TechnologyIndustry Association (CompTIA), which develops vendor-neutral professional certificationslinked with various Information Technology (IT) areas, recommends a seven-step process27for tackling computer/network related issues. Here, it has been adapted for the capstoneprocess as follows, with different project phases added in parenthesis, linking it with theEngineering is Elementary (EiE)28 design process: (1) Problem identification and information gathering: What, who, where, when, why, constrains, assumptions (“Ask” phase) (2) Formulate a theory to establish probable cause(s) of the problem (“Imagine” phase) (3) Identify suitable ways of testing the theory, and if not confirmed generate a new one (“Imagine” phase) (4
structure.3S3 = A = B2 pass | B5 pass = (VP(Mn 1) * (Xo)s) + Vt pass * LP(Mn) | [(Xo)s)] + ([Vaux] * Vt)pass + (Mv * VP(Nc))(4) Over the next 150 years, many other pyramids were built —undoubtedly ourfirst civil works, built with the manual labor of thousands of people [many of whom,regrettably, were slaves].S4 = B2 pass = [LP(Mv 1)]F ... Mn 1 * Mn 2 * (No)s + Vt pass ... [Mv 2 * X’ - Mn 3 * Na]E * VP(Mv 3)]E = B2 = [LP(Mv 1]F ... ((Mn 1 * Mn 2 * ((No)s) or [Mv 2 * X’ - Mn 3 * Na]) + (Vt pass * VP(Mv 3)) = Over the next 150 years, many other pyramids—undoubtedly our first civil works— were built, built with the manual labor of thousands of people [many of whom, regrettably, were slaves].(5
Physics. Dr. Suter received a Bachelor of Science degree in physics from the Free University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, a Master of Science degree in physics from Michigan State University, a Master of Science degree in electrical engineering from the University of Maryland, and a PhD degree in materials science and engineering from The Johns Hopkins University.Mr. Stanislaw Tarchalski, Johns Hopkins University Sta´s Tarchalski is a retired senior executive with more than 30 years of progressive responsibility and experience in leading strategic business planning and execution, large/complex program development and management, technical leadership and systems engineering, and organizational development in various
), 535-556.3. Byrne. D. B. & Fraser, B. J. (1986). Student Perceptions of Preferred Classroom Learning Environment. Journal of Educational Research, 80 (1), 10-18.4. Church, M. A., Elliott, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of Classroom Environment, Achievement Goals, and Achievement Outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93 (1), 43-545. Cole, D. G., Sugioka, H. L., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (1999). Supportive Classroom Environments for Creativity in Higher Education. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33 (4), 277-293.6. Findley, B. & Varble, D. (2006). Creating a Conducive Classroom Environment: Classroom Management is the Key. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal, 2 (3), 1-5.7. Holley
, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103-120. 2. Kiefer, S. and Kuchnicki, S. (2013). Project-based learning: Teaching engineering design not tinkering. 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, June 23-26, 2013. 3. Yadav, A., Subedi, D., Lundeberg, M. A., & Bunting, C. F. (2011). Problem-based Learning: Influence on students' learning in an electrical engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 253-280. 4. Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education Next, 12(1), 82-83. 5. A.W. Chickering and Z.F. Gamson, “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.” AAHE Bulletin, 39: 3-7, 1987. 6. Baillie, C., & Fitzgerald, G. (2010). Motivation and
students’ comprehension. All 3D models shown in this paper aremade with CAD Software SOLIDWORKS6 and the rest of sketches are made with MicrosoftWord’s built-in drawing tools.References1 R. Budynas and J. K. Nisbett, “Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design”, 10th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2014.2 R. L. Mott, "Machine Elements in Mechanical Design", Prentice Hall; 5th ed., 2013.3 R. L. Norton, Machine Design: An Integrated Approach, 5 th ed, Prentice Hall, 2013.4 How to animate GIFs with Microsoft GIF Animator, http://gwanderson.server101.com/Computer101/gifAnimate.htm5 Wang, S-L., “Free Body Diagrams of Gear Trains,” in CD Proceedings of 2008 ASEE Zone 1 Conference, West Point, NY, March 28-29, 2008.6 SolidWorks, http
has occurred to document such reasonsthere are at least two significant studies that help inform program developers. The first was Scottet al.’s 2004 report30 investigating motivations of students in business, engineering and educationprofessional doctorate programs. More recently Wellington & Sikes31 addressed the sameresearch question. Notably, the latter researchers observed, as did Humphrey & McCarthy32 in1999, that doctoral students “no longer form a homogeneous population” (p.725). Among themotivations were: renewal, personal satisfactions e.g., overcoming challenges, becoming excep-tional, a differentiator from the MBAs, work demands, the flexibility of such programs, i.e., aperceived difference from what some perceived as
teamworking. Medical education, 40(2), 150-157. 5. De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & education, 46(3), 249-264. 6. Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & education, 46(3), 223-234.
