Longitudinal Study,” in Journal of Engineering Education, January 2004.3. Starrett, S. and M. M. Morcos, “Hands-On, Minds-On Electric Power Education”, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 90, No. 1, pp 93-99, January 2001.4. Higley, K. A. and C. M. Marianno, “Making Engineering Education Fun,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 90, No.1, pp 105-107, January 2001.5. Gabelnik, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R.S., and Smith, B.L., editors, Learning Communities: Creating Connections Among Students, Faculty, and Disciplines, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Jossey- Bass, 19906. Goodwin, T. & Hoagland, K. E. (1999). How to get started in research (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Council on Undergraduate Research.7. Karukstis, K
and Self-Regulated Learning for Freshmen Engineering Students”, Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference, Paper Number: AC 2011-1679, 2011.18. David T. Butterworth, “Teaching C/C++ Programming with Lego Mindstorms”, International Conference on Robotics in Education (RIE), 2012.19. L. Johnson, S. Adams, and M. Cummins, Mobile apps. The NMC horizon report: 2012 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium, 2012.20. K. Brennan and M. Resnick, “New Frameworks for Studying and Assessing the Development of Computational Thinking”, Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 2012.21. V. Barr and C. Stephenson, “Bringing computational thinking to K-12
steps mapped to Walther et al.'s Q3 typology Description Making the data Handling the data Validation: How can we improve We present data collection method We document research insights the research findings’ capacity to for collective scrutiny by mapped to analytical step. (Memo appropriately capture and colleagues and research steps.) represent aspects of the social community. (Step 9) reality observed? Theoretical validation: Do the We have designed the interview We regularly return to the concepts and relationships of the protocol to facilitate inquiry into
, Annual Conference,2006.7. Fortenberry, N., Sullivan, J., Jordan, P., and Knight, D., “Engineering Education Research Aids Instruction,” Page 24.882.17Science, Vol. 317, 2007.8.French, J., Leiffer, P., “The Genesis of Transformation: A First Course in Engineering with a focus on Retentionand Developing Professionalism” Proceedings of the 2012 American Society for Engineering EducationConference& Exposition, Annual Conference, 2012.9. Bradley, W., and Bradley, S., “Increasing Retention by Incorporating Time Management and Study Skills into aFreshman Engineering Course,” Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering
Accrediting Engineering Programs – Effective for Reviews during the 2013-2014 Accreditation Cycle, 27 October 2012, 22 March 2014, .6. Oakes, W., Coyle, E., and Jamieson, L., “EPICS: A Model of Service-Learning in an Engineering Curriculum”. Page 24.1369.12 Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2000.7. Oakes, W. and Thompson, M. “Integration of Service Learning into a Freshman Engineering Course”. Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2004.8. Duffy, J., Tsang, E. and Lord, S. “Service-Learning in Engineering: What, Why and How
representative of the broader engineering faculty population. Future research shouldalso survey faculty directly to find out the extent to which left-of-center grading is deliberatelyemployed since most of our knowledge of the practice is filtered through student perceptions.We also need research that can better understand the motivations of faculty who use the practice.Understanding these motivations can help researchers come up with viable alternatives to left-of-center grading.5. AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1262274. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of
and Development, PDesign, S˜ao Lu´ıs, pages 10–13, 2012.21 Susan Gasson. Human-centered vs. user-centered approaches. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 5(2):29–46, 2003.22 Dorothy Leonard and Jeffrey F Rayport. Spark innovation through empathic design. Harvard business review, 75:102–115, 1997.23 Joseph Lin and Carolyn Conner Seepersad. Empathic lead users: the effects of extraordinary user experiences on Page 24.51.18 customer needs analysis and product redesign. In ASME DETC Design Theory and Methodology Conference, 2007.24 Peter Landwehr. Empathic design vs
