-structured problem;students define the problem and identify the skills necessary for its solution; students build theirknowledge base both independently and cooperatively, and repeat the cycle until they havearrived at an acceptable solution. In both engineering design and other PBL processes, solutionsare non-unique and context-specific. And in both contexts, having students begin with the socio-technical concept of technology helps foster a more durable and culturally astute set ofconsiderations when those students perform the iterative process. We see this as corroboratingDym et al.’s labeling of PBL as the “most-favored” pedagogical model for teaching engineeringdesign, citing its potential for positive impact on retention rates, student
Page 24.811.11 and cooperative. o Ordinary - Often did what he/she was supposed to do, minimally prepared and cooperative. o Marginal - Sometimes failed to show up or complete assignments, rarely prepared. o Deficient - Often failed to show up or complete assignments, un-prepared. o Unsatisfactory - Consistently failed to show up or complete assignments, often unprepared. o Superficial - Practically no participation. o No Show - No participation at all. My major contribution(s) were: Something I did not know before this project that I learned was: Next time I will be a better team member by: How would you
? APEX, 15(4), 56-77.[2] Allen, E. (Ed.). (1992, Winter). Polarities: Teaching structures. Connector, 1(1) 1.[3] Salvadori, M. (1958). Teaching structures to architects. Journal of Architectural Education, 13(1), 3-8.[4] Bender, R. (1976, June). The teaching of structural design. Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture [ACSA Memo]. Reprinted and cited by Black, R. G., & Duff, S. (1994). A model for teaching structures: Finite element analysis in architecture education. Journal of Architecture Education, 48(1), 38-55.[5] Faoro, D. F. (1994, Fall). Report of survey on structures curricula. Connector, 3(2), 2.[6] Bruning, R. H. (1994). The college classroom from the perspective of cognitive psychology. In K
and C. Galperti, “An adaptive system for optimal solar energy harvesting in wireless sensor networknodes,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I: Regular Papers, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1742–1750, Jul. 2008.10. V. Raghunathan, S. Ganeriwal, and M. Srivastava, “Emerging techniques for long lived wireless sensor Page 24.876.12networks,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 108–114, Apr. 2006.11. H. Yang, Wu, H.; He, Y.: Architecture of wireless sensor network for monitoring aquatic environment ofmarine shellfish. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE Asian Control Conference, Hong Kong, August 2009, pp. 1147-1151.12. R.M. Felder, and R. Brent
. Agelidis, "The future of power electronics-power engineering education: challenges and opportunities", IEEE Workshop on Power Electronics Education, 2005, Mar Hotel Recife, Brazil, June 16-17, 2005, pp.1-8.3 M.D. Koretsky, D. Amatore, C. Barnes, S. Kimura, “Enhancement of Student Learning in Experimental Design Using a Virtual Laboratory", IEEE Transactions on Education , vol. 51, no.1, pp.76 – 85, Feb. 2008.4 W. Robbins, N. Mohan, P. Jose, T. Begalke, C. Henze, T. Undeland, “A building-block-based power electronics instructional laboratory," IEEE 33rd Annual Power Electronics Specialists Conference (PESC), 2002, Cairns, Queensland, Australia, June 24-27, 2005, pp.467 – 472.5 N. Mohan, W.P. Robbins, P. Imbertson, T.M
problem solving. No experiments wereperformed as part of the PBL. Student 1’s biggest complaint about the PBL was that “it’s nothands on.” Student 1 suggested adding a lab that would allow students to discover qualities ofdifferent types of biomass. “Instead of learning about the biomass on here, we could haveactually tested the different types and stuff and looked at it through that different way.” Student3 also echoed this sentiment and suggested combining the PBL with a lab test that “get[s] yourhands dirty doing it.” This is consistent with the Jones’ constructivist approach3. Studentsactually asked for tasks that would require additional effort if it meant they could discover orconstruct biomass information.Instructor Implications The
. Fasse, J. Gray, J. Holbrook, S. Puntambekar, and M. Ryan (2003). Problem-based Learning Meets Case-Based Reasoning in the Middle-School Science Classroom: Putting Learning by Design into Practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences , 12(4), 495-54710: McCormick, M. and Hynes, M. (2012) Engineering in a Fictional World: Early Findings from Integrating Engineering and Literacy. Conference Proceedings, Collection: Proceedings from the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, San Antonio, Texas. Bibliography: Conference Proceedings11. Ulrich, K. and S. Eppinger (2008) Product Design and Development, Fourth Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education12. Dym, C., and P. Little (2004) Engineering Design: A
