, Technology, and Research Trust. The authors are gratefulfor this support.References [1] P. J. W. Norris, Fran H., Sandro Galea, Matthew J. friedman, “Methods for Disaster Mental Health Research,” p. 326, 2006. [2] F. H. Norris, S. P. Stevens, B. Pfefferbaum, K. F. Wyche, and R. L. Pfefferbaum, “Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness,” Am. J. Community Psychol., vol. 41, no. 1–2, pp. 127–150, 2008. [3] M. Siambabala Bernard, “The concept of resilience revisited,” Disasters, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 434– 450, 2006. [4] D. A. McEntire
Engineering Education, 2(1):n1, 2010.[3] Vivek SinghBaghel and S Durga Bhavani. Multiple team formation using an evolutionary approach. In 2018 Eleventh International Conference on Contemporary Computing (IC3), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2018.[4] Anon Sukstrienwong. Genetic algorithm for forming student groups based on heterogeneous grouping. In 3rd European Conference of Computer Science (ECCS’12), pages 92–97, 2012.[5] Virginia Yannibelli and Anal´ıa Amandi. Collaborative learning team formation considering team roles: An evolutionary approach based on adaptive crossover, mutation and simulated annealing. Research in Computing Science, 147(4):61–74, 2018.
accreditation efforts. Programs were tasked to identify 1-2 dedicatedaccreditation or assessment coordinators who would then interface with program faculty,coordinate efforts at the program level and report back from the school level meetings. Facultywere chosen based on recommendation from the Chairs and/or self-selection following a call.The faculty ranged in rank from Assistant Professor to Professor. The school-level accreditationcommittee consisted of the program faculty coordinator(s) plus the department chairs, theschool-wide assessment coordinator and the Associate Dean for undergraduate studies. Twointernal evaluators also brought additional expertise from their tenure as ABET programevaluators. The following sections detail specific planning
workshop,although most responses described some aspect of the hands-on engagement.Finally, students reported the workshops did not need to be changed, as one studentnoted, “everything was perfect and clear”. In summary, based on the data reviewedto data, students were engaged and learning through participation in the workshops.Acknowledgement:NASA-MUREP Grant # NNX16AN19A and NSF grant # 1601522ReferencesEyers, D., Dotchev, K., 2010. “ Technology review for mass customization usingrapid manufacturing”. Assembly Automation, 30 (1), pp. 39 – 46.Lipson, H., 2012. “ Frontiers in additive manufacturing. The shape of things tocome”. The Bridge, 42 (1), pp. 5 – 12.Kondor, S., Grant, C., Liacouras, P., …etc, 2013. “ Personalized surgicalinstruments”. ASME
identified the following benefits of the Queue system.Save time for both students and instructorsTime is at a premium for students, instructors, and staff. The Queue organizes both students andinstructors to maximize student learning when time is restricted.Group Formation and Peer LearningNumerous studies have shown the benefits of peer learning, but this can be challenging tofacilitate in large courses with several hundreds of students. The Queue allows students toidentify other students or groups who have the same or similar questions. This could be used tohelp students form small groups to discuss their question(s) and then work with an instructor.Similarly, the Queue could also be used to facilitate students answering other students
/14cfr43_main_02.tpl[4] Federal Aviation Administration, 14 CFR Part 91, ‘General operating and flight rules’, 2018.[Online] Available: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=9949eb4dc104f421574d2d48b16ba677&mc=true&node=pt14.2.91&rgn=div5#se14.2.91_1417 [5] Federal Aviation Administration, 14 CFR Part 3, ‘General requirements’, 2018. [Online]Available: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=1&SID=aa8fea6ef04319b68102c105dd9437f2&ty=HTML&h=L&mc=true&n=pt14.1.3&r=PART[6] Amaya, N., Rovira, M. D., del Cerro, S., Grillo, M., Nomen, R., & Sempere, J. (2019).Distributed Safety Management as a tool for creating a safety culture in university students andfuture professionals. Journal of Loss Prevention in the
through the development of additional features to allow forthe classification of sub-organizational units s as opposed to classifying the full document undera single strategy which becomes more useful as source code becomes more complex.6. ConclusionIn this paper, we have discussed how to clean and process raw data using stop word filtration,tokenization, and lemmatization. We explored the data to discover some of its propertiesand to illustrate various characteristics of an insufficient comment versus a sufficient commentclassification. Finally, we trained two supervised machine learning classifiers, the MultinomialNaive Bayes classifier and a Random Forest Classifier using the bag of words model and TFIDFweighting. We were able to achieve a
Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, June 2018.[2] Shekar, A., “Project-Based Learning in Engineering Design Education: Sharing Best Practices,”Proceedings of the 121st ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, June, 2014.[3] Wright-Carlsen, R., Zyhier, S., Sirinterlikci, A., “Project-Based Learning: Engaging BiomedicalEngineering Sophomores Through a Collaborative Vein-Finder Device Project with Nursing,” Proceedingsof the 125th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, June, 2018.[4] Rockenbaugh, L.A., Kotys-Schwartz, D.A., Reamon, D.T., “Project-Based Service Learning and StudentMotivation,” Proceedings of the 118th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver BC, June,2011.[5] Puttagounder, D.S
