,” Regional Conference in Engineering Education RHEd/APCETE/REES. Malaysia 2016.[3] M. Ebben and J. L. Murphy, "Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: a review of nascent MOOC scholarship," Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 328–345, 2014.[4] S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, et al., "Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, pp. 8410- 8415, 2014.[5] R. Zaurin, “Preparing the Engineering Student for Success with IDEAS: A Second Year Experiential Learning Activity for Large-size Classes,” in Proceedings of the 125th American Association of
Workshop.Description available at http://www.asce.org/exceed/.10 Center for Teaching Excellence, United States Military Academy. Available athttp://www.dean.usma.edu/centers/cte/11 Bowman, Bruce A. and Farr, John V. (2000) “Embedding Leadership in Civil EngineeringEducation.” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice., ASCE,126 (1), 16-20.12 Meyer, K., Morris, M., Estes, A., and Ressler, S. “How to Kill Two Birds with One Stone—Assigning Grades and Assessing Program Goals at the Same Time.” Proceedings of the 2005American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. June 2005.13 Welch, R., Estes, A. and Winget, D. “Assessment of Squishier Outcomes: Open-EndedProblem Solving through Client-Based Projects.” Proceedings of the
support further efforts toutilize student group activities by reworking the required Annual Report format to encourageBOK related activities. The current report format is reflected in the list of student groupactivities presented above – it would be a relatively simple matter to add or remove categories. Itmight be even more effective for a CE program to set their own requirements for their studentgroup’s report(s) such that the program has an annual source of assessment data to draw uponthat is catered to their individual program. This link to the BOK and other criteria would onlyhelp the annual report be a more purposeful and apparent part of any civil engineering program.It could also help to cement the relationship between its student
areas, andecological balance and diversity. Different people will put different valuations on these assets [9]. Valuations can include economic, ecological, aesthetic, and ethical components. Theeconomic consultant who undertakes such a valuation must use judgment in deciding not onlywhich methods to use to assess values but also whether and how to quantify them. If s/hedecides to quantify environmental values, different methods will yield higher or lower figuresand it will be tempting (especially if s/he wants future work) to use the method that suits theclient's desired outcome [9]. Students will find out how subjective such an evaluation processcan be through the following exercise in which they can make judgments to conduct
. Birdsong. Research in the Undergraduate Environment, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, 2006.2. P. Jansson, R. P. Ramachandran, J. L. Schmalzel and S. A. Mandayam, “Creating an Agile ECE Learning Environment Through Engineering Clinics”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 455-462, August 2010.3. S. Davis, M. Frankle, R. P. Ramachandran, K. D. Dahm and R. Polikar, “A Freshman Level Module in Biometric Systems”, accepted in IEEE Int. Symp. on Circuits and Systems, Beijing, China, May 19-23, 2013.4. B. Y. Smolenski and R. P. Ramachandran, “Usable Speech Processing: A Filterless Approach in the Presence of Interference”, IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine, Special Issue on Speaker
) C8. Determine max stresses at stress concentration C9. Use a stress-cycle (S - N) to predict the fatigue 072S 082S 092SFigure 6 Multi-Year Assessment of Course Objectives Page 15.649.9 MENG 3306 Muti-Year Course Objectives Scale (1-5) 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 C10. Determine stress for a TWPV
AC 2010-134: EXCEED II: ADVANCED TRAINING FOR EVEN BETTERTEACHINGDebra Larson, Northern Arizona University Debra S. Larson is a Professor and Associate Dean for the College of Engineering, Forestry and Natural Sciences at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, AZ. She served as department chair for civil and environmental engineering at NAU for four years. Prior to her faculty appointment at NAU, Debra worked as a structural and civil engineer for various companies. She is a registered Professional Engineer in Arizona. Debra received her B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Engineering from Michigan Technological University. She received her Ph.D. degree in Civil Engineering from Arizona State
, J.H. (1985). “Humanities in an engineering program.” 1985 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Vol. 3, 1598-1601. 4. Fourie, A. (1994). “Will civil engineering look any different in the year 2001?” Civil Engineering, published by South African Institute of Civil Engineers, 2(12), 19-21. Page 15.660.11 5. Ansari, A. (2001). “The Greening of Engineers: A Cross-Cultural Experience.” Science and Engineering Ethics, 7(1), 105-15.6. Van Treuren, K. and Eisenbarth, S. (2002). “Engineering education in a liberal arts environment at Baylor University.” 2002 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 16-19 June
