was to introduce traffic safetyusing the ArcGIS software. An iterative process using several implementation cycles helped theinstructor to refine the structure of instructional tasks based on student-centered feedback asdescribed in the following subsections. The iterative refining process covered four semesters,Fall 2009, Spring 2010, Fall 2010 and Spring 2011.Nature of Instructional ActivitiesThe nature of instructional activity in the GIS laboratory changed throughout the fourimplementation cycles. During first two semesters the GIS laboratory was a stand-aloneinstructional activity placed at the beginning of the course with minimal classroom support fromthe teaching assistants. The assumption was that students will fully use the GIS
experiment” and “No lab” versions2. The materials, handouts, andinstruction for each laboratory session are located in the corresponding appendices. In assessingstudent responses in each laboratory section, the researchers analyzed survey responses andmanually assessed the written responses for demonstration of learning objectives. Following thelaboratory development and conduct and analysis of survey results, this paper will discuss theconclusions gathered from this study with respect to the research questions above.According to recent research in alternative teaching and learning practices in science andengineering courses, students seem to respond more positively to inductive or active learningwhen compared with traditional lecture sessions6. The
results demonstrated thatthe new teaching improvement is capable of adding students’ GIS knowledge.1. INTRODUCTION The GIS courses for graduate and undergraduate students are offered in Old DominionUniversity (ODU) via distance education mode. The distance courses are delivered to 15 states,50 higher education centers, and 4 oversee navy bases (Japan, Koera, Mid-East, and Canada) viaboth the regular classroom and ODU’s TTN (Tele-Tech-Net) system (active satellites, streamvideo, video tapes, DVD, etc.). One of the problems in the distance courses is that the remotestudents have difficulty to access the large volume of geospatial data for their homework anddistance laboratory via internet. The GeoBrain system, which is funded by NASA
Paper ID #8759An innovative way to teach sustainability in Civil engineering Material ClassDr. Goli Nossoni, Manhattan College Dr. Goli Nossoni specializes in the area of civil engineering structures and materials she has worked in multidisciplinary research laboratory. Her research recently expanded to include innovative green and recycled materials. She taught the Civil Engineering Materials course the last two years, and has tried to encourage her students to think critically about the environmental impact of the materials they use and be more creative. She recently has received an EPA-P3 grant for a multidisciplinary
Paper ID #29343Practical approach towards teaching a content intensive subject inhigher educationProf. James Lambrechts P.E., Wentworth Institute of Technology James Lambrechts received a B.S. from the University of Maryland and an M.S. from Purdue University, both in civil engineering. He was a geotechnical engineer for 27 years with Haley & Aldrich, Inc. in Boston before taking a position at Wentworth in 2005.Dr. Anuja Kamat, Wentworth Institute of Technology Anuja Kamat is an Associate Professor in the Civil Engineering Department at Wentworth Institute of Technology, Boston. Prof. Kamat received her Ph.D. in Civil
Paper ID #6973Using Interactive Video Conferencing for Multi-Institution, Team-TeachingDr. Steven J. Burian, University of Utah Dr. Steven J. Burian is an associate professor in the Urban Water Group in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of Utah. Dr. Burian’s career spans more than a decade during which he has worked in design engineering, as a scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, as a profes- sor at the University of Arkansas and the University of Utah, and as a director of an engineering design and sustainability consulting firm he co-founded. Dr. Burian received a Bachelor’s
Paper ID #16741Civil Engineering Students’ Viewpoints on Teaching, Learning, and CareersDr. Seamus F Freyne P.E., Mississippi State University On the civil engineering faculty at Mississippi State University, Seamus Freyne teaches structures courses and his research interests include engineering education.Dr. Veera Gnaneswar Gude P.E., Mississippi State University Veera Gnaneswar Gude is an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at Mississippi State University. He has degrees in chemical (BS) and environmental engineering (MS, PhD) disciplines. He has academic, industrial, and research experiences on
Paper ID #32735Evolution of a Traditional Classroom Teaching Workshop to Support RemoteDeliveryDr. Charles Riley P.E., Oregon Institute of Technology Dr. Riley has been teaching civil engineering structures and mechanics for over 12 years and has been honored with both the ASCE ExCEEd New Faculty Excellence in Civil Engineering Education Award and the Beer and Johnston Outstanding New Mechanics Educator Award. While he teaches freshman to graduate-level courses across the civil engineering curriculum, his focus is on engineering mechanics. He values classroom demonstrations and illustrative laboratory and field
