assessment. Pelligreno, J., Chudowsky, N. and Glaser, R. (eds.) Washington, DC: National Academy Press.3. National Research Council (2005). How Students Learn. Donovan, M. & Bransford, J. (Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.4. Aspy, D.N., Aspy, C.B. & Quimby, P.M. (1993). What doctors can teach teachers about problem based learning. Educational Leadership, 50, (7), 22-24.5. Duch, B., Groh, S. & Allen, D. (2001). The Power of Problem-Based Learning: A Practical “How To” For Teaching Undergraduate Courses in Any Discipline. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publication.6. Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.7. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs
previously mentioned,this may have caused communication, mutual respect issues. Without the team members havinginsight into their cognitive diversity this gap may not have been managed with the needed skilland coping behavior. Team 1 had one person also skewing the score, however, there teamdifferential was more than half of team 4’s differential – again working to their benefit. Table 4: Map Density Team concepts Links Concept:Link AI score 1a 18 26 0.692307692 78 1b 13 18 0.722222222 101 1c 9 11 0.818181818 94 average
engineering: 2004, Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resource Statistics.4. Goodman Research Group (2002). Final report of the women’s experiences in college engineering (WECE) project, Cambridge, MA.5. Davis, C-S. & Finelli, C.J. (2007), Diversity and Retention in Engineering, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, v2007, n111, p63-7.6. Derlin, R.L. & McShannon, J.L. (2000), Faculty and Student Interaction and Learning Styles of Engineering Undergraduates, Retrieved May 10, 2008 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/16/89/1d.pdf.7. Goldberg, J. & Sedlacek, W. (1996), Summer Study in Engineering for High School Women, Maryland
which the student works provides the following: Page 15.288.2≠ The student works on GE Transportation project(s) 19 hours per week during the academic year and 50 hours per week during the summer. During a full year, the student works on projects a total of approximately 1500 hours.≠ The project areas include traction, control, cooling systems, remote diagnostics, propulsion equipment, diesel engines, power electronics, software development, noise and vibration, wind energy, and structures.≠ The graduate tuition, fees, and books for the student are paid by GE Transportation (about $16,000-$17,000).≠ The student is an
leader of character who can understand, implement, and manage technology;and to inspire cadets to a career in the United States Army and a lifetime of personal growthand service.The Department mission statement includes educating and inspiring, which align along a set ofcommonly accepted educational taxonomies; that is, Bloom’s Taxonomy, which is based on theseminal work of the 1950’s educational committee chaired by Benjamin Bloom. The committeeestablished a set of taxonomies in three domains of learning: cognitive, affective andpsychomotor. The cognitive domain taxonomy is widely accepted in many fields and has beenidentified as, “arguably one of the most influential education monographs of the past halfcentury.”3 The taxonomies are a language
Modulus Strength (g/cc) (GPa) (GPa) (GPa) (MPa) S-Glass 2.59 86 4.14 Epoxy 3.12 75.8 Kevlar 49 1.45 131 3.62 Polyester 3.4 55 Carbon-PAN 1.75 230 3.24 PEEK 3.24 100 Figure 13: Modulus and ultimate strength of a few commonly used fiber materials.Composites are anisotropic heterogeneous materials, which simply mean material properties Page 15.1201.13depend not only on directions but also on locations. Micromechanics is a branch of physicalscience, which studies the
Sources 170 (2007) 1–12, April 20072. T. Lopes, E. Antolini, F. Colmati, E.R. Gonzalez, J. Power Sources 164 (2007) 111.3. E. Antolini, J.R.C. Salgado, E.R. Gonzalez, J. Power Sources 155 (2006) 161.4. S. Rousseau, C. Coutanceau, C. Lamy, J.-M. Leger, J. Power Sources 158 (2006) 18.5. D. Zhang, Z. Ma,G.Wang, K.Konstantinov, X.Yuan, H. Liu, Electrochem, Solid State Lett. 9 (2006) A423.6. F. Colmati, E. Antolini, E.R. Gonzalez, Appl. Catal. B: Environ, 73 (2007) 106.7. S.S. Gupta, J. Datta, J. Electroanal. Chem. 594 (2006) 65.8. D.M. dos Anjos, K.B. Kokoh, J.M. L´eger, A.R. de Andrade, P. Olivi, G. Tremiliosi-Filho, J. Appl. Electrochem. 36 (2006) 1391
