Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Carrie Girstantas; William Scherer

Engineering Educationcontacts and serves to create a familiar environment to bring complex ongoing workrelated questions to the cohort. Several key characteristics of this learning environment are constrained by the useof time, namely having two days of eight consecutive hours of time with the professorand with the cohort, usually involving lectures, case studies, and group discussions withindividual write ups of the material and individual learning. Throughout the day studentsbreak out in teams to work on collaborative learning modules, during which time theinstructor visits each of the teams to monitor progress and offer guidance and insight.Summary Comparison: Use of time and technology and impact to content In the Spring 2000 a

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Molly Johnson; Cathie Scott; Cynthia Atman

• Student-centered instructioninstruction • Discussion/lecture After class meeting: Write up reflections on your activity.Part 3 (weeks 5-9) Methods of Teaching Read assigned readings and Teach each otherActive practice and • Cooperative learning and post reflections to listserv. assigned methods offeedback on design, peer collaboration teaching throughdelivery, and • Direct instruction Prepare summary of readings jigsaw activity.assessment of class • Problem-based learning for in-class discussion. (Jigsaw method

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Kay C. Dee

candidate’s progresstoward tenure, allowing the candidate subsequent time to act on any recommended correctivestrategies and/or to improve their record of accomplishments. For engineering faculty, third-yearreview materials will generally need to demonstrate a record of achievement and plannedimprovement in research, teaching, and service-related issues.Preparing for an intensive third-year review can be difficult for junior faculty, for many reasons.This review may be the first time young faculty go through the scrutiny of a peer review processwhere the “peers” are people they work with on a daily basis. This review may be the first timejunior faculty seriously try to interpret and apply an institution’s promotion and tenure criteria totheir own

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Elliot Douglas, University of Florida

:• Identification of the lesson topic. Typically, one major topic is identified for each lesson.• Identification of lesson objectives. The objectives should be identified first, so that the lesson content focuses on what the students are expected to accomplish. Additionally, writing of objectives at different levels of Bloom’s taxonomy8 allows higher order thinking (or “independent thinking”, see next section) to be utilized.• Preparation of a lesson outline. The outline lays out the general order and hierarchy of the presentation.• Preparation of board notes. Board notes are a specific technique utilized in the T4E and ExCEEd workshops, and have been described previously.1,2 Briefly, board notes lay out on a piece of paper exactly

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Patricia Harms; Steven Mickelson; Thomas Brumm

Cross6, learning communities are more thanjust another curricular fad. Why are educators so impressed with learning communities? Crossargues the reasons fit into three categories: “philosophical (because learning communities fit intoa changing philosophy of knowledge), research based (because learning communities fit withwhat research tells us about learning), and pragmatic (because learning communities work)”(original italics, p. 4).In this paper we will describe the Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (ABE) first-yearlearning community at Iowa State University, a learning community that includes linked courses,a living community option, peer mentors and tutors, faculty-student dinners, and service learningopportunities. We have found that

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Yi-Zun Wang; Mohammad Saifi

, and peer evaluations.Logical ReasoningWe teach logical reasoning and thinking methods to solve problems related to engineeringprinciples. The textbook written by Wales and Stager3 gives the examples, step by step, to showhow engineering problems are solved logically. Students are able to complete a series ofequations with correct calculations and engineering units. We also introduce the logical thinkingmethod into students’ report writing and engineering graphics processes.Filed TripsWe arranged several field trips to industrial companies around this area and met with theengineers there. Students found out what daily jobs there are for engineers and what future careerthey could have.Students commented, that "You never stop learning in this

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Kenneth Reid

these explained by their peers in many cases.This paper will report on one study involving two sections of a freshman introductory course.The course is Digital Circuits I in an Electrical Engineering Technology program, consisting oftwo sections of approximately 35 students in each section. Both sections went through half ofthe semester (including two exams) with a classroom format that was about 90% traditional and10% active/collaborative, with 100% traditional laboratory experiments: student pairs workingthrough a weekly laboratory experiment. At the midpoint of the semester, the format of onesection continued (although a group design project was introduced), while the other lecture andlaboratory changed. The new lecture format was mini

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Peter Golding; Walter Fisher; Stella Quinones

studentsÀ English placement. The three Englishcourses in order from lowest to highest level are Introduction to Writing (D), Basic EnglishComposition (D), or Expository English Composition. Each of the freshman seminar (Seminar inCritical Inquiry) sections and the Introduction to Engineering sections is taught by engineeringfaculty. The Reverse Engineering Lab is taught by engineers from the staff of the TexasManufacturing Assistance Center (TMAC) located on the UTEP campus.Students are clustered each semester until they complete Pre-calculus. Figure 2 illustrates thecluster sequencing for a student entering UTEP with placement in Introductory Algebra and BasicEnglish Composition. An asterisk (*) after a course indicates that it is part of a

