climate change effects their motivations and agency to solve complex global problems for a sustainability in their career.Dr. Allison Godwin, Purdue University, West Lafayette Allison Godwin, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. She is the recipient of a 2014 American Society for Engineering
oninnovation and deep learning included a variety of experimental activities and field trips,Imaginative Education and knowledge building.An example of balancing innovation and efficiency is how students learned about AtterbergLimits (the moisture contents of fine-grained soils that indicate the boundaries between differenttypes of engineering behavior). As in most introductory geotechnical courses, studentsperformed the standard ASTM laboratory procedures to determine the liquid limit and the plasticlimit of a soil. Through this efficiency activity students learned the procedural knowledgeassociated with the topic. However, innovation was also integrated into the experiment to helpstudents develop a deeper understanding of the concepts by requiring
inthe summer and included both face-to-face and online components. Topic coverage fell into oneof three main categories: 1) university employment expectations, 2) course logistics andexpectations, and 3) effective interactions between Mentor TAs and students enrolled in thecourse. Workshop effectiveness was evaluated through a mixed method approach including theuse of pre and post workshop surveys and end of the semester focus group discussions withstudents serving as Mentor TAs as well as post course surveys of course-enrolled students. Acomplete discussion of the developed workshop and the future direction of the program is alsoincluded.Introduction and BackgroundOver the past three years, faculty at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) have
significant differences in the clusters of attitudesselected by male vs. female students; there were not significant differences in the number ofpeople attitudes selected by students in different majors (Kruskal-Wallis sig. 0.404); there was asignificant difference between majors for the number of work attitudes selected as characteristicof themselves (Kruskal-Wallis sig. 0.002; environmental average 1.3 vs. civil average 1.8, post-hoc adjusted significance 0.015).The results indicate that personally individuals select a more balanced set of people-oriented andquality work attitudes, in contrast to the quality work attitudes that most believed dominatedengineers’ attitudes. This difference could be due to the persistence of long-held stereotypes
engineering problems [ABET k]These projects have several objectives: (1) to allow students to tackle a larger and more realisticcivil engineering dynamics problem, (2) expose students to computational tools used in solvingproblems, (3) evaluate critical thinking and communication skills. The projects are designed tobe solved by student teams, who are told they are acting as consultants on the project posed(TAMU 2). As the problems posed are more realistic than standard homework assignments, thestructures to be analyzed are more complex and computer software applications are used to solvethe numerical component of the projects. The content in these courses was modified to includehow to convert a physical system (structure and corresponding loads) into
two different engineeringeducation environments.Figure 1 - Sample 4-page handout as distributed to the studentsFigure 2 - Sample 4-page handout as completed by the instructor during class2.0 Case Study #1 - Mechanics of MaterialsAt Colorado School of MInes, CEEN 311 Mechanics of Materials is a 3.0 credit hour requiredcourse for eight different engineering majors, and is taught to approximately 500 students eachacademic year. The course is administered centrally by a Course Coordinator, who is responsiblefor standardizing the content across different sections, instructors, and Graduate TeachingAssistants (GTAs). Section sizes for the course generally range from 60-80 students, with 1 GTAassigned to each 2 sections. The GTAs are fully utilized
years. Some states have term limits while others do not.PE Boards, and PE Board members, have several basic functions. The primary and most timeconsuming function is the review of applications for licensure and the qualifications of theapplicants. Those applying to take the Fundamentals of Engineering examination (the “FEexam”) who are students or graduates of EAC/ABET engineering programs are typicallyapproved without much review. The educational qualifications of those with alternate educationbackgrounds are typically reviewed in detail by PE Board members. Board members typicallysplit up the task of detailed review of the education and experience of each individual applicationfor initial licensure as a professional engineer, and follow it
under construction. He will be graduating in June 2016 with the intent of entering the field of structural engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Using K’nex Toys in Architectural Engineering ProgramsAbstractFor the past three years, students in ARCE 483 Seismic Analysis and Design in the ArchitecturalEngineering program at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo have been designing experiments using K’nextoys. The resulting experiments have included the effects of fixity on natural frequency, flexibleversus rigid performance, seismic activity on a bridge structure, soft story behavior in buildings,the effect of floor system stiffness on the deflection of a system, the effect of mass
Page 23.733.7 Figure 4 – Security warningAs shown in Figure 5, the student’s view of the virtualized WaterGEMS program window isidentical to the program windows available when the software is installed locally. All of thesame program functionality is available, including all program menus and buttons, the option tosave program files onto the students’ local machine, and the ability to print to locally-connectedprinters. Thus the student experience when using virtualized WaterGEMS is nearly identical tousing a locally-installed version of the program, and in fact users are able to switch back andforth between the two.For purposes of this pilot test, the server hosting the WaterGEMS software was a cloud
structural members and haverepetition of key mechanics of materials concepts before moving on to higher level courses must Page 12.217.15not be ignored. A better method than looking at the feedback from individual courses may be toconduct exit interviews with the graduating students to find out how they think the linkagebetween the two courses improved their level of understanding of mechanics of materials in theirhigher level engineering courses, or to compare student achievement directly by giving term endquestions identical to those used in the old CE364 at the end of the new CE364.Course Integration Lessons LearnedThe major lesson learned
the gap between design courses and capstones withoutgetting too detailed in the calculations that a capstone might require. The evaluation discussedincludes student survey data on their experiences that will be correlated to assessment grades. Thispaper will also provide suggestions for others in how to formulate and adopt such mini-projects.IntroductionEducators are tasked with preparing undergraduate students to become professionals who areknowledgeable about and engaged in dealing with the challenges of today’s society [1]. That said,many undergraduates at graduation are limitedly capable of formulating creative solutions to realworld messy problems they have never seen before [2-3]. A major component of this limitation isthat
turbidity), and how repeated measurements of identical samplescould produce different numbers (turbidity, suspended solids). Basic statistics (e.g.average, standard deviation) were used to characterize this real data collected in the lab.Module: Mass BalanceThat module was followed by one presented by the ChE instructor who introduced basicmass balances with specific applications in sewage technology. For instance, we designeda lab aimed at teaching the principles of basic filtration, a common step in wastewatertreatment. Students simulated nineteenth-century devices and materials to study basicsolids filtration. The ChE faculty member “gamified” that filtration lab, challengingteams to create a filter that was most effective at removing coffee