, respectively.Linda Weavers, Ohio State University Linda K. Weavers is the John C. Geupel Chair and Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science at The Ohio State University. In addition, Dr. Weavers is co-Director of the National Institute of Water Resources (NIWR) Water Resources Center for the State of Ohio. After obtaining her B.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of Minnesota, she received M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Environmental Engineering Science from the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Weavers’ research is multi-pronged with research projects in the area of advanced oxidation processes (including sonochemistry, ozonation, and
) Biomaterials Science: AnIntroduction to Materials in Medicine and Dowling’s Mechanics of Materials books wereespecially useful references 28,29. Callister’s Fundamentals of Materials Science andEngineering text also contains a web based supplemental chapter 30 that is helpful as is theUniversity of Cambridge’s on-line Teaching and Learning Package (TLP) on the structure ofbone and implant materials 31. In fact, having the students complete this well-developed andinteractive TLP as a homework assignment or in-class project (if computers are available) is anexcellent way to introduce your students to biomedical materials and design. Dr. Pruitt’s Page
Model (TAM) and examines the connection Page 14.688.6between the user, the possibility of the Linear Axis RDS as a learning tool, and the learningoutcomes. The model is an extension of assessment models conducted by the evaluation team inprevious projects [8].Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is an extension to Fishbein and Ajzen’s [9] Theory ofReasoned Action that explains the relationship between attitude towards the technology andintention to use it. Theory of Reasoned action suggests that if a person is to perform a certainaction, it would depend upon his/her attitude towards that action, and how others would see it, asto whether or not he
Capstone project involve computational systems modeling and/or analysis? Rate your answer on a scale of 1-5 (5 being extensive, 1 being none). 16. How do you feel that your ability to build and/or validate computational models has changed since last August? Rate your answer on a scale of 1-5 (5 being greatly improved, 1 being gotten much worse).For the results presented questions 10-14, 125 corresponds to “very low preference” to “veryhigh preference” for a job involving the skill in question. (All other scores are as indicated onthe survey questions.) Table 1 below summarizes the weighted averages of the scores for all 14questions in Round 1 and all 16 questions in Round 2 of the survey. In both surveys, the resultswere split
definedas a “design challenge”. Now, you know, then maybe the most challenging one was this scaling exercise, that’s homework nine, where they tried to use all of the knowledge they had in class about what controls the performance. Those are the issues when you make the device smaller… According to Dr. Sanders, this activity not only served as a final project integrating allthe knowledge of the semester, but also it tried to imitate an industry design experience. … so this particular one, sort of integrates all of the knowledge in the course, and kind of explains, this is... if you are going to be a device-development engineer in Intel or something, this is basically what you are going to be doing, trying
listed above, are being measured. Evidence that may be used includes, but is not limited to the following: student portfolios, including design projects; nationally normed subject content examinations [emphasis added]; alumni surveys that document professional accomplishments and career development activities; employer surveys; and placement data of graduates.2, 17-19The FE Examination is the only nationally normed, engineering-specific examination that couldsatisfy that statement. Notably, the entire section quoted above has been struck from the ABETCriteria beginning with the 2004-2005 version.20-23 In addition, starting with the 2004-2005ABET Criteria, all such lists of suggested accreditation methodologies were