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Linda Broadbelt; L. Catherine Brinson; Kathleen Issen; Brad Kinsey

? Page 6.800.12 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright  2001, American Society for Engineering Education g. How difficult is it to move from a research-focused institution to a teaching-focused institution? What about the reverse? h. What is “peer instruction” and “collaborative learning?” How have you used these techniques in your class?5. Grant Writing – The Funding Process a. Provide an overview of the grant writing, application, review and selection process to obtain funding. b. Is it better to choose a research area and then find funding, or find out the “hot” areas are for a particular funding agency and tailor

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Herbert Hess

of the pumphouse. They attach a chinamarker nearby on a string. They also write out the details of each task and laminated theresulting two pages to the same wall. A sample of the “annual” portion of the tasks is shown inFigure 8. Then thestudents perform the tasks Every Twelve Months Date Completed Date to be Completedwith the homeowner, to 1. Check Batteriesinsure that everything is 2. Battery Equalizingunderstood. A year later, Chargethe system performs 3. Give Wind Generatorreliably. The customer, Complete Mechanicalon her own initiative, Checkseeks out the university 4. Check Concentration of Coolantpresident

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Carl White; Myra Curtis; Clifton Martin

critical thinking, writing and speaking skills.The paper describes the program, the leadership structure and the training/mentoring model thathas resulted in the current program design and the expanded outreach effort.IntroductionIn the urban communities the underrepresented student is faced with roadblocks that can impedetheir educational development. These roadblocks include inadequate classroom environment,inadequate teacher preparation, inadequate educational tools, as well as any family economic andsocial barriers. Most of these students rarely break through these roadblocks successfully.Consequently, they do not reach their potential to achieve academically. This academic crisis forthe underrepresented student is no more apparent than in the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Daniel Davis; Elizabeth Petry; James Fuller

” Session 1606At the University of Hartford’s Ward College AET program:• Design is introduced early in the program and integrated throughout the curriculum. Every semester has a design studio course.• Increased exposure to practice is provided through industry-in-the-classroom activities.• Increased emphasis is placed on communication, both oral and written. Requirements are integrated throughout the curriculum.At the University of Hartford, students are often challenged with "real" projects. Whenpossible proposed sites are accessible for student visits. Students present their solutionsand are critiqued by their peers, faculty, local professionals, and invited guests. Othermembers of the College and University community are present as well

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Leslie Pease; Edward Mastascusa; Dan Hyde; Brian Hoyt; Bill Snyder; Maurice F. Aburdene; Michael Prince; Margot Vigeant

.) with rotation through the roles for each student;3. Team homework within instructor-assigned groups;4. Team design assignments, using open-ended problems as a primary vehicle to promote problem-based learning;5. Peer evaluation, especially in lab and project teams; and6. Collaboration facilitated by electronic communication, especially using a course management system, e.g. Blackboard.To provide a more complete understanding of how these activities were implemented in theteaching-learning process at Bucknell, specific aspects of three of last fall's Project Catalystcourses are described in the following sections. The examples highlight key elements of theproject, including team building, incorporating formal cooperative learning

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Lyle McCurdy; William Drake; Douglas Walcerz

Copyright  2001, American Society for Engineering EducationWith the adoption of these new requirements, engineering technology educators must developnew ways of evaluating their courses and/or programs. Although there may be many ways tomeet these new requirements, whatever method is developed should include the followingcharacteristics: a. be easy to learn and use, with minimal faculty time commitment, b. allow faculty to easily write appropriate educational objectives based upon the new eleven criteria for their courses, c. encourage students to write meaningful outcomes of true learning, based upon the eleven new criteria, d. provide tabular and graphical information that can be used to validate that the instructor’s

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Spencer Brinkerhoff; III, Walter Hopkins; David Hartman

providing the topic for the report and the references that would beresearched in writing the report. They are also given a due date for submitting a rough draft andthe due date for the final report. Students are also required to give a brief (five to seven minute)oral presentation summarizing the report or detailing some interesting item they had discoveredin writing it. Bonus points are awarded if students produce evidence that they used the Writers’Workshop and if they obtained peer reviews of the rough draft of their written report. This papertypically constitutes 10% of their grade.III.6 Mathematical ModelsThere are numerous, short, team-oriented problems which provide for student solution. Theseproblems are of varying degrees of mathematical

