been incorporated to treat the collected stormwater and the resultshave shown that this material can removal heavy metal contaminants and provide purified water.This would provide an effective way to removal toxic pollutants such as heavy metals whilemaintain versatile and compact. Overall, this portable stormwater collection and treatment systemprovides an effective and economical affordable solution to process non-point pollutions,especially the stormwater runoff for urban residents.Spring 2017 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, April 7-8, 2017 MSUBibliography[1] Savage, N., and Diallo, M. S., 2005, "Nanomaterials and water purification: Opportunities andchallenges," Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(4-5), pp. 331-342.[2] 2013, "Emerging
. AirportTramAcceleration 0.3 0.2 Accleration(g's) 0.1 0 time(s) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3Figure 1. Sample acceleration data. Spring 2017 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, April 7-8, 2017 MSU AirportTramPosition 300 250 200 position(m) 150 100 50 0 0 5 10
). Students need challenge, not easy success. Educational Leadership, 48(1), 22–26. Retrieved from http://thinkingskillsclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/risk_success_clifford_1990.pdf[3] Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2010). Studies in Higher Education The Conscientious Consumer : Reconsidering the role of learning The Conscientious Consumer : reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507012009936[4] Askew, S., & Lodge, C. (2000). Gifts, ping-pong and loops-linking feedback and learning. In Feedback For Learning (pp. 1–17).[5] Aleven, V., McLaren, B.M., Sewall, J., &Koedinger, K.R., Proceedings of the 8th
right of center) directed at optical detectors with audio amplifier andspeakers located to the left and right outside of the image. Spring 2017 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, April 7-8, 2017 MSUReferences. 1. James L.Huff, Carla B. Zoltowski, and William C.Oakes, “Preparing Engineers for the Workplace through Service Learning: Perceptions of EPICS Alumni,” Journal of Engineering Education (January 2016): 43 – 69. 2. John S. Lamancusa, Jose L, Zayas, Allen L. Soyster, Lueny Morell, and Jens Jorgensen , “The Learning Factory: Industry-Partnered Active Learning,” Journal of Engineering Education (January 2008): 5 - 11. 3. Alan J. Dutson, Robert H. Todd, Spencer P. Magleby, Carl D. Sorensen, “A Review of
where the student explains how s/he solved the problem. To answer thissection, we ask the students to imagine that they are trying to explain what they did to their boss,what the problem was, and how it was solved. Students should assume that their boss knowsabout computer hardware and the current subject. Thus, they should use the correct language andthe right terminology. Some labs ask the students to write a procedure to solve the problem theysolved, assuming that the procedure would become part of the company’s documentation andtraining for other technicians. Some labs require collecting data from the conducted experiment.Students most format the data in tables and charts and present an analysis explaining themeaning of the data. This
anode electrode. IMFC is the current produced by theMFC reactor. The meanings of all parameters shown in Equations (4) - (8) can be found in ourprevious ASEE paper [3]. The model contains 4 differential equations, 9 equations, and 25parameters. dS = -qa xa - qm xm + D( S0 - S ) (4) dt dxa = - µ a xa - K d ,a xa - a a Dxa (5) dt dxm = - µm xm - K d ,m xm - a m Dxm (6) dt
Study Student's Exhibition, didcomplete visual identities and package designs for the project and added valuable feedbackduring Team meetings: Evan Ardanaz, Angel Juarez, Jamie Liu, Jackson Magnaye, MatthewPerrotti, Francesca Robinson, and Alessandra Sardella.References 1. James L.Huff, Carla B. Zoltowski, and William C.Oakes, “Preparing Engineers for the Workplace through Service Learning: Perceptions of EPICS Alumni,” Journal of Engineering Education (January 2016): 43 – 69. 2. John S. Lamancusa, Jose L, Zayas, Allen L. Soyster, Lueny Morell, and Jens Jorgensen , “The Learning Factory: Industry-Partnered Active Learning,” Journal of Engineering Education (January 2008): 5 - 11. 3. Alan J. Dutson, Robert H. Todd
vd 0 v o v in A cL 1 Kirchoff ' s Current Law : iR2 i R1 i R 2 Virtually at vin 0 v in v in v o
beimplemented in the chosen course(s). During the two-year cycle, it is the departmental CCL’sresponsibility to implement the GenEd SLGs into the course(s) and assess the work with helpand support from full-time and part-time faculty members who are teaching the course(s). This isaccomplished by holding workshops (in-person or online), updating the syllabus, providingstudents with an assignment or project, changing or adjusting the topics covered in the course,utilizing rubrics, among other activities.Every semester, there is one Dean’s meeting for every School with all the CCLs invited toparticipate. During that meeting, the CCLs report on the progress and difficulties theyencountered. At the end of the two-year cycle the CCLs provide a final report
can be found by simulation. An example of a basketballthrown with unknown speed at 45 degrees with known range can be found on page 73 of PhysicsFundamentals, Vincent Coletta, Second Edition, 2010, Physic Curriculum & Instruction Inc. Abasketball with unknown speed thrown at 45 degree going from (0, 2m) to (6m, 3m) is listed andthe book method contains algebra steps to solve for initial speed by eliminating time variable,with the answer = 8.4 m/s.The simulation results can be categorized in the following format for the illustration of deductionthinking and induction thinking:Science Deduction1 (Statement)If speed was 8.4 m/s, then ball entered basket.Science Deduction2 (Contrapositive)If ball did not enter basket, then ball was not thrown
., Felder, R.M., Fuller, H. (2000). “Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams,” J. Engr. Education, 89(2), 133–140. www2.ncsu.edu/effective_teaching. 8. Thornton, R. K. (1997) Learning Physics Concepts in the Introductory Course: Microcomputer-Based Labs and Interactive Lecture Demonstrations, Conference on the Introductory Physics Course, J. Wilson, ed. Wiley, New York, 69-85. 9. Hestenes, D., Wells, M. and Swackhamer, G. (1992) Force Concept Inventory, The Physics Teacher 30, 141-158. 10. Schwartz, Daniel L.; Chase, Catherine C.; Oppezzo, Marily A.; Chin, Doris B.Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol 103(4), Nov 2011, 759-775. 11. Perkins, K. K., Adams, W. K., Pollock, S. J
Annual Conference & Exposition. American Society for Engineering Education.[6] Sidhu, S.M. and S. Ramesh. (2006). Multimedia Learning Packages: Design Issues and Implementation Problems. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology (MOJIT). 3(1): p. 43-56.[7] Haron, H.N. (2008). Challenges in Teaching and Learning of Engineering Statics. in 4th International Conference On University Learning And Teaching. Shah Alam, Malaysia.[8] Haron, H.N. Shaharoun, A. Puteh, M. and Harun, H. (2012). Does Motivation Affect Students’ Understanding and Performance In Engineering Statics?, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 56 ( 2012 ), pp 191 – 203[9] Montfort, D., Brown, S. and Pollock. D. (2009). An
Figure 5The data indicates that students’ success attaining this performance indicator, was higherin part 2 (75%) than in part 1 (50%). This is as expected result, since part 1 requiredmore critical thinking skills, than part 2. Overall, the students performed 63% percent.This level of success leaves much room for quality improvement, but at least there isconfidence that the assessment procedure outlined in this work is a good tool formeasuring and demonstrating ABET outcome E.[1] www.abet.org[2] Dudeck, K., Grebski, W. (2013). Energy Education and Training: A Case Study. In Anwar, S. (Eds.), (Vol. On line, March 2013). Taylor and Francis. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1081/E-EEE- 120048423.[3] Dudeck, K., Grebski, W. (2011) “New