Paper ID #7138By the Students, for the students: A New Paradigm for Better Achieving theLearning ObjectivesMr. Mohammadjafar EsmaeiliDr. Ali Eydgahi, Eastern Michigan University Dr. Eydgahi is a professor in the school of Engineering Technology at Eastern Michigan University. He has supervised a number of graduate thesis and undergraduate projects in the areas of Unmanned Vehicle Design, Sensor Fusion, Speaker Recognition Design, Virtual Reality and Visualization, Digital Signal Processing, Control Systems, Robotics and Systems Automation. He has an extensive experience in curriculum and laboratory design and development
March 6, 1945 and completed his secondary education in Snyder, Texas. He was granted the B.A. (magna cum laude) and M.E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering from Rice University, Houston, Texas, in 1967 and 1968, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in Applied Physics from Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1974. He was employed as an Aerosystems Engineer in the antenna design group of General Dynamics, Ft. Worth, Texas, from 1968 to 1969. From 1970 to 1974 he was a Teaching Fellow and Research Assistant in applied mathematics and applied physics at Harvard University. He was also a Research Assistant at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories, Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the summers of 1970 and 1971. In 1974
coursework in Calculus were also contacted about the program.ResourcesThe program was conducted by two engineering faculty, one in electrical engineering and theother in materials engineering. Each faculty member spent one week with the participants,presenting brief lectures and supervising laboratory activities. Five undergraduate students,majoring in electrical or mechanical engineering, were hired to assist with laboratory sessions.An important resource for the program was LabVIEW Lessons2 which features activitiesdesigned to develop students' computational thinking and engineering design skills through thepresentation of open-ended problems. Page
Aerospace Engi- neering at San Jos´e State University since 1994. Prior to coming to SJSU, he worked at IBM in San Jos´e in the development of disk drive actuators and spindle motors. He has also worked as a consultant in the optomechanical and laboratory automation industries. His areas of teaching and research are primarily focused in mechatronics, precision machine design, engineering measurements, and programming. He was one of the faculty members who redesigned the E10 Introduction to Engineering course in 2007.Prof. Ping Hsu, San Jose State University Dr. Ping Hsu graduated from University of California, Berkeley in 1988 with a Ph.D. in Electrical En- gineering. After graduation, he joined the Department of
where graduate TAs (GTAs) dutiesentail leading laboratory and discussion sessions.2,3 Formal training for TAs, provided at theuniversity level, department level, and course level4, often focuses on the basics and mechanicsof being a TA. The most basic training for new TAs includes topics such as TA responsibilitiesand grading (e.g. homework and exam). More advanced, yet still introductory, TA trainingtopics include knowing students, lecture techniques, leading discussions, classroommanagement, creating optimal learning environments, academic integrity, class planning andinstructor evaluations.5,6 Opportunities for in-depth development of TAs pedagogical skills arelimited, and the prevalence of optional versus mandatory training leaves many TAs
Paper ID #7410Building the Whole Engineer: An Integrated Academic and Co-CurricularFirst-Year ExperienceDr. S. Patrick Walton, Michigan State University S. Patrick Walton received his B.ChE. from Georgia Tech, where he began his biomedical research career in the Cardiovascular Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. He then attended MIT where he earned his M.S. and Sc.D. while working jointly with researchers at the Shriners Burns Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital. While at MIT, he was awarded a Shell Foundation Fellowship and was an NIH Biotechnology Predoctoral Trainee. Upon completion of his doctoral studies, he joined
: ExploringEngineering and Engineering Communications. Exploring Engineering I & II, each have twocomponents: (1) a one-hour lecture section that meets twice a week, and (2) a one and one-halfhour laboratory section that meets once a week. The lecture section is one for which all thestudents are registered while the laboratory component is split into classes of twenty-fivestudents or fewer. In Exploring Engineering I, the fall semester iteration of this course,attendance is mandatory. However, in Exploring Engineering II students have been given theoption of viewing the recorded lecture, rather than being physically present when the lecture isgiven. Attendance is taken in the lecture with an iClicker™. Students, who choose not to attendthe lecture, access