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Kathryn Jablokow

course can be summarized under twoheadings: new knowledge and new skills. New knowledge includes ten factors that influence theinvention process, detailed case studies of nearly a dozen familiar artifacts from a variety ofengineering disciplines, the fundamentals of Adaption-Innovation theory, and some details ofpatent law. New skills include the ability to research and write an original case study (a commonrequirement in many management programs, but few engineering schools), and an improvedcapacity for leveraging the cognitive preferences of their peers in group settings based on a newunderstanding of and appreciation for different creative styles.9.0 Student Feedback and CommentsStudent comments are routinely collected as part of the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Mary Cardenas; Patrick Little

suggest activities such as: listen, take notes, chat, sleep, read, and so on. When asked what they think might happen in a studio they usually suggest: paint, draw, sculpt, write, and other active pursuits. The difference is clear. The focus in a studio is on work done by the student. That is the key distinction.1While this definition (or refusal to make one) is useful in understanding and appreciating thecreative freedom and pedagogic experimentation in that school's reform of the introductoryengineering curriculum, the lack of a specific definition may serve to make assessment of studiocourses more difficult than necessary. Indeed, the distinction offered seems to be more betweenlecturing and active learning than on the studio

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Lynn Nored; David Compton

industry experience is through mentoring designprojects. At OC, no engineering student may graduate without completing a three-semestersystems design project. Project teams composed of electrical and/or mechanical students workthrough the difficulties of planning a project. They must plan a schedule and a budget, writestatus memos, and present reports to the rest of the college. During their presentations, they mustanswer questions submitted from an audience that includes professors and their peers. This isrigorous project designed to emulate the reality of industry.II. IntroductionThe founders of the engineering program intended to prepare every engineering student to enterthe workforce with the skills to be immediately productive, professional

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Chris Lorenz; Trevor Harding; Jennifer Kadlowec; Kurt DeGoede

that theevents and experiences had on them as graduate students and as faculty in their teaching careerswill be discussed.UM-ASEE Student Chapter EventsThe UM-ASEE Student Chapter provides a variety of avenues for meeting the purpose of theorganization. Since its inception, the main events hosted by UM-ASEE Student Chapter arepanel discussions and brown-bag lunches on topics related to academic careers. Topics that havefueled panel discussions that are pertinent to the graduate students are: finding an academic job,curriculum vitas, grant proposal writing, interviewing, starting a research program, the state ofteaching at various types of universities and patents and intellectual property. The format for

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Ashraf Ghaly

thecollege’s server. The course instructors offered a tutorial on posting material on the Internet,in addition to unlimited help outside of class. The project in this course, however, wasInternet-based. Called Humanstruction, the project required each student to pick a subjectof interest within the framework of the course and write a research paper on that subject.Students had to post their projects on their respective web sites for peer and instructorevaluation. While the project could also include pictures, graphs, charts, or tables, it had tocontain at least 10 pages of text. In addition to the instructors’ evaluation, all assignmentsand the project were peer reviewed. Reports were required to emphasize the engineeringand historical aspects of the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

John Olson; Georgia Ehlers; David Lovelock; Ali Mehrabian

know. In terms of academics, Justin would never have been exposed to higher levels of math or science, because he struggles with visual processing.……….This does not mean he cannot learn, but that teaching him requires creative thinking and a commitment to helping him learn in a manner which works for him. He is forever behind his peers academically, in terms of classroom experience. You cannot imagine the pride Justin takes in knowing that he has just spent 2 weeks at a camp taught by professors, graduate students, and caring volunteers who appreciate his intelligence. Justin is rarely able to surpass his 'normal' peers in terms of life's experiences. You have changed that for him

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Edward Fisher; Anton Pintar; Kirk Schulz

presentations and report writing. The studentsdevelop their own operating procedure for running the experiment. The procedure and safetyconsiderations are combined into a Job Safety Assessment Form (JSA).A safety program, initiated in 1982, has evolved into an extensive safety program, PAWS(Prevent Accidents With Safety), with a high level of student involvement. During eachexperimental cycle, a group is designated to serve as the student Safety Committee as itsassigned experiment. Among other duties, the Safety Committee conducts safety audits of the unit Page 6.260.1 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Judson Singer