;Schueler‐Choukairi,T.2012,StudiesinSecondLanguageAcquisition,pp.35‐66.3.NationalCenterforEducationStatistics.Integratedpost‐secondaryeducationdatasystem,FallEnrollmentDatafile.s.l.:NCES,1999.4.Ninewaystoreducecognitiveloadinmultimedialearning.Mayer,R.E.,&Moreno,R.1,2003,EducationalPsychologist,Vol.38,pp.43‐52.5.Cognitiveconstraintsonmultimedialearning:WhenPresentingmorematerialresultsinlessunderstanding.Mayer,R.E.,Heiser,J.,&Lonn,S.1,2001,JournalofEducationalPsychology,Vol.93,pp.187‐198.6.Richtel,M.Multitaskinghurtsbrain’sabilitytofocus,scientistssay.Seattle:TheSeattleTimes,2010.Article.7.earningviadirectandmediatedinstructionbydeafstudents.Marschark,M.,Sapere,P.,Convertino,C.M.&Pelz,J.2008,JournalofDeafStudiesandDeafEducation,pp.446
Academic Standards. http://education.state.mn.us/mde/index.html2 Center for Engineering Education. http://www.stthomas.edu/cee3 U. Roy, “Preparing engineers for future with collaborative technology,” Journal of computer applications inengineering education, vol. 2, pp. pp. 99-104, 1998.4 Global Foundries, “Sand to Silicon.” Online video clip. Youtube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvluuAIiA505 Arduino website. http://arduino.cc6 J. A. Riofrio, S. Northrup, “Teaching Undergraduate Introductory Course to Mechatronics in the MechanicalEngineering Curriculum Using Arduino,” Proceedings of the 2013 American Society for Engineering EducationAnnual Conference, Atlanta, 2013.7 N. Bird, “Use of the Arduino platform for a junior-level undergraduate
that inorder to get the most benefit out of these different methods, they should be used in conjunctionwith each other.References1. McCracken M, Almstrum V, Diaz D, et al. A multi-national, multi-institutional study ofassessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin.2001;33(4):125-180.2. Thomas L, Ratcliffe M, Woodbury J, Jarman E. Learning styles and performance in theintroductory programming sequence. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 2002;34(1):33-37.3. Carini, R, Kuh, G, Klein, S. Student engagement and student learning: testing the linkages.Research in Higher Education. 2006; 47(1):1-32.4. Chabay, R. Self-perception and social-perception processes in tutoring: Subtle social controlstrategies of expert tutors. Self
Paper ID #10870Eliminating Lectures (and video lectures) in Large Introductory MaterialsScience and Engineering Courses: Large Gains in Student LearningProf. Steven M. Yalisove, University of Michigan S. M. Yalisove obtained a PhD in Materials Science and Engineering at the University of Pennsylvania in 1986. After a post doc at Bell Laboratories, he joined the Michigan faculty in 1989. In 1996 he was a Fulbright scholar at the FOM institute in the Netherlands. He is currently the Associate Director of the Materials Laboratory at the Center for Ultrafast Optical Sciences at the University of Michigan. Yalisove’s
Research,” in 120th ASEE Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, 2013.3. Kellog, S., “Developing Online Materials to Facilitate an Inverted Classroom Approach”, 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, 2009.4. Toto, R. and H. Nguyen, “Flipping the Work Design in an Industrial Engineering Course”, 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, 2009. Page 24.616.135. R. M. Felder, R. Brent, and M. Prince, National Effective Teaching Institute (NETI), Charlotte, NC, June 2012.6. Kahn Academy website: https://www.khanacademy.org/ accessed 12/20/13.7. R Core Team R: A language
. 44-49.3. Bishop, J.L. and M.A. Verleger. The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research. in 2013 ASEE Annual Page 24.181.20 Conference. 2013. Atlanta, GA: American Society for Engineering Education.4. Zappe, S., et al. "Flipping" the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. in American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. 2009. Austin, TX.5. Gannod, G.C., J.E. Burge, and M.T. Helmick, Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering, in Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering2008, ACM
... 2. I decided on my 1st choice project based on best fit with my interest and concentration(s). 3. I decided on my 1st choice project based on the recommendation of a friend. 4. I decided on my 1st choice project by reading the Job Description (JD) online. 5. The project Job Description (JD) for my 1st choice project was detailed enough. 6. I compared the Job Description (JD) of my 1st choice project with other JDs. 7. I decided on my 1st choice project based on my personal interview with the then current project leaders and/or faculty advisor during the GO Job Fair. 8. I decided on my 1st choice project based on some other reason (please explain reason below). 9. Other reasons for choosing 1st choice project, not included
