Knowledge Center(http://www.wepanknowledgecenter.org) is another excellent source of material, researchreports, initiatives and organizations pertinent to women in STEM. The National Academy ofEngineering’s Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CASEE), in conjunctionwith the Society of Women Engineers (SWE)’s Assessing Women in Engineering (AWE) Page 25.932.10Project, is producing its Advancing Research into Practice (ARP) series, which translatesresearch findings on many these issues into practical recommendations for use in the classroom(http://www.engr.psu.edu/awe/ARPResources.aspx). Lastly, all of the professional
4 – Somewhat Likely 5 – Very LikelyThe module received a 5.0+/-0.0 (5 out of 5 from all 5 respondents).Questions from the Module 1 exit interview are listed below, and the results from the 3undergraduate students that participated in the course are listed in Table 1. Exit Interview Items: 1. Do you believe this course motivated/helped improve your experience in your Calculus classes? Explain. 2. What part(s) of the module implementation (teaching, worksheets, communication, field trip, etc.) do you think were the best and should be kept? Explain. 3. What part(s) of the module implementation (teaching, worksheets, communication, field trip, etc.) do you think were
vintage, 8000 sf unreinforced masonry building and the construction of a 10,000 sf building for an Historical Archive Complex • Green Building Competition - 1,000 sf residences in New Orleans, $100,000 budget, sustainable and accessible with the main floors elevated above the maximum predicted flood levels • Sedgewick Nature Reserves • Crandall Gymnasium & Natatorium - Redevelopment of a 1927 gymnasium and adjacent 1937 natatorium into a state of the art digital fabrication center. • UCSB College of Creative Studies – 60,000 sf building(s), parking, site work • Athletic Department Complex – 100,000 sf building(s), 1,000 car parking structure, 15,000 seat stadium, building renovations, sitework
Modernisation Project Vignette § Singapore Water Management Vignette § FAA Advanced Automation System (AAS) Vignette § Standard Korean Light Transit System Vignette References:1. Pyster, A., D. Olwell, J. Anthony, S. Enck, N. Hutchison, and A. Squires, eds.; Ferris, T. lead author (2011, December 15). Graduate reference curriculum for systems engineering (GRCSE) version
Learning Sciences, 235-76. 4. Prince, M.J. 2004. “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research,” Journal of Engineering Education, 1-9. 5. Harsha, P., M. Green. 2010. Computer Science Majors Significantly Increase for the Second Year in a Row: Growth Reverses the Steep Decline in Enrollment of the 2000’s. Retrieved from http://www.cra.org/uploads/documents/resources/taulbee/CRA-Taulbee-PR-2010-Final.pdf. 6. Dahlstrom, E., T. de Boor, P. Grunwald, M. Vockley. 2011. The ECAR National Survey of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, Educause Center for Applied Research. Page
., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom- Based Practices. Jnl. Eng. Ed. 94, 87–101 (2005).3. Kilpatrick, D. J., Linville, M. & Stout, D. E. Procedural justice and the development and use of peer evaluations in business and accounting classes. Journal of Accounting Education 19, 225–246 (2001).4. Byrd, J. S. & Hudgins, J. L. Teaming in the Design Laboratory. Jnl. Eng. Ed. 84, 335–341 (1995).5. Eschenbach, E. A. & Mesmer, M. A. Web Based Forms for Design Team Peer Evaluations. Proceedings of the 1998 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (1998).at 6. Wang, J. & Imbrie, P. K. Assessing Team Effectiveness: Comparing Peer-Evaluations to a Team Effectiveness
: Linking Engineering and Society. National Academy of Engineering. 36(2):38-446. Paterson, K., C. O’Holleran, and C. Leslie (2010). Faculty Impressions of Service Learning in Engineering Education. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. Louisville, KY. AC2010-2033, 8 pp.7. Silliman, S., R.Mohtar, K.G. Paterson, and W. Ball (2010). Engineering Academic Programs for Hydrophilanthropy: Commonalities and Challenges. Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education. 145:5-29. (I)8. Bielefeldt, A.R., K.G. Paterson, and C.W. Swan (2010). Measuring the Value Added from Service Learning in Project-Based Engineering Education. International Journal of Engineering Education. In Special Issue on
