No1 50% 25% 0% Aggregates Rep. Aggregates Rep. Fine Aggregates Panel Topics --- Concrete Rep. Concrete Rep. Chip Seals-Emulsions Value --- 3.5% of 3 CA 10.7% of 1 CA 14.3% of 1 CA1: Lab report grade determined only by instructor and teaching assistant (TA) and was not part of panels.--CA = credit hour and Rep. = ReportPanels took place during regular laboratory time, and required around two hours per day for thesix groups to give presentations and be evaluated. The 2013 offering was more informal andoccurred in the laboratory, whereas the 2014 offering occurred in a
Paper ID #12605Using Graphical Data Presentation Techniques to Improve Student Success,Teaching Effectiveness, and Program AssessmentDr. Barry Dupen, Indiana University Purdue University, Fort Wayne Dr. Dupen is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering Technology at Indiana University – Pur- due University Fort Wayne (IPFW). He has 9 years’ experience as a metallurgist, materials engineer, and materials laboratory manager in the automotive industry. His primary interests lie in materials engineer- ing, mechanics, and engineering technology education. He is also an experienced contra dance caller
. Page 26.109.15Acknowledgements: The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support from the School ofEngineering at the University of Glasgow The authors acknowledge the dedication and assistanceof laboratory demonstrators: Mr. R.A. Kirkwood, Mr. K. Erotokriutou, Mr. G. Orchin, Mr. S.Tabor, and Mr. P. Ohiero.References1 J.W. Bridge, Incorporating Active Learning in an Engineering Science Course, Proceedings of the 2001 ASEEAnnual Conference, Session 1664.2 D. Roylance, Innovations in Teaching Mechanics of Materials in Materials Science and Engineering Departments,Proceedings of the 2001 ASEE Annual Conference, Session 1464.3 K. Stair and B. Crist, Jr., Using Hands-On Laboratory Experiences to Underscore Concepts and to CreateExcitement
simulation to perform virtual tensile tests on platinumnanowires and analyze the results using interactive methods. The simulations are performedonline using the nano-Materials Simulation Toolkit on nanoHUB.org7. This tool provides asimple and intuitive graphical interface to a research-grade molecular dynamics code denotedCMDF7,8. During the laboratory, different diameter platinum nanowires could be chosen and thetemperature and strain rate could be defined by the students. Results from these tests consisted ofstress vs. time curves and images of the nanowire at different times during the simulated tensiletest. For the laboratory, a specific strain rate and temperature (300 K) were defined, but thestudents were encouraged by the teaching assistant
may also face administrative resistance. It is likely that suchchallenges will increase for cases in which teaching teams require expertise from more than onetraditionally defined discipline and must cross departmental or college lines.ConclusionsIn conclusion, this paper described ENGR 314: Materials & Mechanics and the associatedintegrative semester long team project that combines traditional content of both materials scienceand mechanics of materials. In addition to the project, the course includes experiential learning inthe form of hands-on laboratories for material characterization and mechanical analysis. ENGR314: Materials & Mechanics provides students with a unique opportunity to recognize the topicsof materials science and
group has to discuss their data and what theirresults mean in context of larger objectives of the lab. Since laboratories are collaborative multi-weekthemed projects, student may be at different points in their experimental process from week to week.There are rules for discourse and these are modeled for students by Teaching Assistant(TA) andInstructor. Peer students may ask only clarifying questions of the students and cannot make any othercomments. Within the speaking group, each member must speak, and groups have three minutes todiscuss their data without interruption. There is then three minutes of clarifying questions from peers. Thegoals for the discourse are to have students formulate, elaborate, analyze, evaluate and apply a
until 1998. Dr. Farrell has contributed to engineer- ing education through her work in experiential learning, focusing on areas of pharmaceutical, biomedical and food engineering. She has been honored by the American Society of Engineering Education with sev- eral teaching awards such as the 2004 National Outstanding Teaching Medal and the 2005 Quinn Award for experiential learning. Stephanie has conducted workshops on a variety of topics including effective teaching, inductive teaching strategies and the use of experiments and demonstrations to enhance learning.Dr. Stephen J Krause, Arizona State University Stephen Krause is professor in the Materials Science Program in the Fulton School of Engineering at Arizona
Group of the Materials Research Science and Engineering Center at UW-Madison. Prior to moving to Syracuse, she taught for several years at Madison Area Tech- nical College. Her interests include development of engineering faculty attitudes and pedagogy, teaching professional skills in the engineering classroom, and engineering outreach at the K-12 level.Dr. Julie M. Hasenwinkel, Syracuse University Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs & Student Affairs Professor, Department of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering College of Engineering and Computer Science Syracuse University Syracuse, NY 13244 Page
alternative materials and rank the various materials thatcan be used for their products. This would then require them to investigate the mechanicalproperties of the component materials and relate them to the product performance, the life cycle,manufacturing process and the environmental impact. This work summarizes the overallexperience of the students on the material and process selection for a wide range of commercialproducts and possible ways to improve the teaching of this course.INTRODUCTIONThis work is an attempt to create awareness in early engineering students as to how materials andmanufacturing processes are chosen for different consumer products. To this end, the projectcomponent of a sophomore course dealing with reverse engineering has
interest in engineering education that stems from the differences that he has observed in Engineering vs Physics pedagogy.Dr. Scott Ramsay, University of Toronto Scott Ramsay is currently a lecturer and Adjunct Professor Scott is currently an Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at the University of Toronto, in Toronto, Canada, and a registered professional engineer in Ontario. Scott earned his PhD in Materials Science and Engineering from the University of Toronto in 2007. Scott’s current primary academic interests are in improving the quality of undergraduate engineering education through the use of various reusable learning objects. Scott has taught extensively in Material Science, teaching
research/teaching focuses on engineering as an innovation in pK-12 education, policy of STEM education, how to support teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering, engineering ’habits of mind’ and empathy and care in engi- neering. He has published more than 140 journal articles and proceedings papers in engineering education and educational technology and is the inaugural editor for the Journal of Pre-College Engineering Educa- tion Research.Dr. Jennifer Kadlowec, Rowan UniversityProf. Andrea Jennifer Vernengo, Rowan University Jennifer Vernengo is an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. Jennifer re- ceived her Ph.D. from Drexel University in 2007. She began work as a