education in general, and those of the Middle East and the Arab Gulf States, in particular Page 12.92.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 A Practitioner - Faculty Collaboration in Teaching Civil Engineering DesignAbstractTeaching civil engineering design through senior projects or capstone design courses, withindustry involvement and support, has increased in recent years. The general trend towardincreasing the design component in engineering curricula is part of an effort to better preparegraduates for engineering practice. While some design projects are still of the “made up
CAEE210 and the breadth of its content make the assignment ofappropriate teaching assistants difficult. The use of outside speakers also has its perils since lastminute changes in their schedules often overrides their appearance in class. Needless to say,contingency lectures and/or speakers should be available.The commitment of individual faculty in both CAEE201 and CAEE210 generally amounts totwo lectures and the oversight of a two-hour laboratory during one week of the 10-week term.The laboratory in CAEE201 is mostly computational in nature and is usually overseen by thefaculty member. The laboratory in CAEE210 is usually taught by a teaching assistant.One of the challenges is having faculty recognize that the sophomores in these courses lack
engineering (CE) materials course along with the other courses in the U.A. WhitakerSchool of Engineering (WSOE) at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) is taught in anintegrated lecture lab style. In this non-traditional setting, instructors use an integrated, active,and collaborative instructional technique. Also, unlike many other universities, there is not aseparate time slot allocated in the schedule to conduct the laboratory experiments for this CEmaterials course. Instead, the lab is embedded into the course structure. Although it has beendocumented in the literature that this technique represents effective teaching pedagogy only afew engineering programs have adopted this method. In addition, the WSOE is only in its thirdyear since students
Training Civil Engineers to Communicate Effectively: Teaching Technical Communication in a Student’s First Engineering CourseAbstractABET requires that graduates of accredited institutions have “an ability to communicateeffectively.” The importance of effective communication of technical information is alsoaddressed in the ASCE Body of Knowledge. How schools meet this outcome varies byinstitution but about half of the schools surveyed for this paper require a specific course on thesubject. Constraints at the United States Military Academy (programs can not extend beyondfour years and a very large core curriculum) make it impractical to require a technicalcommunications course
establishing and maintain a teaching presence, setting clearexpectations, proactively taking steps to minimize student resistance, and adopting newengagement strategies gradually.The challenges brought about by the COVID transition are generally exacerbated in civilengineering courses with hands-on and/or laboratory components that cannot be readilyreplicated remotely. A survey of transportation engineering faculty in the United States [6] foundthat a small fraction (22%) held laboratory courses remotely during the pandemic. However, thestudy was not clear if this meant that the laboratory component for the remaining courses wereeliminated altogether or kept in an in-person format. García-Alberti, Suárez, Chiyón, andMosquera Feijoo [7] documented
AC 2008-721: LET’S ROCK THE BOAT: EVALUATING THE CONCEPT OFSTABILITY IN FLUID MECHANICSTanya Kunberger, Florida Gulf Coast University TANYA KUNBERGER joined FGCU as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering in August, 2007. She graduated cum laude from the Georgia Institute of Technology with a Bachelor's of Civil Engineering and a certificate in geochemistry. Her MS in Civil Engineering, with a minor in Soil Science, and her Ph.D. were obtained at North Carolina State University. Dr. Kunberger was a recipient of the 2003 Center for Transportation and the Environment's Student of the Year Award and a 2007 recipient of NC State's UGSA Outstanding Teaching
to augment physical models, as well as laboratory and in-field experimentation. Thisoverview provides context for the pedagogical approach discussed in this paper which combinesproject-based learning and large-scale laboratory experimentation. Based upon a review ofpublished research related to structural steel design instruction, there have been no similar steeldesign courses which use this teaching approach to expose students to the lateral load resistingframe systems common in seismic areas.Project-based LearningPast engineering pedagogy research has shown that incorporating a project-based approach in astructural steel course, that reflects a task similar to that in industry, is more effective than thetraditional lecture approach [2-3