-intercept, caused by physical and electronic offsets between the active elements of thetransducers and the measured displacement between the bases of the holders, can be ignored.)The speed of sound found for a 10-point fit is typically within 1% of the textbook speed of soundin air of 343 m/s at 20° C.Because the Machine Science pulsers cannot be adjusted in frequency or amplitude, theextensions that we have used at NU to measure the (lack of) dependence of the speed of soundon frequency or intensity were not possible at NECC. Using the Voltage Cursor feature theNECC students were able to measure the decrease in intensity of the signal as the distancebetween the transducers in increased. This can be displayed as a scatter plot in Excel, and
class room or laboratory.For an engineer in industry, a project is a sequence of tasks required to reach an objective.Typically, the objective is to design a device or process that has value to a customer (user). Theproject begins by defining a performance problem associated with an application and ends with adesign solution. The problem drives the learning required to complete the project. Managing theproject requires the engineer to demonstrate effective teamwork, clear communication and theability to balance the social, economic and environmental impacts of the project. Project-basedlearning (PBL) is based on the practice of solving problems. The concept of problem-basedlearning was first developed in the medical field in the mid-1950’s. It
EPICSEPICS is an engineering-centered, multidisciplinary, service-learning program at PurdueUniversity that has received national recognition. Students enrolled in the EPICS courses learndesign while they develop projects for local or global community partners. In the 2011-2012academic year, over 500 students from more than 70 majors within the College of Engineeringand across the university have participated in EPICS. This program is structured with student-leddivisions, each with 8-20 students, a faculty or industry mentor, and a graduate teaching assistant(TA). Each division has one or more not-for-profit agency/ies (such as a museum, governmentservice, charity, etc.) as a community partner(s). The students work with their communitypartner(s) to
preparation for her and created a challenging objective for the group. The resultsshowed the students in her group their weaknesses in a format different from the in-class testsand verified that they did indeed need to study and that attendance in the study group isworthwhile.Study Group LogisticsAs described elsewhere8, students arrive at study groups to find that the mentor has organized theseating in the room to be in a U-shape with all chairs and desks facing the white board. Thementor takes a seat as if s/he is a part of the group. The mentor facilitates collaborative groupwork by opening communication and asking about problem areas from the lecture or homework.In the case of a group with students from several different course sections studying
. Page 25.202.1514 Baillie, C. (2011) ‘Threshold capabilities: an emerging methodology to locate curricula threshold’, in proceedings of the Research in Engineering Education Symposium, 4-7 October, Madrid.15 Male, S. and Baillie, C. (2011) ‘Engineering Threshold Concepts’, SEFI Annual Conference, European Society for Engineering Education, Lisbon.16 Smith, M., Hargroves, K., and Desha, C. (2010) Cents and Sustainability: Securing Our Common Future by Decoupling Economic Growth from Environmental Pressures, Earthscan, London.17 Von Weizsäcker, E., Hargroves, K., Smith, M., Desha, C., and Stasinopoulos, P. (2009) Factor Five: Transforming the Global Economy through 80% Improvements in Resource Productivity, Earthscan
educational objectives, Complete ed. New York: Longman. [7] Feltovich, P.J., Prietula, M.J. & Ericsson, K.A., (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In Ericsson, K.A. ed. The cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, xv, 901 p.[8] Chi, M.T.H., (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts’ characteristics. In Ericsson, K.A. ed. The cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press, xv, 901 p.[9] Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I. & Vermetten, Y., (2005). Information problem solving by experts and novices
future is... beyond modular. The Technology Teacher, 56(7), 28-29.11 Virtual Machine Shop. (n.d.). Retrieved August 2011, from http://www.kanabco.com/vms/index.html12 Smith, R. (2007). Virtual machine shop. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from www.jjjtrain.com/vms/index.html13 Bugeja, M. (2007, September 14). Second thoughts about Second Life. Retrieved June 21, 2008, from http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2007/09/2007091401c.htm14 Volk, K. S. (1993, Spring). Enrollment trends in industrial arts/technology teacher education from 1970-1990.15 Rogers, G. (1998). Concerns about technology education laboratories. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 35(3), 97-10016 Rogers, G. E. (1996). The untapped resource. Journal of