(singer.kettering.edu/student_intros.htm ) and peer letters which recount theirexperiences (singer.kettering.edu/peerlet.htm). Through peer letters students have theopportunity at the end of the course to pass on useful information to their peers who will take thiscourse in the future. These future learners who read the peer letters will receive currentinformation about the course from those who have been through "the battle." Toward the end ofthis session students write a one and one half to two page type-written, double-spaced letter inwhich they will explain the topics that are covered in this course from their point of view. Further,they explain the course requirements, the importance and drawbacks of group projects/tests, thevalue of attending class, the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Brett Hamlin; Gretchen Hein

of calculus, physics, and first year engineering courses. Calculus-ready students were ran-domly selected and asked to participate in this study. Those declining our offer were used as ourcomparison group. The comparison and the test groups had similar compositions of majors, SAT/ACT scores, and high school backgrounds. The results from this study show that the students inthe test group scored significantly higher on common exams than did students in the comparisongroup. Follow-up analysis shows that the students in the test group continue to have higher overallgrade point averages, and self-report a higher level of academic confidence that do their peers inthe comparison group. This paper details the integration process, including the active

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Wang Chien Ming; Mohamad Ridwan; Ang Kok Keng

students areencouraged. In these participatory workshop-lectures, active learning can be an ultimateachievement, even with a large class size of about 450 students per session. Peer instructions viabuzz groups are encouraged in lectures by posing concept quizzes (similar to Mazur’s) andthought provoking puzzles at regular intervals during lectures. Printed lecture notes with criticalinformation purposely “blanked” out also allow students to discover and learn during theworkshop-lecture as they actively work through their notes, sometimes together with thelecturers.Such techniques often require the contents of the lecture to be pruned judiciously. This is wherethe next two technologies can help in alleviating the worry of some lecturers of leaving

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Steven Myers; Kathleen Nunnally; Catherine Blat; Patricia Tolley

Session 2793 Successfully Applying the Supplemental Instruction Model to Sophomore-level Engineering Courses Catherine Blat, Stephen Myers, Kathleen Nunnally, and Patricia Tolley University of North Carolina at CharlotteAbstractSupplemental Instruction (SI) is a non-remedial program that utilizes peer-assisted review sessionsand targets historically difficult academic courses. Although SI has been used nationally fordecades, there is very little literature on its application in engineering courses. There iswidespread evidence of its use in non-engineering and pre-engineering courses

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

R. Williams; F. Edwards; E. Egemen; Adrian Hanson

define a problem, solve the problem, andpresent the solution to the client. However, due to time and resource constraints, a number of steps in the“real life” engineering design processes, such as interactions with clients, permit applications,specifications, contract documents, etc. have traditionally been omitted from capstone class syllabus. Thispaper describes the authors’ approach to present a complete overview of the design process to the students.For this purpose, engineering consulting office was used as a model. The students were asked to completethe design assignment just like in a consulting office, where they would be required to meet with theclients, interact with the regulators, turn in time sheets, regularly meet with their peers

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Audeen Fentiman; Robert J. Gustafson; John Merrill; John Demel; Richard Freuler

management, report writing and oral presentations haveassumed important roles in these programs. ABET criteria are introduced early as part of thecourse syllabi as to which will be addressed in each particular course of the sequence. The rangeof laboratory exercises and the design projects with the written reports and oral presentationsrequired that are currently a part of the IEP and the FEH Program are described in the nextsections.4. Hands-on Laboratory ExercisesThe intent of the laboratory exercises that are a part of the two freshman engineering programs isto provide significant opportunities for hands-on learning combined with a broadinterdisciplinary outlook. Underlying these opportunities is a goal of making the students awareof the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Naseem Ishaq; Salahuddin Qazi

-based educational software systemdeveloped at the University of Illinois. It allows instructors to create on-line lecture notes thatinclude equations, animations, and graphics that can be reviewed by students any time from anylocation. It also includes on-line interactive homework problems, Network TA that enablesstudents to communicate with their peers, on-line teaching assistants and instructor via web aswell as web-based bulletin board system and on-line grade book to record student grades.CypberProf enables students to review lecture notes all day, complete homework problems onthe web and receive immediate feedback on their work, and review their grades any time byposting question to their instructor, teaching assistant, and peers using

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Maria Kreppel; Beverly Swaile

Society for Engineering Education• Introduction to cooperative learning and peer evaluation.• Understanding of ethical issues in technology from multiple professional perspectives.• Examination of the assumptions, impact, and implications of technological decisions.• Exploration and research of ethical issues in application of technology. To provide the reader with a better understanding of the way the course has beendeveloped and integrated into the multidisciplinary student collective, course assignmentsamples are provided below. It is important to emphasize that students are divided into teamsthat work collaboratively to define, research, and communicate the position(s) of the stakeholdergroups each represents. The communication