, Albuquerque, NM. 7. Barger, M. and Hall, M.W. (1998). “Sustainability in environmental engineering education.” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, June 28 - July 1, 1998, Seattle, WA. 8. Robinson, M. and Sutterer, K. (2003). “Integrating sustainability into civil engineering curricula.” Proceedings of the 2003 Annual Conference, June 22-25, 2003, Nashville, TN. 9. Hansen, K. and Vanegas, J. (2006). “A guiding vision, road map, and principles for researching and teaching sustainable design and construction.” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 18-21, 2006, Chicago, IL. 10. Freyne, S., Hale, M., and Durham, S. (2007). “Incorporating
addressingethical quandaries.CE 1105 Module: What is Critical Thinking and Why is it Important for Good Decision Making?The CE 1105, Introduction to Civil Engineering, module is designed as an introduction to criticalthinking and uses Bloom’s Taxonomy to illustrate various levels of cognitive abilities.Specifically, the learning objectives are that students will be able to: define critical thinking; explain Bloom’s Taxonomy; draw the Bloom’s Taxonomy pyramid; apply the first three levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy to basic problems/decisions; and identify the level(s) of Bloom’s Taxonomy used in various phases of decision making.After the pretest is administered, the instructor begins the lesson with a discussion of whatcritical
. and Ince, S. (1957) History of Hydraulics, Dover21 Lewis, Tom (1999) Divided Highways: Building the Interstate Highways, Transforming American Life, VikingPress22 Delatte, N. J. (2008) Beyond Failure: Forensic Case Studies for Civil Engineers, ASCE Press, Reston, VA 23 Evans, H., Buckland, G., and Lefer, D. (2004) They made America: from the steam engine to the search engine:two centuries of innovators, Little, Brown, and Company, New York, NY24 Bowler, P. J. (1993) The Norton History of the Environmental Sciences, Norton25 Cleveland State University Special Collections, (2012), http://library.csuohio.edu/speccoll/26
Sustainability Summit. Denver, CO. 28, February, 2011. 2. Office of Sustainability. University of Utah office of sustainability. (2011, April 27). Retrieved from http://www.facilities.utah.edu/portal/site/facilities/menuitem.f3f7b0b1f50f8fe6d0f3d010c1e916b9/?vgne xtoid=f3a0bf5b7e46d110VgnVCM1000001c9e619bRCRD 3. Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, Initials. (20100, April 29). Stars (sustainability tracking assessment and rating system. Retrieved from https://stars.aashe.org/ 4. Anderson, J.L., Chenoweth, S., DeVasher, R., House, R., Livingston, J., Minster… & Williams, J.M. Communicating sustainability: sustainability and communication in the engineering
/ 314.0 89.1 278.3 / 314.0 88.6 264.3 / 314.0 84.2 274.1 / 314.0 87.3 9e 132.2 / 163.2 81.0 120.0 / 163.2 73.5 130.9 / 163.2 80.2 127.7 / 163.2 78.2 Page 15.260.11 104.0 ConclusionsDoes a program need to include industry partners in their senior design course to besuccessful? Obviously not, since few programs use industry partners; however, manyprograms have gone to using adjuncts with large amounts of industry design experienceto teach their senior design course (meet ABET requirements) since not all full timefaculty are P.E.’s and
experience is the involvement with the projectsponsor, graduate mentor, and faculty adviser in addition to the necessary technical design. Alsovaluable is the emphasis on autonomy and teamwork, and the creation of professionally prepareddesign deliverables. The students and the sponsors alike have enjoyed the opportunity to worktogether in this unique environment, and have found it a mutually beneficial experience.References 1. Todd, R.C., Sorensen, C., & Magleby, S. (1993). Designing a senior capstone course to satisfy industrial customers. Journal of engineering education, 82 (2), 92-100. 2. Fairchild, G. F., & Taylor, T. G. (2000). Using business simulations and issue debates to facilitate synthesis in agribusiness
s at in ic ist M ys er m ne Ph he
in the solution of broadly defined problems. Civil Engineering Technician (CE Technician) is a person typically performing task- oriented scientific or engineering related activities and exercising technical judgments commensurate with those specific tasks. A person working as a CE Technician works under the direct control and personal supervision of a CE Professional or direction of a CE Technologist. A person initially obtains status as a CE Technician through the completion of requisite formal education, experience, examination(s), and/or other requirements as specified by an appropriate credentialing body. A person working as a CE Technician is expected to comprehend and
120 75 52 W Environmental 53 167 66 72 Water resources E/hydraulics/hydrology 44 139 / 94/93* 55 60 / 141T* Construction / management 46 74 / 40 58 32 / 49T Systems / infrastructure 20 53 25 23 ^ Other(s) 30 ** 38 **W/E Note that there were 18 specializations in environmental plus water resources; based on examining thecoursework requirements
hasdecided to conduct all 2021-2022 reviews virtually and it expects to review over 1080 programsacross all four commissions during the accreditation cycle. Over 730 of these programs will beevaluated by EAC.The objectives of this study were to: • gather input on best practices and opportunities for improvement in all elements of the virtual review, including pre-visit preparation, virtual “on-site” operations, team dynamics, communication and training, and • provide recommendations for future virtual reviewsResults of surveys, author(s)’ observations, and recommendations to improve future reviews -whether in-person or virtual - are presented in this paper. Lessons learned address suggestionsfor improvement for future virtual reviews