that the passing rate in the secondcourse in thermodynamics is higher for those students who completed the first course with theinstructors who were tough graders, that is those who issued lower GPAs in the prerequisitethermodynamics class5. Page 25.233.5 Table 1. Cumulative Grade distribution for sections of Thermodynamics-I taught by each instructor. Inst- GPA N S %A %B %C %D %F %W % DFW Type
. Page 25.235.5 Independent variable Dependent Variable Student Background Information Teaching Content of Department of Gender Architecture Extension Education Age Previous Education System Description Architecture Teaching (12 items) Previous Major Studied Analysis, Current Education System Independent S
Desktopdeployment options, learningmanagement system applications, andcontent development tools. DOE LMS Page 25.1284.6 Figure 4: Overview of the standards and technology selection process Learning Content Portability StandardsQuestion: Which learning content portability standard(s) would fit our needs?Objectives: (1) ability to move content between various delivery platforms, (2
in these steam engines by JohnSmeaton between 1765 and 1772 increased the engines’ efficiency to around 1.4%, a noteworthyincrease. Even after the more famous, and more efficient, Boulton & Watt engines weredeveloped in the 1770’s, the simpler and very reliable Newcomen engines continued to be builtfor the purpose of pumping water from coal mines up until the 1820’s. Coal mines had a readysupply of unsellable “slack coal” as the fuel which influenced the decision about whichtechnology to use. The last operational Newcomen engine was retired around 1930.1design process overviewThe project followed the methodology set forth in Engineering Design – A Project-BasedApproach, by Dym and Little.4 Figure 3 – A
asthma study volunteer9 and were asked to discuss the case inpairs or groups of three, considering especially the information just presented on IRBs, informedconsent, and the data safety and monitoring board. Students recorded the results of theirdiscussions, addressing questions such as: What was the problem(s)? What should theresearchers have done differently? What can we learn from this example? Do we have a fullunderstanding of what happened? As a follow-up to the ethics material presented in lectures anddiscussion section, students were given an assignment to reflect on the proceedings (AppendixA). Students were encouraged to generate their own points of discussion, but possible points todiscuss included: What do you consider to be some of
Through Peer Observation and Collaborative Reflection, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, v. 35, 2, pp.161-170 4. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., Norman, M. K. (2010), How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principels for Smart Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, p. 151 5. Sarkisian, E. (2006). Teaching American Students: a guide for international faculty and teaching assistants in colleges and universities, Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, Cambridge, MA, chapters 4, 6. 6. Feldon, D. F., Peugh, J., Timmerman, D.E., Mahler, M.A., Hurst, M., Strickland, D., Gilmore, J.A., Stiegelmeyer, C. (2011). Graduate Students’ Teaching Experiences
communication, University of South Florida Department of Mechanical Engineering,Tampa, Fl. June-Jul 2011.[32] Robert H. Reuss, Babu R. Chalamala, Alina Moussessian, Michael G. Kane, Amrita Kumar, David C. Zhang,John A. Rogers, Miltos Hatalis, Dorota Temple, Garret Moddel, Blake J. Eliasson, Michael J. Estes, Joseph Kunze,Erik S. Handy, Eric S. Harmon, David B. Salzman, Jerry M. Woodall, M. Ashraf Alam, Jayathi Y. Murthy, StephenC. Jacobsen, Marc Oliver, David Markus, Paul M. Campbell, and Eric Snow, “Macroelectronics-Perspectives onTechnology and applications,” Proceedings of the IEEE., vol. 93, no.7, pp. 1239-1256, 2007.[33] Arash Takshi and John D. Madden, “Multilayer Stretchable Conductors with a LargeTensile Strength,” Journal of Elastomers and
Instructional Technology Conference, Murfreesboro, TN.3. Moore, M. G. & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View. Boston, Wadsworth Publishing.4. Eigenmann, R., Hacker, T. & Rathje, E. (2010). NEES Cyberinfrastructure: A Foundation for Innovative Research and Education, Proc. 9th US National & 10th Canadian Conference, Toronto, Canada.5. McLennan, M. & Kennell, R. (2010). HUBzero: A Platform for Dissemination and Collaboration in Computational Science and Engineering, Computing in Science and Engineering, 12(2), pp. 48-52.6. Network for Computational Nanotechnology (2011). Retrieved from https://nanohub.org/groups/ncn.7. Brophy, S., Anagnos, T. & Lambert, J. (2011). WIP: NEESacademy – Cyber