engineering ethics in a service learning design course.Where We Began Our goals from the beginning were to satisfy the Accreditation Board for Engineeringand Technology(ABET)’s requirement that students havean “understanding” of ethical issues.But this is only a start, and since our program works so closely with the community, we mustalso go well beyond ABET, helping our studentsusetheir understandingof ethical issues to thenapply a process of practical moral reasoning, a process through which they can arrive at ajustifiable and feasible response to ethical dilemmas in their project work. Our goals are notsimply academic. Nor do we want to teach only ethics. Rather, we have aimed our efforts atteaching engineering ethics to students who must
. At the beginning of 2010, cooperative education programs exist in 80 post-secondaryinstitutions in Canada with an enrolment of over 80,000 students.3 It is interesting to comparethe experience in North America with that in Japan where cooperative education was not Page 15.836.3introduced until the 1990’s and then initially at the graduate, rather than undergraduate, level.4However, there was a rapid expansion of cooperative education and internships and by 2005, atotal of 100,000 students participated in internships over a one year survey period.4What defines, or constitutes, cooperative education? According to Hodges and Coolbear5, “In
agreement survey method.AcknowledgementsThe work of X. Tan was supported by NSF (ECCS 0547131).References[1] McAfee L, Kim A. AC 2007-2415: Successful Pre-College Summer Programs. American Society for Engineering Education. 2007.[2] Heckel RW. Significant Departures of Undergraduate and Graduate Degree Trends in Engineering Disciplines from the Trends of Engineering as a Whole. Engineering Trends, vol. Report 0207C, 2007.[3] National Research Council (U.S. W, DC). National Science Education Standards: observe, interact, change, learn.: National Academy Press, 1996.[4] Schreuders P, Feldt A, Wampler H, Driggs S. A Brine-Shrimp Ecosystem Design Project for 5th and 6th-Grade Students. American Society for
studentlearning outcomes and associated performance criteria are developed.Academic Program Design and Development ManagementThis component allows users to create and manage academic programs and curriculum usinginnovative approach by way of mapping courses, outcomes and performance criteria together invarying levels from University Level to Unit/College Level to Program Level while being able toallow inheritance of these outcomes from the higher level(s). As with the previous tool set, theuser has access to the design, development, approval process, versioning, and history of allaspects of the mapping process. By mapping SLOs and PCs into the curriculum, users can designa developmental appropriate learning experience for each SLO/PC.Direct and Embedded
impact students depending upon the environments inwhich students learn. Some recommended strategies for reaching all students with STEM afterschool activities are listed below:Content-based Strategies Use and teach with the latest technologies and provide students with tools from many and various media Contextualize activities by connecting with real-life situations and societal issues Provide opportunities for individual student expression and connection to their cultures and experiences Provide students with as much choice as possible in some aspect(s) of the activity Provide activities that link content areas (for example, dance and geometry, writing and astronomy) Provide a varied slate of
(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References1. Ormrod, J.E., Human Learning. 1995, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Press.2. Chi, M.T.H., "Two Approaches to the Study of Experts' Characteristics," in The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, K.A. Ericsson, et al., Editors. 2006, Cambridge University Press: New York. p. 21-30.3. Berliner, D.C., "Describing the Behavior and Documenting the Accomplishments of Expert Teachers." Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 2004. 24(3): p. 200-212.4. Bucci, T.T., "Researching Expert Teachers: Who Should We Study?" Educational Forum, 2003. 68(1): p. 82- 88.5. Kreber, C., "Teaching Excellence