National Paralegal College/National Juris University online. Retrieved fromhttp://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_files/realProperty/PersonalProperty/Bailments.aspCheung, S. N. (1970). Structure of a Contract and the Theory of a Non-Exclusive Resource, The. JL & Econ., 13, 49.Farnsworth, E. A. (1967). "Meaning" in the Law of Contracts. The Yale Law Journal, 76(5), 939- 965. doi: 10.2307/794951Farnsworth, E. A. (1982). Contracts. Boston. MA: Little Brown & Co.Fiorita, M. (2012) "The Consequences of 'Pay-If-Paid' and 'Pay-When-Paid' Construction Contracts Clauses" October 2012. Web. 27 Dec. 2013.Harris, L. D., & Perlberg, B. M. (2009). Advantages of the ConsensusDOCS Construction Contracts
, 2012.5. J. Highsmith, Agile Project Management, Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2004.6. K. Schwaber and J. Sutherland, “The Scrum Guide: The Definitive Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game,” Scrum.org, 2011.7. I. Sommerville, Software Engineering, 8th Edition, Essex: Pearson Education, 2007.8. The State of Scrum: Benchmarks and Guidelines, June 2013, http://www.scrumalliance.org/why-scrum/state-of- scrum-report.9. Planning Poker: An Agile Estimation and Planning Technique, http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/agile/planning-poker.10. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), “Criteria for Accrediting Computing Programs,” Computing Accreditation Commission, Baltimore, MD, 2012.11. S. Ambler, Acceleration: An Agile
, ethics is the study of “what it means to do theright thing”. A related debate is how to view ethical rules – as fundamental and universal, likethe laws of science or as rules that provide a framework for interacting with other people in aproductive way.Moreover, from a global perspective, ethical rules differ across different cultures. In somecountries it is considered a common business practice to offer bribes or kickbacks, whereas in theU.S. this practice is illegal and unethical. Is one culture’s “bribe” just another culture’s“lobbying”? The “bribe” is considered unlawful, whereas the lobbyist is working in a legallyrecognized manner as long as s/he does not transfer money to gain access to power. Note thatethics is not law, and the role of
history and today’s challenges available for us to freelymine and appropriate instead of being conditioned by it. In this context a humble but importantrole of western designers may be to structure the project so that such experimental methodscould be unleashed. Such method could render the existing binaries (West and non-West, pastand present, field and home) obsolete and generate instead a new forum based on commonpolitical aspirations. Fieldwork that is capable of creating such a forum could further the roles ofarchitectural and engineering education.1 Formerly Kigali Institute of Science and Technology until 3013.2 See for instance Ewing, S. et al, eds. Architecture and Field/Work, Critiques: Critical Studies in ArchitecturalHumanities
).13. Ragusa, G. Engineering creativity and propensity for innovative thinking in undergraduate and graduate students. in 118th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 26, 2011 - June 29, 2011 (American Society for Engineering Education, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011).14. Genco, N., Holtta-Otto, K. & Seepersad, C.C. An experimental investigation of the innovation capabilities of undergraduate engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education 101, 60-81 (2012).15. Kazerounian, K. & Foley, S. Barriers to creativity in engineering education: A study of instructors and students perceptions. Journal of Mechanical Design 129, 761-768 (2007).16. Atman, C.J., Kilgore, D. & McKenna, A
expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.”6. Works Cited1. McIlwee, J.S. and J.G. Robinson, Women in engineering; Gender, Power, and Workplace culture1992, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.2. Wolfe, J. and E. Powell, Biases in interpersonal communication: How engineering students perceive gender typical speech acts in teamwork. Journal of Engineering Education, 2009. 98(1): p. 5-16.3. Bowles, H.R., L. Babcock, and L. Lai, Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations:sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2007. 103: p. 84-103.4. Phelan, J.E., C.A
