Conference Session

Engineering and Technology for Everyone

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

. Page 14.545.7Technological literacy focus courses will go into great depth within one or more technologytopic areas (see Figure 2b) with a higher fraction of C and D values in that column(s) whencompared to a survey course.Technological Literacy Design Courses and Critique, Assess, Reflect, or Connect (CARC)Courses will cover these respective rows in the matrix for one or more of the technology topicareas as shown in Figures 2c and 2d, respectively. It is expected that these courses will also havea higher percentage of C and D values in the corresponding rows – specifically for the detailedcross-cutting concepts within each group – compared to a survey course.To satisfy the diverse requirements of curriculum committees on varied campuses

Conference Session

Engineering and Technology for Everyone

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

SA % a A %b D %c SD %d NE %eThe gains my students and I make in the classroom justify the amount oftime I spend preparing my Moodle course(s). 44.8 57.1 1.7 0 1.7The various class management tools (such as the gradebook, time-stamped submissions, and posting assignments) help me to stay 29.3 58.6 1.7 0 10.3organized.Working to prepare and integrate content, classroom activities, andonline assessment in a Moodle unit has improved my planning

Conference Session

Engineering Courses for Non-engineers

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William Loendorf, Eastern Washington University; Terence Geyer, Eastern Washington University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

past. One thing iscertain; this hands-on laboratory approach to a traditional lecture based class works well and willbe continued.Bibliography1. Allen, R. H. (2002). Impact teaching: Ideas and strategies for teachers to maximize student learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.2. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: George Washington University.3. Crabtree, D. E. (1972). An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers No. 28. Pocatello, Idaho: Idaho State University Museum.4. Crawford, A. E., Saul, E. W., Mathews, S., & Makinster, J. (2005). Teaching and learning strategies for the thinking classroom

Conference Session

Potpourri

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

College, Defense Acquisition University Press, January (2001).29. Shishko, Robert., et al., NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, SP-6105, (1995).30. Oliver, David W., Timothy P. Kelliher, James G. Keegan, Jr. Engineering Complex Systems with Models and Objects, McGraw-Hill, New York (1997).31. Shigley, Joesph E., Charles R. Mischke, Standard Handbook of Machine Design, 2nd Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York, (1996).32. McCabe, Warren L., Julian C. Smith, Peter Harriott, Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill (2005).33. Merritt, Frederick S., M. Kent Loftin, Jonathan T. Ricketts, Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, 4th Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York (1996