Automated Grading of Spreadsheet Exercises," JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 23-29, 2003.[3] P. Blayney and M. Freeman, "Automated formative feedback and summative assessment using individualized spreadsheet assignments," Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 20, pp. 209-231, 2004.[4] M. Waldman and M. Ulema, "Automated measurement and analysis of effectiveness of teaching selected Excel topics in an introductory IS class," Computing Sciences in Colleges, vol. 23, pp. 73-82, 2008.[5] Z. Kovačić and J. S. Green, "Automatic Grading of Spreadsheet and Database Skills," Journal of Information Technology Education Innovations in Practice, vol. 11, pp. 53-70, 2012.[6] K. Matthews, T
-duty- vehicles-more-efficient. [Accessed: 25-Jan-2019].[6] O. Delgado and N. Lutsey, The U.S. SuperTruck Program: Expediting the Development of Advanced Heavy-Duty Vehicle Efficiency Technologies. Washington DC: International Council on Clean Transportation, 2014, p. 2.[7] J. Park, “How Navistar's SuperTruck Exceeded Goals,” Fleet Management - Trucking Info, 20-Dec-2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.truckinginfo.com/157131/how- navistars-supertruck-exceeded-goals. [Accessed: 20-Dec-2018].[8] “SuperTruck Powertrain Technologies for Efficiency Improvement.” United States Department of Energy, 10-Jun-2016.[9] S. Jensen, “It’s a bird…it’s a plane…its SuperTruck,” OEM Off-Highway, 01-Feb-2012
parallel cooperation and development of theinstructors also has had positive benefit. The fact that such a model can be incorporated withminimal to no curricular change suggests potential benefit at other institutions as well.REFERENCES[1] S. McGuire, Teach Students How To Learn. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, 2015.[2] K. Leary and M. DeRosier, “Factors Promoting Positive Adaptation and Resilience during theTransition to College.” Psychology, vol. 3, no. 12A, pp. 1215-1222, 2012.[3] J. Himel, “The Understanding and Promotion of Resilience in College Students.” Ph.D.dissertation, Dept. of Clinical Psychology, Antioch University, Keene, NH, 2012[4] R. Palmer, D. Maramba, and T. Dancy II, “A Qualitative Investigation of Factors Promotingthe
Education Conference Proceedings. 2. Bungee Barbie & Kamikaze Ken - Indiana University Bloomington. (1995). Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~hmathmod/doc/bungeeb5.doc 3. Burghardt, M. D., & LLewellyn, M. (2006). Engineering Effective Middle School Teacher Professional Development. American Society for Engineering Education Conference, 11.558.1 – 11.558–12. 4. College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, W. S. U. (Ed.). (2019). Engineering Mathematics (EGR 1010) Topics and Materials. Retrieved from https://engineering-computer- science.wright.edu/research/engineering-mathematics-topics-and-materials 5. Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering
, ofstakeholder needs, of the social and environmental context, and of temporal dimensions [4] - [6],[15] - [17]. Our definition of systems thinking is represented in Figure 1, where the “component”of a problem that an individual may be working on is in the center. The expanding circlesrepresent the contexts that can and should be considered in making decisions about thesolution(s) and their appropriateness. Many times, this component is part of a larger technicalsystem, thus other pieces or components within the system both must be considered and can havean impact on the success of the solution. This technical system exists within another existingstructure, such as infrastructure of the environment or regulations in a particular field of
al., “Argumentation in K-12 Engineering Education: A Review of the Literature (Fundamental),” in American Society for Engineering Education, 2018.[9] B. Barron, “When Smart Groups Fail,” J. Learn. Sci., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 307–359, 2003.[10] J. M. Kittleson and S. A. Southerland, “The Role of Discourse in Group Knowledge Construction: A Case Study of Engineering Students,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 267–293, 2004.[11] E. Ochs, “Linguistic Resources for Socializing Humanity,” Stud. Soc. Cult. Found. Lang. No. 17. Rethink. Linguist. Relativ., pp. 407–437, 1996.[12] E. Ochs and B. Schiefflin, “Language acquisition and socialization: three developmental stories and their implications,” in Culture theory
disciplinespecific engineering laboratories. Data were collected in three streams. First, through identical pre-test and posttest surveysmeasuring attitudes and interest in STEM fields. This survey, which took approximately tenminutes to complete, was a slightly modified version of the Friday Institute’s S-STEM survey[16] which has been shown to be a valid instrument for understanding student attitudes fordifferent STEM disciplines. Second, focus group interviews related to attitudes and interests inengineering were conducted. The focus group protocol and questions were created by the team ofresearchers to address specific topics around the research questions including student interest andidentity around engineering tasks. The third data collection
. Ravesteijn, “Training complete engineers: global enterprise and engineeringeducation,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 419-427, 2001[2] S. R. W. Alwi et al., “Sustainability engineering for the future,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.71, pp. 1-10, 2014[3] K. W. Chau, “Incorporation of sustainability concepts into a civil engineering curriculum,” Journal ofprofessional issues in engineering education and practice, vol. 133, no. 3, pp. 188-191, 2007[4] T. J. Siller, “Sustainability and critical thinking in civil engineering curriculum,” Journal ofprofessional issues in engineering education and practice, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 104-108, 2001[5] J. Mesa et al., “Sustainability in Engineering Education: A Literature