/humanitarianengineering/23. Colorado school of Mines – Senior Design Program. http://cecs.mines.edu/25763-php24. Ohio State University – Senior Design Program . https://hecourse.engineering.osu.edu/HEsyllabus25. Massachusetts Institute of Technology – GEAR lab - 2.S999 Global Engineering http://stellar.mit.edu/S/course/2/fa13/2.S999/index.html26. Massachusetts Institute of Technology – TATA Center http://tatacenter.mit.edu/tata- center/about-us/27. Winters, A. (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). “2.S999 Global Engineering” Fall 2013. December 13, 201328. University of Maryland – GEMS Program http://www.gemstone.umd.edu/academics/curriculum.html29. Penn State – Humanitarian Engineering and Social Entrepreneurship Program http
serves as the framework on which to transformthe course. It forces each faculty member to take a broad and comprehensive view of the coursesthat they will address in the SFIP. At this stage there is no innovation. Setting the panoramicoutline as a prerequisite leaves more time for innovation, a lesson learned during the 2012 SFIPsession. Table 2: Template used to create a panoramic outline of 30 sessions of 1.5 hours each (a prerequisite to start the SFIP in June) Course: Professor: Session Topic(s) Instructional Objectives – By the end of this session students shall be Real-World
-‐1055, (1985). 2. Halloun, IA, & Hestenes, D., “Common-‐sense concepts about motion,” Am. J. Phys. 53, 1056-‐1065, (1985). 3. Tobias, S., Revitalizing Undergraduate Science; Why Some Things Work and Most Don’t, Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation, (1992). 4. Tobias, S., They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different: Stalking the Second Tier, Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation, (1990). 5. Laws, P., “Calculus-‐based physics without lectures,” Phys. Today 44(12), 24-‐31, (1991) 6. Laws, P., Workshop Physics, J. Wiley, (2004) 7. Mazur, E., Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual, Prentice Hall, (1997
. Krousgrill HigherEd 2.0: Web 2.0 in Higher Education, in Interactive Multimedia, I. Dellyannis, Editor. 2012, Rijeka, Croatia: InTech.[16] Halic, O., Lee, D., Paulus, T., and M. Spence, To Blog or Not to Blog: Student Perceptions of Blog Effectiveness for Learning in a College-Level Course. The Internet and Higher Education, 2010. 13(4): p. 206- 213.[17] Huang, T.-C., Huang, Y.-M., and F.-Y. Yu, Cooperative Weblog Learning in Higher Education: Its Facilitating: Effects on Social Interaction, Time Lag, and Cognitive Load. Educational Technology and Society, 2011. 14(1): p. 95-106.[18] Kerawalla, L., Minocha, S., Kirkup, G., and G. Conole, An Empirically Grounded Framework to Guide Blogging in Higher Education. Journal of Computer Assisted
the take-awayhas a new element the students can research.The transformation of the class proved successful. The major elements of the structure of theclass have been laid out and show significant positive results. However, further fine-tuning onthe minor elements mentioned above should be considered for future research.References:1. Azhar, S., Grau, D., Burt, R., and Gibson, G."State-of-the-Art Best Construction Practices Integration into Higher Education Curricula." Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 0(0), .2. Badger, W. and Robson, K. (2000) Raising Expectations in Construction Education. Construction Congress VI: pp. 1151-1164.3. Brint, S. Cantwell, A. Hanneman, R. (2008). The Two Cultures
the top lessons learned by the Dual-Use Ferry student teams. Atthe end of the design effort, a design solution was provided to the customer. The customer wasvery pleased with the resulting effort and stated that future marketplace design efforts would bewelcomed and supported.AcknowledgmentsWe thank the Department of Defense for financial support of the capstone marketplace projectand for technical and logistical support in providing mentors and sponsors. We thank the mentorsand sponsors of the Dual-Use Ferry project for their generous support and guidance. Finally, wethank the students at Stevens Institute and UAH for their hard work on this challenging project.Bibliography 1. B. McGrath, S. Lowes, A. Squires and C. Jurado, SE Capstone
). Technology education and other technically related programs. In G.E. Martin (Ed.), Foundations of technology education, 44thYearbook of the Council on Technology Teacher Education (pp. 25- 117). New York, NY: Glencoe McGraw-Hill.8. Johnson, S., Gostelow, J. P., & King, W.J. (2000). Engineering and Society, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.9. Loendorf, W. R. (2004). A Course Investigating Technology in World Civilization. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, June 20-23, 2004.10. Loendorf, W. R. (2010). The Social, Economic, and Political Impact of Technology: An Historical Perspective. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering
Engineering Education Brigham Young University Randy C. Hurd Mechanical Engineering Brigham Young University Kip S. Hacking Electrical Engineering Brigham Young University Tadd Truscott Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering Brigham Young University Abstract: Over the past two years several professors from the technology education and mechanical