engineering programs in recentyears. Since 1990’s, RP has been used in engineering education to enhance design relatedcourses4. It became an essential part of the design and manufacturing curricula, ranging fromfirst-year design and drafting courses to senior-year capstone projects5-9. It has also been used intwo-year engineering program10. RP is considered as one of the “new frontiers” of manufacturingeducation, along with 3D scanning and reverse engineering11. In order to address the emergingdemand of RP technicians on the job market, Patton and Liu12 developed “train the trainers”workshops. In addition to using RP in regular engineering curricula, Strzelect and Vavreck7reported using RP to support broader mission of the campus, including
StationExtra Power CordComputer KeyboardOptical MouseWritable CDsUSB Hard DriveEuropean AdaptersReading List (for Afghanistan)*Hosseini, K. (2003). The Kite Runner, Riverhead Hardcover.*Hosseini, K. (2007). A Thousand Splendid Suns*Michener, J. A. (1986). Caravans, Fawcett.*Mortenson, G. and D. O. Relin (2006). Three Cups of Tea: One Man's Mission to Promote Peace . . .OneSchool at a Time, Viking Adult*Seierstad, A. (2003). The Bookseller of Kabul Little, Brown and CompanyAhmedi, F. and T. Ansary (2005). The Story of My Life: An Afghan Girl on the Other Side of the SkySimon Spotlight EntertainmentChayes, S. (2006). The Punishment of Virtue: Inside Afghanistan After the Taliban The Penguin Press HCStewart, R. (2006). The Places In Between, Harvest
, Professional and Ethical Responsibility, andTeamwork than did the seniors. She also found that extracurricular activities were important inmeeting the BOK2 outcomes, that a student’s role(s) within design teams impacts the perceptionof importance for certain outcomes (e.g. a team project manager is more likely to assign higherimportance to Leadership and Project Management), and “as students gain a better understandingof the attributes desired for civil engineering professionals, they will be better equipped to seekout experiences and courses to develop these skills.”15As ASCE notes, it is the student, the “fledgling engineer,” who is responsible for meeting theappropriate level of achievement for each outcome as he or she prepares for professional
feature and capability of the CBM, refer to the paper by Jong.13 Both of the MoMF andthe CBM are suitable for learning by sophomores and juniors; and they have been taught andtested in the course Mechanics of Materials at the author’s institution for several years.References1. H. M. Westergaard, “Deflections of Beams by the Conjugate Beam Method,” Journal of the Western Society of Engineers, Vol. XXVI, No. 11, pp. 369-396, 1921.2. S. Timoshenko and G. H. MacCullough, Elements of Strength of Materials (3rd Edition), Van Nostrand Company, Inc., New York, NY, 1949.3. S. H. Crandall, C. D. Norman, and T. J. Lardner, An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids (2nd Edition), McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1972.4. R. J. Roark and W. C
used for someexperiments) would impact the quality of education by potentially diminishing design creativitywith subsequent course offerings.References 1. Rosentrater, K. A. & Al-Kalaani, Y. 2006. Renewable energy alternatives – a growing opportunity for engineering and technology education. The Technology Interface, 6, 1. 2. Anderson, O. R. 1976. The Experience of Science: A New Perspective on Laboratory Teaching, Teachers College Press, New York. 3. Hofstein, A. and Lunetta, V. 1982. The role of Laboratory in Science Teaching education: Neglected Aspects of Research, Review of Educational Research, 52, 2, 201-217. 4. Edward, N. S. 2002. The role of laboratory work in engineering
21stCentury. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education, July 2008, Budapest, Hungary.2 Eisenberg, S., Murray, J.-A., and DeWinter, U. (2007). “Assessment of an engineering study abroad program:Reflections from the first 124 students (2001-2006).” Proceedings of the 2007 American Society for EngineeringEducation Annual Conference.3 Lin, W., Peloubet, F., Wang, H., and Zhang, Y. (2007). “Engineering field experience: An international and culturalperspective for civil engineering students.” Proceedings of the 2007 American Society for Engineering EducationAnnual Conference. Page 25.559.8
Mean deviation deviation deviationHow much did you learned during 8.89 1.27 8.92 1.23 8.88 1.29the workshop?How much fun was to participate in 9..52 0.81 9.36 1.11 9.56 0.71the workshop?How difficult was the workshop? 4.56 3.09 3.96 3.32 4.72 3.02How successful was your team´s 7.52 2.63 8.12 2.17 7.36 2.73final design?Did you enjoyed working in a team? 7.35