Coalition. 1998 FIE Conference, Session T1D.2. Sheppard S. et al., Examples of Freshman Design Education. Int. J. Engng Ed. Vol. 13 (4), p. 248-261, 1997.3. Cardella ME. et al., Students with Differing Design Processes as Freshmen: Care Studies on Change. Int. J. EngngEd. Vol. 24 (2), p. 246-259, 2008.4. Borrego M. et al., Team Effectiveness theory from industrial and organizational psychology applied toengineering student project teams – A review. Journal of Engineering Education, 102 (4), p. 472-512, 2013.5. Adapted from BP Challenge: Encouraging hands-on learning, Fill It Up. Available at:http://www.starters.co.nz/bpchallenge-index.html.
acknowledge a limitation of our analysis. We recognize that such groupgrade-setting meetings are very likely not the norm for courses in the calculus sequence,in other courses that serve as pre-requisites for engineering, or in engineering courses. Inthis sense, we would not expect our findings to generalize to the specific ways in whichstudents are “weeded out” at other institutions. At the same time, we believe that ourstrategy of analyzing practical dilemmas of grading and sorting, whether this work iscarried out individually or in groups, is a potentially productive one in understandingideological aspects of success and failure.Bibliography1. Meyer, M., & Marx, S. (2014). Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why
ranks. The participants worked on acollaborative team project(s) to implement teaching innovations at a Midwestern large research-intensive, predominantly white institution (PWI). The project durations ranged from one to threeyears for sustainable implementation of teaching innovations. The semi-structured interviewscovered the participant’s previous teaching experience prior to joining the SIIP community, adescription of their current role in the community including what did and did not work well, anda description of their vision for the community in the future. Consistent with phenomenologicalresearch, the interviews were evaluated holistically to allow essential themes of the experience toemerge.Preliminary results of the phenomenological
, 137–152 (2000).13. Eccles, J. S. et al. in Achievement and achievement motivation 76–146 (1983). doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa850214. Eccles, J. S. & Wigfield, A. Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals. Annu. Rev. Psychol 53, 109–32 (2002).15. Wigfield, A. & Cambria, J. Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review 30, 1–35 (2010).16. Eccles, J. S., O’Neill, S. a & Wigfield, A. Ability self-perceptions and subject task values in adolescents and children. What do children need to flourish Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development 237–249 (2005). doi:10.1007/0-387-23823-9_1517
? 2) One 67 1.95 0.44 0.67 3) Two 9 4) Three or more 4 Will one of your jobs likely 1) Yes 53 lead to an engineering 2) No 1.47 0.25 0.50 47 position? Average hours per week 1) None 18 spent on your job(s)? 2) Less than 10 5 3) More than 10 less than
project and do all the work; complete only your part, hoping there are no consequences; stop working and blame team members; talk to teacher or advisor; call a team meeting and resolve issues. The remaining questions were evaluated using a Likert scale (strongly disagree/disagree/neutral/agree/strongly agree): 6. In my previous experience, my team was responsible for determining the goals and outcome of the project. 7. On average, I have had a lot of responsibility on my team(s). 8. My ideas were respected and used by my team(s). 9. The workload was evenly distributed across all group members. 10. I know what to do to make sure all my teammates do their part to make a project a success. 11. I can accomplish more as a team rather than
material is based upon work supported by the Research Experiences for Teachers Programunder National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1300779. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
for the difficulties they mightface professionally and personally in the future. It has also been criticized for insufficient 1 This study is supported by the “Re-development of Cornerstone Curriculum in Civil Engineering for Futures Thinking”, sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, under Grant no. MOST 104-2511-S-032-003.curricular opportunities to involve students in design, experiences for teamwork andcommunication, and knowledge and awareness of fields outside engineering.4, 11 Among the key elements called for in engineering education reform, threeoverwhelmingly stand out: (a) softening the