appear tobe unduly affecting the process. Page 15.1342.7 45 40 35 30 S tudents E nrolled 25 20 15 10 5 0 Fall 05 SP 06 Fall 06 Sp 07 Fall 07 Sp 08 Fall 08 SP 09 Fall 09 SemesterFigure 2: Dynamics Class Enrollment Over Nine Semesters Average course grades are shown in Figure 3 with the grade distributions
and do participate. Toinsure that all rules prohibiting underage drinking are maintained, the students running the eventcheck all participants and provide special “of age” wrist bracelets to all who are over 21, toinclude faculty and ASCE professional members in attendance (note the green wrist band on thestudent, on the far right of the right hand photo, in figure 5). This again models responsible useof alcohol, or non-use. Page 15.645.9 Figure 5 End of Year Celebration and “HB101 Final” Beer Name Slogan Associated Course(s)/EventGraduation Wheat
. ASEE Prism, 16(2), October 2006.4 S. Danielson and J. R. Hartin. The future of mechanical engineering technology education. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Orlando, FL, 2005.5 National Academies of Engineering and the National Academies. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2004.6 National Academies of Engineering and the National Academies. Educating the Engineer of 2020:Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC,2005.7 National Academies of Engineering and the National Academies. Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing
40 0.747 to 0.824 0.801 2 40 0.792 to 0.830 0.811 3 40 0.796 to 0.821 0.810 All three 120 0.747 to 0.830 0.8074 Page 15.1331.13Tabl e 3 Ranges an d average va ues tIor the coe ffiICIents . 0 f restItutIOn 0 f new ba 11 s. Used Ball no Number of data samples Range of values Average value 1 40 0.780 to 0.834 0.813 2 40
summer months. In 2009, the Utica team qualified for, and participated in, the International MATE Finals in Buzzard’s Bay Massachusetts in June 2009. • RC Aircraft Kit: The Detroit Aerospace H.S. “Afterburners” built a 1/5 scale Piper Cub RC aircraft from a kit. They plan to use this to take aerial photos. • Environmental Consultants: Hancock H. S. PEAK (Partnering the Environment and Academics in the Keweenaw [peninsula of Michigan]) worked as an environmental consulting group focusing on a local watershed area. They performed stream monitoring, mapping, and plant inventory for the watershed.Each HSE team worked on its project during the 2008/2009 school year. In April 2009, teammembers from all five HSE
. Page 15.371.8While the technology readiness level is not linearly related to the rubric scores of capstoneproject demonstrations, when plotted against the TRL the demonstration score, S, has a quadraticdependence given by S = (TRL - 6)-.13 + 3.3. Thus demonstration scores are highest (mean of3.3) for a TRL of 6. This technology readiness level is defined as "Representative model orprototype system, which is well beyond the breadboard tested for TRL 5, tested in a relevantenvironment. Examples include testing a prototype in a high fidelity laboratory environment orin simulated operational environment."11. Thus capstone project which have students createprototype systems generally scored better than those which are more speculative or research
. Sherri S. Frizell is an Associate Professor in the Computer Science Department at Prairie View A&M University (PVAMU). Her research interests include human computer interaction, educational technology, and computer science education. She is very involved in activities to promote the academic and career success of women and minorities in computer science and engineering. Dr. Frizell has served as mentor to minority students participating in the Texas A&M University System Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) Program and the LSAMP Bridges to the Doctorate Program. She is the recipient of the 2009 PVAMU College of Engineering Outstanding Teacher award. Dr
Education: Perspectives, Issues andConcerns, Delhi, India: Shipra Publications. pp. 419-436.[4] Lohani, V.K., Kachroo, P., Chandrachood, S., Zephirin, T. Loganathan, G.V., & Lo, J.L., (2006). Mechatronicsexperiment in a freshman year course. Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference on Engineering Education(iCEE06), Puerto Rico, July 23-28, 2006, 5 pages.[5] Castles, R., Zephirin, T., Lohani, V. K., and Kachroo, P., (2010). Design and Implementation of a MechatronicsLearning Module in a Large First Semester Engineering Course, Paper to appear in August 2010 issue of the IEEETransactions on Education.[6] Mullin, J., Jinsoo, K., Lohani, V. K., and Lo, J., (2007). Sustainable energy design projects for engineeringfreshman. Proceedings from