wasdeveloped to recognize the graduating student(s) who have made significant contributions to thementoring program. The students who receive the LSU Leadership Legacy Award must benominated by current mentors in the program and voted on by the faculty/staff advisors. Morethan one student can be selected for the Legacy Award each semester. All of the mentors are encouraged to join the LSU Distinguished Communicatorprogram, a university wide program that is listed as a special designation on students’ transcripts.The Distinguished Communicator program recognizes students’ exceptional abilities in fourareas of communication: verbal, written, visual and technological. Currently, every officer inSPM has been accepted into the program and is
computing devices will provide us multipleprojects in the foreseeable future with a little more structure and research on how to transformthe data. This will reduce the stress of finding new projects each semester with minimal funds. Itwill also allow students to gain experience with a new engineering tool: apps. The results of thispilot semester indicate that simple projects with just a balance board and Smartphone can teachengineering students the process of designing and analyzing a statistical experiment.1. S. Deans, “Determining the validity of the Nintendo Wii balance board as an assessment tool for balance,” (MS thesis, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2011). Accessed October 24, 2013, http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi
area(s). Learning Objectives: What will teachers take away from this lesson? While some learning objectives can be bottom line and traditional, the intention is that the most beneficial portion of the lesson is the teacher's inference on its application to the teachers' subject area. Main Idea: This is the message to the team of freshmen who pick this topic in order to communicate what the EPICS course is envisioning for this module. These are restatements of the learning objectives with subtle suggestions for the interactivity; Page 24.1392.7 however, this decision is ultimately made by the
. A., & Fowler, E. (2001). Improving First‐Year Engineering Education,” Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 33-41. [4] Brockman, J. B., Fuja, T., & Batill, S. M. (2002, June). “A Multidisciplinary Course Sequence for First- Year Engineering Students,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Educational Annual Conference and Exposition. [5] Montgomery, R., Follman, D., & Diefes-Dux, H. (2003, November). “Relative Effectiveness of Different First-Year Engineering Seminars,” Proceedings of Frontiers in Education. [6] Budny, D., LeBold, W., & Bjedov, G. (1998). “Assessment of the Impact of Freshman Engineering Courses,” Journal of Engineering Education, 87(4), 405-411. [7] Brannan, K. P., &
Page 24.32.5students to take an introduction to engineering course but they may choose from introduction tothe various disciplines, an engineering projects course, and an engineering survey course.DisseminationAs indicated earlier, sharing the detailed taxonomy with ASEE will result in broad disseminationand impact. We have shared our work primarily through conferences to gain the help of theengineering education community in framing the taxonomy and our other results. We havepresented our work in four presentations at 3 conferences, and have another under review forpresentation at this ASEE conference. We have engaged the community with several workshopsand presentations as well. Orr, M., Ohland, M., Long, R., Brawner, C., Lord, S., and
, 21 Sep 2009. Lecture.[8] Young, Jeffrey R., "'Hybrid' Teaching Seeks to End the Divide Between Traditional and Online Instruction." The Chronicle of Higher Education, 22 Mar 2002. Web. 6 Jun 2013. .[9] Welsh, Ralph S., "Making the Transition from Traditional Classroom Instruction to Distributed Hybrid Instruction Utilizing Video Lecture Capture." Just Flip It: From the Front Lines of the Flipped Classroom. Clemson Public Health Sciences, 21 May 2013. Webcast. 30 May 2013.[10] Berrett, Dan, “How ‘Flipping’ the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture.” The Education Digest 78.1, 2012: 36-41. ProQuest Education Journals. Web. 13 Mar 2013.[11] Rutter, Michael, "‘Flipped Classroom’ Teaching Model Gains an Online
Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 12-29. ACM, May 2006.3. “SWEBOK: Guide to the software engineering Body of Knowledge” IEEE Computer Society, 2004.4. V. Subbian, C. Purdy, “UnLecture: Bridging the gap between computing education and software engineering practice,” in ASEE Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 2014 (accepted).5. K. Beck, “Embracing change with extreme programming,” Computer, vol. 32, pp. 70-77, 1999.6. M. Fowler, UML Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2004.7. K. M. Slaten, M. Droujkova, S. B. Berenson, L. Williams and L. Layman, “Undergraduate student perceptions of pair programming and agile software