DesigningCollege Courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2013.[4] M. Menekse, G. Stump, S. Krause, M. Chi, “Differentiated Overt Learning Activities forEffective Instruction in Engineering Classrooms.”Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 102 (3),pp. 346-374, 2013.[5] – C. Spezia, D. Thomas, “Tool, Techniques and Class Experience with On-DemandMultimedia Content in an Electric Machines Course,” in Proceedings of the 2012 AmericanSociety for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. June 10-13, 2012, SanAntonio, Texas, American Society of Engineering Education, 2012.[6] H. Sheybani, G. Javidi, “Teaching an Online Technology Course Through InteractiveMultimedia,” in Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education
Psychology, 1997, 22, 125-146.10 P.A. Alexander, “The Development of Expertise: The Journey from Acclimation to Proficiency,” Education Researcher, 2003, 32, 10-14.11 P.A. Alexander, T.L. Jetton and J.M. Kulikowich, “Interrelations of Knowledge, Interest and Recall: Assessing a Model of Domain Learning,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 2008, 87, 559-575.12 Kulturel-Konak, S., Konak, A., Esparragoza, I. E., and Okudan Kramer, G. E., 2013, Assessing Professional Skills in STEM Disciplines. Proceedings of the Third Integrated STEM Education Conference, ISEC ’13, Princeton, NJ, 2013.13 R. L. Barry, and E. G. Seebauer, Fundamentals of Ethics for Scientists and Engineers. New York. NY: Oxford University
design.UGTA’s reaped many benefits ranging from an increased sense of ownership and belonging asengineering students to developing the often-overlooked “soft” skills needed to thrive asprofessionals. This model is now being explored for use in the companion course, Introduction toEngineering, which students take in the alternate freshmen semester (the sequence can be takenin either order).Perhaps the most important result can be found a year later in our student study spaces, dorms,and off-campus housing: the teams formed in this course can be found living and workingtogether as friends and colleagues after having forged meaningful connections during their timein Introduction to Engineering Problem Solving.References[1] S. Godin, Stop Stealing Dreams
some use of[2-4].References[1] W. Strunk, Jr. and E.B. White, The Elements of Style. [E-book] Available: http://www.jlakes.org/ch/web/The-elements-of-style.pdf.[2] S. Illingworth and G. Allen, Effective Science Communication: a practical guide to surviving as a scientist. Bristol, U.K.: IoP Publishing, 2016.[3] G.D. Gopen and J.A. Swan. “The science of scientific writing,” American Scientist, vol. 78, pp. 550-558, 1990.[4] B. Mensch and K. Kording. “Ten simple rules for structuring papers”, PLoS Computational Biology https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619, 2017
, engineer). This approach is coupled with the AskNature.org website,which is a public database of biological information organized by a biomimicry taxonomy [37].The cognitive process of this approach is divided into the steps of scoping, discovering, creating,and evaluating (Fig. 2), and is structured around the search for particular biological insights tosolve a given problem. Scoping involves specifying the problem to be solved with operatingconditions, the functions that must be performed, and which life’s principles the design willincorporate. Discovering involves identifying biological systems that have evolved strategies tosolve the defined function(s) followed by abstracting those strategies into possible designprinciples. This step is often
same students. The discussions were extensive in the discourse of the non-mentored professor; however, these were not part of a classroom experience design based on the critical reflection of the instructor, as it was the case for the mentored professor. TG students had access to computers to use GeoGebra to work individually and collectively. In contrast, in the CG, students had no access to computers, and although some accessed through their smartphones, most of the times was the instructor the only one using GeoGebra to make explanations to the students, while they listened passively.It is evident the positive impact that the redesign of the learning activities had on the learningenvironment from the perspective of the student´s particular
secondary schools) led by Benjamin S. Bloom,committed themselves to create this common framework. They met annually as a working groupthrough the late 1940s and early 1950s to create a common framework for the characterizationand assessment of educational activities. Their goal was to create a common hierarchal set ofterms and language that characterized educational objectives in a uniform and repeatable way.The publication describing their early work presented the concept of three domains ofeducational activities. Those domains included the cognitive, which deals with the recognitionof knowledge and the progressive development of intellectual abilities; the affective domain,which describes changes in interests, attitudes, and values; and the
collaborative projects betweenthe academic and facilities sides of the university that will serve both educational andenvironmental interests going forward.References[1] P. Ballon and D. Schuurman, "Living labs: concepts, tools and cases," Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, vol. 17, no. 4, 2015.[2] C. Veekman, D. Schuurman, S. Leminen and M. Westurlund, "Linking Living Lab Characteristics and Their Outcomes: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Technology Innovation Management Review, vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 6-15, 2013.[3] T. Cohen and B. Lovell, "The Campus as a Living Laboratory: Using the Built Environment to Revitalize College Education," Sustainability Education & Economic Development Center by The American Association of