Paper ID #11865Active Learning Laboratories in a Restructured Engineering Physics-MechanicsDr. Timothy J. Garrison, York College of Pennsylvania Timothy J. Garrison is the Coordinator of the Mechanical Engineering Program at York College of Penn- sylvania Page 26.150.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Active Learning Laboratories in a Restructured Engineering Physics-MechanicsAbstractOver the past several years an engineering physics
education. Page 26.98.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 A report on a project to introduce computation into a Modern Physics course and laboratory The importance of computational physics both as a discipline and as a component of the undergraduate curriculum has been recognized for some time. The challenge lies in creating course materials that introduce students to computational physics with problems that are meaningful and challenging, yet are neither overwhelming to the students nor take substantial time from the more
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Resistance is Futile: A New Collaborative Laboratory Game Based Lab to Teach Basic Circuit Concepts AbstractIn recent years, gamification of education has proven to be an effective paradigm in modernpedagogy. Following the success their previous work "Sector Vector”, the authors now present anew game-based laboratory to highlight the manipulation and calculation of resistors in circuits.In Game of Ohms [1] the lesson of electrical resistance is delivered as an interactive exercisebuilding an intricate circuit. As the game progresses, students are forced to make short and longterm plans to modify an evolving circuit which
Paper ID #12634The Introductory Physics Lab as a Consulting FirmDr. Daniel Ludwigsen, Kettering University Dr. Daniel Ludwigsen pursued research in Musical Acoustics while completing the Ph. D. in Physics from Brigham Young University. After joining Kettering University in support of the acoustics specialty within Applied Physics, Dr. Ludwigsen has broadened his professional interests to include physics education research and instructional design. In addition to an overhaul of the introductory physics laboratories, partially supported by NSF CCLI funding, Dr. Ludwigsen has written two courses at the sophomore/junior
understanding of physical phenomena,and Aristotle’s ideas are well alive in students’ minds. Many physics concepts and laws arebased on well controlled experiment, such as in vacuum. On the other hand, Aristotelian theoryis derived from everyday life experience, so it is accepted naturally in the 18+ years of students’life experience. Therefore, when the physics concepts and theories are introduced, conflicts arisein students’ minds. The Aristotelian pre-concepts are often more powerful, so it takesconsiderable amount of effort to turn the table around. Lillian C. McDermott and the PhysicsEducation Group developed a set of laboratory-based modules that offer a step-by-stepintroduction to physics, and through an in-depth study of a few fundamental
highest tower possibleusing only spaghetti, tape, and string. While still a useful tool for good design practices, thechallenge also underscores lessons on materials and equilibrium in an engaging, hands-onexercise. Similar investigations of bottle acoustics or eggshell architecture recast physics lecturesas design evaluations in a lively fashion, promoting student enthusiasm and interaction.The course also includes a weekly laboratory section. Akin to time spent in studio, this is used asan opportunity to refine techniques and understanding through extended exploration. Here,students have the time to attempt different strategies or investigate a model more thoroughly. Asa case in point, shortly after the Marshmallow Challenge in class, the lab
of approximately 6-8 End of Chapter problems turned in weekly and several inclass homework problems in which the students we required to work with a partner tosolve a homework problem in 10 minutes.Along with the use of online learning systems, many other variables are involved in theprevious 4 years including variation in student population, textbooks, changes in mypresentation of material in lecture, and changes in the accompanying laboratory sectionmake it impossible to suggest that online learning systems alone affect student criticalthinking skills and conceptual understanding of physics as measured by the commoncumulative final exam. Any change in the average grade earned has been negligiblethrough the years. The addition of ORION
difficulty levels;• development of skills in simulation, analysis, and modeling.Characteristics of the structure of the developed project:• working in groups;• application problems that make use of prior knowledge (already acquired in classes) andnew knowledge (which would still be exposed later);• use of sequential scripts with a backstory;• integration with other basic sciences;• teacher as facilitator and moderator of activities;• number of students undergoing activity: 1000 (65% enrolled in morning courses and 35% inevening classes);• number of students per team: 04• all extra classroom work with supervision and evaluation by laboratory teachers.The project used both Problem and Project Based Learning approaches. Problem Based andProject Based
their practicaluse in the classroom and laboratory. We will show that by organizing student learning outcomesand course objectives around the principle of operational definition we can simplify theassessment of student learning, determine student strengths and weaknesses, and developstrategies to increase student achievement.While the ABET General Criteria 5 on curriculum is silent on calculus-based physics theprogram criteria are not. The program criteria for Architectural Engineering states; “Theprogram must demonstrate that graduates can apply mathematics through differential equations,calculus-based physics, and chemistry.” The program criteria for Mechanical Engineering states“basic science” while Electrical Engineering mentions “physical
appointed as an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow (1979-81); NSF-JSPS Fellow, KEK, Japan (1986); and Fellow of the American Physical Society (1985). He served as a project director at the Department of Energy (1990-91), was Associate Chair (1995-98) and then Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy (1998-2007). He is on the editorial board of theEuropean Physics Journal C. Prof. Bodek was awarded the 2004 APS W.KH. Panofsky Prize in Experimental Particle Physics ”for his broad, sustained, and insightful contributions to elucidating the structure of the nucleon, using a wide variety of probes, tools, and methods at many laboratories.” In 2004, Prof. Bodek received the University of Rochester Award for Excellence in Graduate
disciplines in Spanish, focuseson integrating physics and calculus for first-year engineering students13. The Fis-Mat coursemeets three times a week for a total of 5 blocks of 80 minutes each in three sessions (one blockon Monday and two consecutive blocks on Wednesday and Friday). In terms of teaching load,two blocks correspond to the Physics course, two blocks to the Mathematics course and oneblock corresponds to the Physics Laboratory. Both professors were present and participating atall times. During the actual sessions there was no distinction between the blocks, each professorled the class depending on students’ needs. The course program was structured in a coherent andarticulated way without paying much attention on whose block corresponded
Paper ID #13421Engineering Program Growth with Mesh Network CollaborationDr. Hank D Voss, Taylor University Dr. Hank D. Voss, Taylor University Dr. Hank D. Voss received his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from University of Illinois in 1977. He then worked for Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratories prior to coming to Taylor University in 1994. He is currently a Professor of Engineering and Physics at Taylor University. Some of the courses that he regularly has taught include Principles of Engineering, Intro to Electronics, Statics, Advanced Electronics, Jr. Engineering Projects, FE Review, Control Systems
’ learning of basic quantum phenomena such as photon, electron, atommodels, and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle using virtual laboratories. They found thatalmost all students accurately conceptualized the quantum phenomena. Zollman and hiscolleagues2 argued that quantum mechanics learning is not as difficult as it is commonlyperceived. They suggested that non-science high school and first year college students havethe capacity to comprehend quantum mechanics without classical mechanics backgrounds.However, to accomplish this, instruction has to be carefully and internationally designed.Thus, they developed a new instructional design for quantum mechanics that included hands-on activities and a computer-based simulation. 175 teachers in 160