you include all design parameters that you will need for your calculations in Task 2 below. 2. Aerodynamics at Cruise: a. Describe a typical high-speed cruise segment for a reconnaissance mission. Create a table summarizing the cruise Mach number, altitude, initial and final weights (most airplanes burn fuel when they fly), range of the cruise segment, and other mission values that are important. You will need to read some of the flight manual information to estimate these weights, ranges, etc. This information will be used to define the reference condition(s) for your aerodynamic analysis. b. Lift at initial cruise weight i.Estimate the lift at the
5.6 6.0 4.8 5.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.2 4.5 4.6 4.7 5.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 us r Tou cienc e r. p r. r. r. e r. r. gr. r. b r cul Eng sho Eng m Eng i l Eng Scienc s Eng er Eng al En al Eng tr y La lar Ca
every four hours…”. Assume each teaspoon was pure DEG and calculate the mass of diethylene glycol a patient would have ingested in a day. (b) The probable oral lethal dose of diethylene glycol is 0.5 g/kg weight. Determine the human weight this corresponds to for the dosage given. (c) Explain why this would be dangerous even if the patient was well above this weight. (d) If the total distribution had been consumed according to the quoted dosage guidelines, how many people would have been poisoned? (e) Develop a chronological list showing the error(s), the corrections to them that were not applied, and how the corrections would have
used in this project was bought from sources in Texas, somedating to the late 1870’s. Other items like the glass insulators were purchased locally or donatedby students and staff. Page 15.1004.6 Figure 2. Pioneer Days Technology.All items required cleaning, with special attention given those made from metal – they weresandblasted and painted with a rust-inhibitor. This collection also includes: railroad spikes,animal traps, hay hook, various sized horseshoes, scythe, plow shears, porcelain-enamel pots,and oil lamps. To be able to deliver and display these artifacts in context, an AV cart wasmodified, by attaching
assess alternate/misconceptions according tolearner points of divergence from the expected conclusion. Inductive learning “encompasses a Page 15.1215.4range of instructional methods…(that) are...learner-centered…(and)…constructivist” withelements of active learning, most notably cooperative learning (p. 123; emphasis ours).15Project-based learning is the main inductive learning strategy that we use. Participants work inteams of up to 4 members to design, prototype, and test a solution to the challenge(s) identifiedby the facilitators.Our research philosophy is influenced by two approaches to qualitative analysis. For Miles andHuberman, 25 the
impacts onstudent learning, engagement, and interest in STEM. Our poster presentation will report thelearning outcomes for our students and feature their work, while providing insights into howothers could develop similar experiences for their students. We think the benefits we have seenfor our students far outweigh the costs associated with planning, implementing, and assessingtheir efforts.Bibliography1. Klein, S., & Geist, M. J., (2006). The effect of a bioengineering unit across high school domains: An initial investigation into urban, suburban, and rural domains. In A. J. Petrosino, T. Martin, & V Svihla (Eds.), Developing Student Expertise and Community: Lessons from How People Learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.2. Klein
for Engineering Education Annual Conference (2005). American Society for Engineering Education. 13. Orr, J.A., D. Cyganski, R. Vaz, “Teaching Information Engineering to Everyone,” Proceedings of the 1997 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference (1997). American Society for Engineering Education. 14. Pisupati, S. Jonathan P. Mathews and Alan W. Scaroni, “Energy Conservation Education for Non- Engineering Students: Effectiveness of Active Learning Components,” Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference (2003). American Society for Engineering Education. 15. National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators