 100, “Introduction to Engineering,” that integrates many of these skills—design, communication, engineering science and teamwork—in the context of a semester-longproject. This course has several sections each semester, each with a different project focus. Somesections of this course go through a complete design/build/test cycle, while others, such as ours,focus more closely on the design process.Our section, Design: The Next Generation, focuses on the product design
AC 2008-710: AN INNOVATIVE FRESHMEN ENGINEERING COURSE TOIMPROVE RETENTIONJale Tezcan, Southern Illinois University-CarbondaleJohn Nicklow, Southern Illinois University-CarbondaleJames Mathias, Southern Illinois University-CarbondaleLalit Gupta, Southern Illinois University-CarbondaleRhonda Kowalchuk, Southern Illinois University-Carbondale Page 13.182.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 An Innovative Freshmen Engineering Course to Improve RetentionAbstractAs part of a federally funded project to improve retention, the College of Engineering (COE) atSouthern Illinois University- Carbondale (SIUC) has implemented a college
focuseson content but also emphasizes the importance of developing communication and collaborativeskills24. Engineering organizations focus on teamwork because of its ability to help spark Page 13.1289.2innovative ideas and allow participants to produce higher quality projects 18, 23. As a result,interdisciplinary or cross-functional teams are a required part of an accredited undergraduateengineering curriculum. The teams are typically involved in a range of functions that includedesign, development and manufacturing. This move to a curriculum that includes teamworkskills is in response to the engineering industry need for engineers who are
AC 2008-2281: LIVING WITH THE LAB: A CURRICULUM TO PREPAREFRESHMAN STUDENTS TO MEET THE ATTRIBUTES OF "THE ENGINEER OF2020"David Hall, Louisiana Tech UniversityStan Cronk, Louisiana Tech UniversityPatricia Brackin, Rose-Hulman Institute of TechnologyMark Barker, Louisiana Tech UniversityKelly Crittenden, Louisiana Tech University Page 13.855.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Living with the Lab: A Curriculum to Prepare Freshman Students to Meet the Attributes of “The Engineer of 2020”AbstractA project-based, freshman engineering course sequence has been developed and implemented forall new freshman engineering students with support from
in other climates. Therefore, an effortmust be made to determine the process feedstocks for different regions of the world. In theSpring of 2008, first-year engineering students at Michigan Technological University willinvestigate the potential of fuel ethanol produced from lignocellulosic (woody) biomass.During the course of this project, students will utilize the “waste equals food” principles ofsustainable design outlined by William McDonough and Michael Braungart. Using theseguidelines, students will learn to incorporate the principles of sustainable development in thedesign and simulation of an ethanol production facility. They will investigate the sustainabilityof the production of the ethanol product from a regional feedstock and the
education, corporate training, and contract research. He currently serves on the Advisory Board for Engineers for Community Service (ECOS), a student-run organization at Ohio State; and teaches a Service-Learning course for Engineering students who travel to Honduras during Spring Break to implement projects on behalf of a rural orphanage. Page 13.352.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Decision-Making in the Design-Build Process among First-Year Engineering StudentsAbstractStudents in a first-year engineering program at The Ohio State University are required
positions at John Deere and Amkor Technology. Her research interests are in the area of quality, productivity improvement, supply chain, lean manufacturing and engineering education. Dr. Bonilla consults, instructs, and collaborates on quality improvement projects with representatives from healthcare, as well as traditional manufacturing operations. She is an ASQ certified Six-Sigma Black-Belt.Leonard Perry, University of San Diego Leonard Perry is an Associate Professor of Industrial & Systems Engineering at the University of San Diego. He has research interests in the area of system improvement via quality improvement methods especially in the area of applied statistics, statistical
students to a systematic, engineering problem solvingmethod. Problems have been selected to preview many of the engineering courses that thestudents will take as sophomores, including statics and circuits. Additionally students learncomputer applications EXCEL, MATLAB and VISUAL BASIC. Finally, Introduction toDesign, taken during their second semester, has been developed to include two parallel paths.The first path focuses on learning how to solve open-ended design projects while working inteams. These projects vary from semester to semester, but normally consist of a mechanicalfocus, a civil focus, and an electrical engineering focus Î which exposes students to the threeareas of concentration that they must decide upon in their sophomore year