,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(3): 05-525. 11. "Premier Award Winners." K-Gray Engineering Pathway Digital Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. 12. Baker, D.F. (2008), "Peer assessment in small groups: a comparison of methods," Journal of Management Education, 32(2):183-209. 13. Wang, E., Velasquez-Bryant, N., Adams, J., Batchman, T., Cantrell, P., Jacobson, E., Johnson, W., Kleppe, J., LaCombe, J., LaTourrette, N., Norris, G., Sparkman, W., and Varol, Y. (2004), "First Year Engineering Experience Initiative," Proceedings of the ASEE Annual conference and exhibition, Salt Lake City. 14. Freeman, S. A., & Dyrenfurth, M. J. (2003), “Using peer assessments in team
Cyber Security education, training, and awareness in the undergraduate curriculum. References1. President's Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC), Cyber Security: A Crisis ofPrioritization (Feb. 2005).2. Can higher education fix the cybersecurity shortfall? – Retrieved fromhttp://www.schools.com/articles/cybersecurity-shortfa3. D. Rowe, B. Lunt, J. Ekstorm, “The Role of Cyber-Security in Information Technology Education” -SIGITE’11, October 20–22, 2011.4. L. Clinton, “Education's Critical Role in Cybersecurity” - EDUCAUSE Review, vol. 44, no. 5(September/October 2009): 60–61.5. R. Raj, S. Mishra, C. Romanowski, T. Howles, “CyberSecurity as General Education”, 15thColloquium for
reported immediately. One Week M Tu W Th F 8- SCHOOL SCHOOL WORK WORK WORK 10 hr s Program work (1-2 hours) Home Work & STUDY Figure 5 (a). Student weekly schedule Figure 5 (b). Student schedule for a two-year spanBesides academic curriculum, the students also have to conduct Manufacturing Core Exercises(MCE) weekly
students training programs at Texas A&M Qatar,and Maersk Oil Qatar is playing a major role in funding STEM development and their relatedactivitiesReferences:[1] Minerick, A.R., D.P. Visco, S.M. Montgomery, D. Briedis, J. Sticklen, C.A. McDonough, S.P. Walton,A.M. Portis, E.H. Chimowitz, W.E. Rochefort, K.L. Levien, Elbashir N. O., J. Condit, and S. Lindeman, (2011)“Special Session: What Works to Retain Students in Chemical Engineering Programs,” The ChemicalEngineering Division Publication- American Society of Engineering Education Proceedings, June 2011,Vancouver, Canada (pages 1-13).[2] Elbashir N. O.; Parsaei H.; Elmalik E. (2013) “A New Educational Approach towards Preparing SkilledChemical Engineers for Special Assignments in the Energy
/The_ASC_Doctoral_Task_Force.pdf2. Barlish, K., Sullivan, K., De Marco, A. (2012). Education and Simulation of Best Value in an International Academic Setting: A Case Study. Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value, 4 (1), pp44-62.3. Davenport, J., and Davenport, J., A. (1985). A Chronology and Analysis of the Andragogy Debate. Adult Education Quarterly, 35 (3), pp. 152-159.4. Dowlatshahl, S. (1996). An Empirical Assessment of Continuing – Education Needs. Journal of Management in Engineering, 12 (5), pp37- 44.5. Epstein, H., I. (1987). Continuing Education – A Look to the Future. Journal of Professional Issue in Engineering, 113, pp2-9.6. Gagne, R. M., Driscoll, M. P. (1988). Essentials of Learning for Instruction
partners willing to help with curriculum, supplies, technology information, class visits and more. All enjoyed and the celebration of manufacturing in Florida. Partnerships Partners and regional leaders came from a number of expected and unexpected venues. FLATE posted a sign up page on its “Made in Florida” website (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WR8NBBT ) for interested parties to sign up including companies wanting to host tours, schools wanting to go on tours, and other organizations who
Applications, 2 nd edition. CRC Press,2008.24. Slotta, J. D. In defense of Chi’s ontological incompatibility hypothesis. The Journal of theLearning Sciences, 2011, 20, 151–162.25. Sonntag, Richard E.; Borgnakke, C.; Van Wylen, Gordon J. Fundamentals of Thermodynamics, 6 th edition. NewYork: J. Wiley, 200326. Streveler, R. A., Geist, M. R., Ammerman, R.F., Sulzbach, C. S., Miller, R. L., Olds, B. M., & Nelson, M. A.The development of a professional knowledge base: The persistence of substance based schemas in engineeringstudents. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 2006, Chicago,IL.27. Tipler, Paul A.; Mosca, Gene. Physics for Scientists and Engineers: with Modern Physics, 6 th edition.New York
both “marketpenetration” and development of transferable programming skills: they recommended exposingstudents to it, but not restructuring the course around it.)We thus kept VB6 in Sensor Lab, knowing that we would eventually need to change. Thischange was ultimately demanded by our university’s conversion to 64-bit Windows 7 (Win7):our IT support person advised that there were issues surrounding VB6’s access of the COM portsin 64-bit Win7, and that it may be time to move on. (A survey of several online programmingforums showed this to be true. While there may be some workarounds that “fix” this issue, thesedid not seem worth it, given that the rest of the world is moving past VB6, especially for newapplications.)We considered Microsoft