Iapproach things.” Rowena saw the actions of engineers as expanding beyond “math andproblems you solve,” acknowledging that the course exposed her to “more opportunities than Ithought in engineering.” However, Marley’s description of engineering was simple: “Build it in away that won’t negatively impact that community.” This is not an indictment against engineers,but a simple expectation of what engineers do, or what they ought to do. Normative ideals of engineers and engineering include the “ought-to”s of the practice. Intheir descriptions of what engineers are, and their previous encounters with engineers andengineering, students had a specific normative vision as to what engineers ought to be and do.Milburn said, “They [Engineers] have a
research agenda that can propagate engineering educational innovations acrossthe community and to the other STEM fields. Hence, broader impacts will be fully realized uponactuation of the research agenda. However, this work moves beyond broader impacts in that itassists in meeting a national need to increase the U.S.’s economic competitiveness, the STEMworkforce, and potentially partnerships between academia and industry. It is in this latter sensethat the project clearly meets the national need to remain economically competitive.References:i American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). (2012). Innovation with impact: Creating a culturefor scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education. Washington, DC: American Society
critical in ensuring a highquality engineering program.Faculty training in proper teaching methods is essential. No improvements can be achieved if weas faculty do not change the way we teach. The faculty improvement process is also to bedeveloped as a PDCA cycle.Future work includes data gathering for 2016 and the preparation of the self-study report towardsABET accreditation.AcknowledgmentsThe author wishes to acknowledge the support of the IE ABET accreditation team and theMECA office at Universidad Icesi.Bibliography[1] N. Villegas, S. Cespedes, G. Ulloa y M. P. Ayala, «An approach to implement CDIO,» de Proceedings of the 10th International CDIO Conference, Barcelona, 2014.[2] H. Gonzalez, El aprendizaje activo y la formación universitaria
National Science Foundation (NSF) award Abstract #1348410. Indigenous Program for Stem Research and a Regional Native Network of Graduate Education: A National Research and Educational Model. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1348410 ii National Indian Education Association (NIEA). Statistics on Native Students. http://www.niea.org/research/statistics.aspx. iii Mendoza, W. (2014) Indian Students in Public Schools- Cultivating the Next Generation: Hearing on Indian Education Before the S. Comm. on Indian Affairs, 113th Cong. (Testimony of William Mendoza, Exec. Dir., White House Initiative on Am. Indian and Alaska Native Education.) iv Stetser, M. & Stillwell, R. (2014). U.S
instructor can encouragestudents to respect the ideas and opinions offered by fellow classmates. S/he can stress theimportance of active listening (using both the mental and physical components of listening).After different viewpoints are exchanged, students can be encourage to decide on a course ofaction for dealing with the issues identified. Table 15 provides an example of the potentialComponents of Civility that can be satisfied using the preceding example.Table 15: Potential Components of Civility satisfied by the preceding example.Civility Assignment Features/Author’s (Civility) BehaviorComponentGive Praise The instructors can express appreciation to students for ideas contributed.Be considerate The instructor
Industrial and Organizational Psychology Applied to Engineering Student Project Teams: A Research Review. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 472-512. 2. Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M. L. Toy, D., & Wright, L. K. (2010). Are Student Groups Dysfunctional? Perspectives From Both Sides of the Classroom. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(1), 39-49. 3. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into practice, 32(3), 179-186. 4. Facione, P. A., Sánchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. The Journal of General Education, 1-25. 5. Froyd, J. E., Borrego, M., Cutler, S., Henderson, C., & Prince, M. J. (2013). Estimates
Engineering offered by the CU Boulder College of Engineering and Applied Science starting in fall 2016. Ms. Sandekian earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at CU Boulder, a Spe- cialist in Education (Ed. S.) degree in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies from the University of Northern Colorado, and expects to earn her Ph.D. in the Higher Education Student Affairs Leadership program from the University of Northern Colorado in 2017.Dr. Bernard Amadei, University of Colorado, Boulder Dr. Amadei is Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He received his PhD in 1982 from the University of California at Berkeley. Dr. Amadei holds the Mortenson Endowed Chair in