Auburn University. He is the co-founder and director of the NSF-funded Laboratory for Innovative Technology and Engineer- ing Education (LITEE). LITEE has recently been recognized by the National Academy of Engineering as one of the 29 programs in the country that have successfully infused real-world experiences into under- graduate engineering education. He is also the founder and director of the Auburn Engineering Technical Assistance Program (AETAP) Prior to coming to Auburn in 1984, Dr. Raju held faculty positions in sev- eral universities in India and visiting positions at the Catholic University of America, Purdue University and the Technical University of Berlin. Dr. Raju received his Ph.D. from the Indian
. Page 23.1368.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 What’s Trust Got to Do with It? Assessing a Research-Based Mentoring Program for Novice EngineersAbstractWhile the importance of trust has largely been explored in large business organizations, littleattention has been given to the role of trust in one-on-one mentoring relationships betweenengineers1. Trust has been relatively understudied in academic settings, especially in mentoringrelationships between undergraduate and graduate students in research laboratory settings. Byassessing ways of creating and maintaining trust in engineering relationships, we will be able tocreate more comprehensive guidelines on building
to co-op and internship to departmental research toorganizations and clubs, to be able to answer questions during the tour based on their ownexperiences. Each department is allotted between 35 and 45 minutes for their presentation. Amajority of the guests have taken a general University campus tour in the morning, allowing theCES tours to focus solely on curriculum, research opportunities, study abroad, cooperativeeducation, awards, student clubs/organizations, and graduate school/job placement within eachdepartment. The tour allows guests to visit department classrooms, laboratories, and researchfacilities. In addition to the student guides, many of the departments will have faculty, staff, andeven department chairs speak with the
Page 23.1220.2fundamentals program and the chosen inverted classroom approach will be explained. Thesubsequent sections will discuss the results pertaining to the three aforementioned questions.Finally, recommendations for future work will be given.MethodsClassroom StructureThe course met for three 125-minute sessions per week and for one 125-minute laboratoryexperience per week. While the inverted approach was applied to both the classroom andlaboratory components, further discussion of the laboratory component is beyond the scope ofthis paper. The classroom experiences were designed studio-style, with one faculty member andtwo undergraduate teaching assistants; seating arrangements encouraged interaction in groups offour and included a
the laboratory areoften not realistic options in classroom research. Alternatively, this situation could be addressedin the future by measuring a variety of potential group differences. This would allow groupdifferences to be ruled out or offered as an additional explanation for group performance. For students who participated in the summer program but nevertheless moved toIntroduction to Calculus, there appeared to be no benefit from participation in the summeralgebra intervention. Although these 15 students had the same large gains in pre- to post-intervention test scores as the group of students remaining in Engineering Analysis I, thisseeming improvement in algebra knowledge did not result in any demonstrated benefits in thefall
College’s Engineering StudentSuccess Center during the academic year and had rigorous training in advising and mentoring.The peer mentors formally interacted with the EXCEED students through active participation inthe projects and activities and leading nightly small discussion groups and informally duringmeals and break times.Campus Resource Hunt: Teams of students went on a photo “scavenger” hunt to discover theresources across campus, including the library, counseling, registrar, bursar’s office, writingcenter, and tutoring and advising centers.College of Engineering Tour: Students went on a comprehensive tour of the buildinghighlighting classrooms, student club space, laboratories, and department offices.Student Panels: Groups of current
Paper ID #7189Engaging Early Engineering Students (EEES): A Fourth Year Report froman NSF STEP ProjectDr. Jon Sticklen, Michigan State University Jon Sticklen is the Director of the Center for Engineering Education Research at Michigan State Univer- sity. Dr. Sticklen is also Director of Applied Engineering Sciences, an undergraduate bachelor of science degree program in the MSU College of Engineering that focuses both on engineering and business. He also is an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering. Dr. Sticklen formerly led a laboratory in knowledge-based systems focused on task