patterns in Activity 7 Activity #8: Failure Case Study Presentations Usual format: In teams of three, the students investigate a failure case study prior to classand the activity is used for group presentations of their findings. Given a series of library andweb-based resources, student teams select a building failure case study and create a four-minutePowerPoint presentation which answers the questions: Which building system type failed?Which key components of the system were involved and how did they fail? Who suffered fromthis event? Which profession(s) was involved with the cause? What could have been donedifferently to have prevented the situation? Each student in the team has to participate in thepresentation. The student teams
hascontributed to a high degree of willingness of staff to take the time out of their busyschedules and help students.In almost all 10 years, at some time the course instructors and faculty advisors have hadto walk a fine line in project management issues, choosing between three basic options: 1. Let students work out the issues with possible detrimental effects to course or deliverables 2. Provide limited executive decisions to positively affect the outcome(s) 3. Weigh in heavily and interrupt the interactions that might (or might not) work themselves out in a timely manner by the studentsSuch decisions are difficult at times, and Option 3 will typically result in meetingdeadlines but with a less valuable student learning process
isthe seminal work of the 1950’s educational committee chaired by Benjamin Bloom. Thecommittee established a set of taxonomies in three domains of learning: cognitive, affective andpsychomotor. The cognitive domain taxonomy is widely accepted in many fields and has beenidentified as, “arguably one of the most influential education monographs of the past halfcentury.”6 The taxonomies are a language that describes the progressive development of anindividual in each domain and are defined as follows7: • Cognitive: of, relating to, being, or involving conscious intellectual activity. • Affective: relating to, arising from, or influencing feelings or emotions. • Psychomotor: of or relating to motor action directly proceeding from mental
outcomes. There are threesections to these course assessments that mirror the course assessments for the CivilEngineering Division within the Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at theUnited States Military Academy.5 The first section describes/defines the course as it wastaught through its catalog description (still appropriate?), course objectives, textbook(s)used, the course schedule, graded events, an assessment of facilities and technologyavailable, curriculum integration, and end-of-course feedback questions. The secondsection assesses the course through evaluating whether the course objectives wereachieved, evaluating the end-of-course feedback, evaluating course grade point average(GPA), time required to complete daily
New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2004. doi:10.17226/109993. Committee on Education of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge: Preparing the Future Civil Engineer. 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2019. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784415221.4. Sola E, Hoekstra R, Fiore S, McCauley P. An Investigation of the State of Creativity and Critical Thinking in Engineering Undergraduates. Creat Educ. 2017;08(09):1495-1522. doi:10.4236/ce.2017.891055. Surovek A, Rassati GA. Is Structural Engineering Education Creating Barriers to Innovation and Creativity? In: 6th Structural Engineers World Congress. Cancun
) • analyze issues in professional ethics(12 comments) • explain the importance of professional licensure (2 comments) Page 26.1185.6 • General Comment(s) not tied to any specific element of the CEPC (41 comments)The raw number of comments indicated an area of interest but were not necessarily helpful ingaining a consensus. Many of the comments contradicted each other. For example, for the 20comments received for “applying math and science…”, seven were positive toward the criterion,ten were negative and three were neutral in that they made suggestions or asked for clarification.Even such classification was problematic. Some comments were
AC 2007-983: INTEGRATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF TEAMWORK,DIVERSITY, LEADERSHIP, AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS INTO ACAPSTONE DESIGN COURSEJoseph Hanus, University of Wisconsin-MadisonJeffrey S. Russell, University of Wisconsin-Madison Page 12.929.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Integrating the Development of Teamwork, Diversity, Leadership, and Communication Skills into a Capstone Design CourseAbstractThe development of teamwork, diversity, leadership, and communications (TDLC) skills in ourprofessional domain is critical to our engineering education program and profession. We solveproblems in teams which are
. Sometimes theyresulted in ridiculous meaning, as in this example where the students are literally saying thatflood waters will stop and speak with a geologist before reaching the flood stage: After conversations with Jim Wheeler of the Geology Department, the 100yr flood event will likely have a flowrate of approximately 2700 ft3/s…Other sentence-structure errors were compounded by students’ use of complex sentences. Theyresulted in ungrammatical sentences whose meaning is discernible but not clearly stated, as inthis example from a lab report: But the brittleness of each coupon varied with coupon #3 having little necking and being the most brittle of the three coupons, coupon #13 had more necking than #3 but less than #7 and