Knowledge as Defined by Coursework, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference 2007.4. Cherbaka N. and Lavelle J., Proposing an Engineering Management Program at North Carolina State University, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference 2009.5. Collins T.R. and Youngblood A.D., Engineering Management Program Re- Evaluation, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference 2002.6. http://www.asem.org/ASEM_Docs/EM_Masters_Program_Certification_- _Academic_Standards.pdf Visited on 29th November 2013.7. Sivaloganathan S. Influencing Factors from the Literature for Engineering Education, The journal of the Institution of Engineers Sri-Lanka. December 2003.8. Grayson L.P. The Design of Engineering Curricula, UNESCO Studies in Engineering Education
Education AnnualConference, Salt Lake City, UT.Stiggins, R.J. (1997). Student-Centered Classroom Assessment, Second Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.Olds, B., Moskal, B., and Miller, R. (2005). Assessment in engineering education: evolution, approachesand future collaborators, Journal of Engineering Education. 94(1), pp. 27-40.Todd, R., Magleby, S., Sorensen, C., Swan, B., and Anthony, D. (1995). A survey of capstoneengineering courses in North America, Journal of Engineering Education, 84(2), pp. 165-174.Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development, Alexandria, VA
and/or safety aspects of the manufacturing process(s) illustrated in the work ofart, the production methods used to produce a particular product, or how a particular work of artwas produced. If the work of art illustrates a process from the past, a perspective on how theprocess (or environmental/safety considerations) have changed to the present is expected withmore weight on the present.Timeline:Initial choice for topic/work of art: due Monday, March 18th. If multiple students/groups havethe same choice, an alternative selection may be needed.Preliminary topics (short description of the focus of the paper with the title/artist of the work ofart and a minimum of 2 references outside the textbook) are due on Monday April 15th.Final papers are
of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 151, 385-397.14. Sobek, D.K.. and Smalley, A. (2008). Understanding A3 thinking: A critical component of Toyota’s PDCA management system. New York: Taylor and Francis.15. Ammar, S. and Wright, R. (1999). Experiential learning activities in operations management, International Transactions in Operational Research, 6, 183–197. Page 24.786.13
(2):137 – 148, 2002. 4 Christian H. Kautz, Paula R. L. Heron, Michael E. Loverude, Lillian C. McDermott, and Peter S. Shaffer. Student Understanding of the Ideal Gas Law, Part I: A Macroscopic Perspective. American Journal of Physics, 73(11):1055, 2005. 5 Ronald L. Miller. Misconceptions About Rate Processes: Preliminary Evidence for the Importance of Emergent Conceptual Schemas in Thermal and Transport Sciences. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2006. 6 Christian H. Kautz and G Schmitz. Interactive Lecture Questions as a Research and Teaching Tool in Introductory Thermodynamics. In Proceedings of the 2006 SEFI Conference, number June, pages 1–9, 2006. 7 Evan B. Pollock
above, the seven members are located in Berlin, Bremen, Cologne, Hamburg, Munich,Münster, and Osnabrück. Collectively, the UAS7 alliance members collaborate with more than1400 university partners worldwide.The UAS7 offers a wide variety of exchange opportunities for international students, includingsummer, semester, and year-long exchange opportunities. In addition, UAS7 offers graduateprograms in English for students who are seeking a degree beyond the Bachelor’s and Master’slevel.The universities of applied sciences (UAS) are relatively new. They were established in theearly 1970’s with the objective to help German industries maintain their internationalcompetitiveness. This new approach to higher education was intended to satisfy a
assessment of their own learning. The application functions as part of a largerarchitecture we designed to allow a teacher to monitor learning during class and gain evendeeper insights during subsequent offline analysis. A pilot study revealed our architecture wasable to successfully record and support analysis of our students’ self-reported learningassessments. Notably, the architecture serves as a useful tool for spotting trends in studentlearning that, when combined with video of a class, can be a powerful critique.References1 Bloom, Benjamin S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, Edward J., Hill, Walker H. and Krathwohl, David R. (1956) ‘Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive domain’. New York: David McKay, 19, p. 56.2