: Department of Mechanical Engineering. Any opinions, findings, or recommendationsare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.Bibliography1. Green M, Dutson A, Wood KL. Integrating Service-Oriented Design Projects in theEngineering Curriculum. In: ASEE Annual Conference, 2002. Montreal, Quebec: AmericanSociety for Engineering Education; 2002. Page 22.565.192. Green M, Wood KL, VanderLeest S. Service-Learning Approaches to InternationalHumanitarian Design Projects: Assessment of Spiritual Impact. In: Proceedings of the 5thChristian Engineering Education Conference. Salt Lake City, Utah; 2004:19-34.3. Bhandari A, Jones
Teaching And Learning, No. 93, Spring 20037. J. L. Murray, P. H. Naimoli, R. S. Kagan, S. M. Kirnan, B.R. Snider, “Reflections on the Use of Undergraduate Research to Support Student Affairs Assessment,” Journal of College Student Development, 45(2), March/April 2004.8. C. Gonzalez, “Undergraduate Research, Graduate Mentoring, and the University's Mission,” Science, August 31, v293 i5535 p1624, 20019. M. Grant Norton and David F. Bahr, “How to Run a Successful Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Site,” ASEE Paper # 2004-872, 200410. Kevin Sutterer, Martin Brenny, J. David Pirnia,, Michelle Woodward, Robert Houghtalen, and Jim Hanson, “Engineering REU Sites: Designing for Appropriate and Valuable Summer
engineering programs (NorthernArizona University and the University of Utah) on a set of design and build problems funded bythe Grand Canyon River Outfitter’s Association (GCROA) with support from the National ParkService (NPS). This organizational structure reflects a primary objective of the capstoneexperience at the College of Technology and Innovation; to provide, in a project setting, aneducational experience consistent with professional practice. Student motivation was increasedas this project was part of a larger effort to enhance the environmental aspects of float tripsthrough the Grand Canyon. Thus, the curricular design “flavor” of the project is consistent withrecommendations from several recent engineering educational studies1,2 Such
), with little effort required, is developedthrough practice. The Instructional Implications section of this paper presents ideas on how thisknowledge can be developed for thermodynamics.Conditional Knowledge Conditional knowledge refers to students’ knowledge of the situations in which particulardeclarative or procedural knowledge should be applied.4,31 This knowledge reflects the students’awareness of when, where, and why other knowledge should be used, and this awarenessunderlies cognitive control during problem solving. That is, a student who knows the conditionsunder which some other particular knowledge should be used is positioned to recognize thoseconditions when they are encountered and, consequently, select the appropriate
the piston. As with the Newcomen pump, the balancing ofthe pump, piston and beam caused the piston to rise due to gravity. The cycle was repeated. Thefirst two strokes were operated manually. Then trips on the plug rod to the air pump controlled thevalve sequencing. A noteworthy feature included an air pump operated by the rocking beam thatdrew non-condensable gases out of the condenser. 25 Watt’s early engines worked on steampressures similar to Newcomen’s. Pressures higher than about 7 psi above atmospheric were rarelyused. 26 This situation reflects the state of boiler strength to avoid rupture and the ability of glandseals and piston rings to minimize leakage.Watt described the performance of an engine at Wheal Butson in 1792. This engine