, there has been noshop training provided to the students to teach them safe and effective fabrication skills eventhough the projects require a wide range of fabrication techniques. Around 320 students areenrolled in the fall semester, 2007. These students are distributed into different lab sections. Eachof the labs consists of 30 students divided up into two different design teams of 15 studentsrespectively. Each lab is run by an instructor with the help of two undergraduate studentassistants (SAs). During the spring and fall semesters of 2007, a hands-on fabrication shop andspecialized training program was developed and implemented by the undergraduate teachingstaff. They applied the Total Quality Management (TQM) approach from business to
and holistic approach to engineering education.In addition to active learning approaches, it is equally important to develop methods for studentsto assess their own learning and, through survey and interview tools, to evaluate the impact ofthese courses and projects in enhancing student confidence in their ability to learn. The basis ofevaluation is the degree to which students feel these courses enhance their views of lifelonglearning, including providing them with the tools and self-efficacy to teach themselves, as wellas the degree to which students understand how specific coursework contributes to acomprehensive approach to engineering problem solving. Hence, improved assessment,including self-assessment, better enables courses and
addition of technical presentations incorporating sustainability concepts and a semesterlong design project. Students will design a “safe” snowball launcher and create a 3-D model oftheir concept using Unigraphics. They will analyze the mathematics and physics of their launcherusing Excel and Visual Basic programming. Throughout the project, students will communicatetheir design progress in memos and a final report.This paper will describe in more detail the design and structure of the two courses, along with thehistory of their development. Data will be presented on how the inclusion of engineering coursesfor these students has improved their retention. Student comments and instructor observations ofthe new course structure will be
instructor's laptop computer,which is used to project a multiple-choice question or quiz to the class. The students' responsesare transmitted to the instructor via the clickers and the tallied result is provided nearlyinstantaneously in the form of a histogram. The students and the instructor receive immediatefeedback on the students' state of learning and the instruction may be altered in a just-in-timefashion based on this information. Teachers and professors are enthusiastic about these devicesbecause they promote student participation and classroom engagement and, if desired, they canbe used as a form of graded assessment of student learning. Students enjoy using them in classbecause they help breakup the monotony of a long lecture and make the
Perspectives on a Freshman Treatment of Electronic SystemsAbstract.The conventional approach to curriculum design is that students start with the basics of scienceand math and gradually progress towards a realistic integration of all their engineering skills in asenior capstone project. That approach is now challenged by changes in the assumed boundaryconditions. Students no longer progress through the program in lock-step. Electronicsapplications have evolved far beyond the components level and many cross-disciplinary skillsare needed. Finally, all students require a level of communications, team-working, trouble-shooting and representational skills that take a long time to mature so it is too late to wait till thesenior year to introduce them. The
fourth course goal, “understand iterative design, implementation, andtesting.”2.3 RequirementsWe have developed a set of course requirements to ensure that courses created from our model areconsistent, stay true to our tenets, and conform to our course goals. Our requirements are: 1. Students work on a project in a relevant, interesting, and accessible domain, 2. teaching design is the major focus of lecture, 3. students work in teams on the course project, 4. students write a final report on their project that describes their project’s design choices, implementation, and assessment, 5. the course has a midterm and a final, 6. students present their work a minimum of two times to the class
, so two lectures and two workshops wereheld each week. In moving to the summer 2007 offering, which spanned only six weeks, alecture and then a workshop were held each weekday, with a two-hour break between them. Afaculty member ran the lectures and workshops, but the workshops also had a teaching assistant:a graduate student in fall 2006 and an upper-class undergraduate in summer 2007. Thebreakdown of course content and delivery is presented in the Appendix (see Table A1, which is acompressed version of the summer course syllabus). The major content items for the courseinclude graphics, design, problem solving, graphing, computer programming, handling digitaldata, project management, communication, and ethics. In each offering of EngE2984, a
(especially ABET’s Engineering Criteria 2000 and theNational Academy of Engineering’s “The Engineer of 2020” report) have prompted changesthroughout the engineering curriculum. Many universities 8-14 increased the emphasis onengineering design and engineering analysis in their first-year engineering course, including theintroduction of hands-on context-rich design projects to be completed by teams of students.15Some universities created courses that explicitly attempted to increase their students’ teamworkskills,16 while others sharpened their focus on improving their students’ problem-solving skills9and creative and critical thinking skills.17 Perhaps the most difficult mandate of EngineeringCriteria 2000 is that students be able to work effectively
Instrumentation and Web Design-III – Final Project Assigned 7 Circuits and Engineering Math 8 Timers, Flip Flops and other ICS, Exam-II 9 Temperature Satellite and How Things Work Launching Temperature Satellite, Recording, Analyzing Data, and 10 Presentation of Final Project – Plane Flying EndsThis course structure was changed to incorporate the common book “An Inconvenient Truth”DVD, provide two new lectures and two new labs on global warming issues. In addition, thewriting intensive portion was changed to a focus on issues on global warming of interest toengineers. The revised course is presented in Table 2
BioMedical Engineering from Louisiana Tech University in 1996 and 2001 respectively. He is often involved in multidisciplinary work at Louisiana Tech, either through the Integrated Engineering Curriculum or through the IMPaCT (Innovation through Multidisciplinary Projects and Collaborative Teams) program. He is also very involved in STEM education at both the pre-college and college levels.James Nelson, Louisiana Tech University Dr. Jim Nelson is the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies for the College of Engineering and Science at Louisiana Tech University. He is also the Robert Howson Professor of Civil Engineering and specializes in water resources. He played a key role in establishing
and organization of an activity. A good example of this may be the DesignDeconstruction project. This requires a great deal of coordination and preplanning, and it is very easy forthe instructors to be zeroing in on the details, instead of the significant benefits the activity yields.In assessing this particular course, we can also note that extensive revision to the curriculum and learningmodes used in the course and classroom has already been accomplished, resulting in a much improvedcourse5,6,12. This was seen in increases in retention and significantly better course evaluation ratings in thecategories of Overall Course, Instructor Effectiveness and Amount Learned in the course. In both of oursurveys, most modes cluster in the high/high
Tougaw4 provide a survey of the common philosophies behind currentIntroduction to Engineering classes at other institutions. Although the MSU class is closelyaligned with the category that they identify as providing the basic survival skills for collegestudents, the MSU course also covers engineering specific topics as well. A conscious decisionwas made not to develop a project-oriented course (e.g., Elzey1; Lo, Lohani and Griffin7) due tothe significant investment of faculty resources for such a course. Typically students in thesetypes of courses have been admitted into engineering and the goal of such courses is to developtheir design skills and pique their interest in engineering. The faculty have a vested interest inputting the required
assessingoutcomes and understanding the factors that affect student success. This section brings forthsome of the ideas discussed at the workshops in these areas.Engineering DesignOne important trend common to many first-year programs involves the introduction of open-ended engineering problems to first-year students. Experiential learning allows teams ofstudents to work collaboratively on projects to meet established design objectives. Through on-going critiques, discussion within teams and feedback from the instructor, students develop theirown solutions to design problems. These projects teach students how to apply basic math andscience principles to a practical problem, to integrate concepts from other courses, and tounderstand the engineering
profession could lead to the neglect of the human side of projects,an undervaluing of the opinions of the “feelers” on the work team, and a lack of emphasison explaining and selling projects to the public, because “the logic speaks for itself.” Shepoints out that intuitive students have an advantage over sensing students on standardizedaptitude tests commonly used for college admissions, and this extends to all timed teststhat are conceptual or symbolic in nature. Intuitives experience learning as rapid leaps ofinsight, while sensors emphasize thoroughness of understanding, and work in a slower,more linear fashion. An important conclusion of this first study was that people reachtheir potential when their profession requires them to use the