). Beyond scholarship: Recognizing the multiple roles of theprofessoriate. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.4. Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of Graduate and Professional Students inHigher Education: A Perilous Passage? ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Volume 28, Number 3. Jossey-BassHigher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-Bass, Publishers, Inc., 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1342.5. Bandura, A. (1991). Self-efficacy mechanism in physiological activation and health-promoting behavior.Neurobiology of Learning, Emotion and Affect, 4, 229-270.6. Stark, J. S., Lowther, M. A., Hagerty, B. M., & Orczyk, C. (1986). A conceptual framework for
Application #: 16012. References 1. National Science Foundation Cyberinfrastructure Council, 2007: “Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery.” http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf0728. 2. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (2015, July), “Executive Order: Creating a National Strategic Computing Initiative.” 3. ABET, Inc. (2015, Oct.), “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs Effective for Reviews During the 20162017 Accreditation Cycle.” 4. Cui, S., & Li, L., & Huang, L., & Wang, Y. (2015, June), Enhance Computing Curricula with HighPerformance Computing Teaching and Research Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual
are as follows: How was the quality of service delivered from our student volunteers? How was their attitude towards your event/service opportunity? Rate the following statement based on your experience with our service: The college of engineering student volunteer(s) performance was (were) excellent. From 1 to 5, where 5 is the best experience, please rate your overall experience. Additional Comments and areas of improvement.Opportunity Highlight IOne of the many opportunities we had for the service learning course is through Nao robotoutreach team. Nao robot has capabilities of talking, walking, dancing, and etc., which attractspeople at the community outreach events. For engineering students, it is a great way
Engineeringand the School of Engineering in SFSU in developing the remote shake table laboratories. Theauthors would also like to acknowledge their partners in Quanser, especially Peter Martin andAbbey Desjarlais, for the contributions in developing and debugging the mobile knowledge apps.References1. 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. (2014, November 26). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21:16, November 29, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Loma_Prieta_earthquake.2. 1994 Northridge earthquake. (2014, October 29). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21:19, November 29, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Northridge_earthquake.3. S.J. Dyke, Z. Jiang, R. Christenson, X. Gao, and S. Courter, "Teleoperation and
top researchers across the country. It is preciselythis type of success that ADVANCE grants like ours are designed to foster. Supporting thesuccess of women faculty increases the success of us all. We are thrilled to have been one ofthe catalysts of this effort.” It is the hope that the events that have been created will serve asa model for students, new faculty, and other universities to pursue their passion, collaboratewith colleagues across departments, and engage with the community to create a rich,dynamic, and energizing academic culture.References:1. Anderson, W.A., U. Banerjee, C. Drennan, S. Elgin, I. Epstein, J. Handelsman, G. Hatfull, R. Losick, D. O'Dowd, and B.M. Olivera, Science education. Changing the culture of
knowledge of the campus. It is hoped that the project will increase interest andretention in the civil engineering program and specifically increase interest in geotechnicalengineering but further study will be required to determine the long-term impact.References[1] Caverly, R., Fulmer, H., Santhanam, S., Singh, P., O’Brien, J., Jones, G., Char, E., Mercede, F., Weinsten, R., and Yost, J. (2010). “Project-based Freshman Engineering Experience: The Core Course,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.[2] Bodnar, L., Lagoudas, M., Hodge, J., Smith, T., Oronzco, J., Corso, J., Sanchez, C., Freise, J., Ringler, H., and Cortes,I. (2012). “Engaging Freshman in Team Based Engineering Projects
and community with science learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878- 98. Retrieved from http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd- TEA.htmlRoth, W., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), 263–291. doi:10.1002/sce.10113Sheldon, S.B. (2003). Linking school–family–community partnerships in urban elementary schools to student achievement on state tests. The Urban Review 35(2), 149-165. doi:10.1023/A:1023713829693Sheldon, S.B., & Epstein, J.L. (2005). Involvement counts: Family and community partnerships and