the themes center on the nanotechnology for civil engineering,some proposed course and lab modules include currently available smart materials, e.g. ShapeMemory Alloys (SMAs) and Piezoelectric (PZT) materials, and micro/nano-scale technologies,e.g. silicon fume and micro-fiber modified concrete and MEMS (Micro-Electro-MechanicalSystems) sensors, and concrete maturity method, due to availability of applicable technologyand operational feasibility at the current civil engineering teaching laboratory. Even though thesetechnologies may not constitute real nanotechnology, they do demonstrate analogies of hownanotechnology will impact students’ careers and civil infrastructures in the future, and inspirestudents’ desire for creativity and
AC 2008-1509: KINESTHETIC STRUCTURESKevin Dong, California Polytechnic State University Page 13.830.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Kinesthetic StructuresAbstractThis paper describes how students are engaged in hands-on activities that reinforce complexengineering principles. In addition to utilizing chalk board examples for design and analysisproblems, physical modeling, not necessarily traditional laboratory testing, is implemented tolink engineering theory with building behavior. Students design, build, and learn how structuresbehave in three dimensions.IntroductionFive years ago, the author switched careers and from practice to
AC 2008-2395: SIMULATING CONSULTING ENGINEER RELATIONSHIPS IN ASENIOR DESIGN COURSE AND ASSESSING THE RESULTSMichael Bronzini, George Mason University Michael S. Bronzini currently holds the Dewberry Chair in Civil, Environmental, and Infrastructure Engineering (CEIE) in the Volgenau School of Information Technology and Engineering at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and is also the Chair of the CEIE Department. Prior positions include Director of the Center for Transportation Analysis at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Chair of the Department of Civil Engineering at Penn State University, and Director of the Transportation Center and Professor of Civil Engineering at the
Bachelor of Science and Master of Science from the University of Arkansas, and a doctoral degree from the University of Kentucky, Dr. Corrie Walton-Macaulay is now a Geotechnical Engineering Assistant Professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Saint Mar- tin’s University. He teaches the traditional geotechnical course of soil mechanics, but also teaches civil engineering materials, mechanics of materials and pavement design. His research area is in unsaturated soil mechanics, energy geotechnics, and transportation infrastructure resiliency. Address: 5000 Abbey Way SE, Saint Martin’s University, Lacey, WA 98503Dr. Suresh Immanuel P.E., University of Evansville Dr. Immanuel Selvaraj is an associate
(and the faculty member teaching it). The majorstrengths of the course before modifications were: four hands-on laboratories, a well-developedand assessed information literacy module with a term-paper as the final product6,7, and on-goingstudent presentations on current geologic issues. The time spent in this class could be broadlydivided into three categories: technical (lecture) topics, professional development andinformation literacy, and laboratories (Table 1). Page 15.614.3Table 1. Topics in GLY 2805 Before Modification Lecture (Technical) Topics Professional Development and Laboratories
with two children.Paul Golter, Washington State University Paul B.Golter obtained an MS from Washington State University and is currently pursuing his PhD while working as the Laboratory Supervisor in the Chemical Engineering Department at WSU.He is married with two children.Gary Brown, Washington State University Gary R Brown obtained a PhD in Education from Washington State University in 1994 and is currently the Director Centre for Teaching Learning and Technology at Washington State University. He is happily married.David Thiessen, Washington State University David B.Thiessen received his PhD in Chemical Engineering from the University of Colorado and has been at
, J. 2006. “Classroom response systems: a review of the literature,” Journal of ScienceEducation and Technology, 15(1), 101-109.7. Van Dijk, L.A., Van Den Berg, G.C., and Van Keulen, H. 2001. “Interactive lectures in engineering education,”European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), 15-28.8. Nicol, D.J. and Boyle, J.T. 2003. “Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: a comparison oftwo interaction methods in the wired classroom,” Studies in Higher Education, 28(4), 457-473.9. Beatty, I.D., Gerace, W.J., Leonard, W.J., and Dufresne, R.J. (2006). Designing effective questions for ClassroomResponse System Teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74(1), 31
property.ConclusionThe experiments demonstrate that these module tests can provide students with a solidintroductory understanding of liquefaction and its effect upon layered soils. These proposedrepeatable experiments and teaching module can be included as one of the many geotechnicalengineering laboratory experiments. In these hands-on experiments students prepare samples, useinstruments and test results on an instructional shake table. In order to properly evaluate theaddition of these laboratory experiments, students should be required to take a short quiz or writea summary lab report. They should also be encouraged to develop their own experiments, whichare not part of the teaching module. Additional surveys to gauge student opinion on the benefitsof the
Teaching Methods for Surveying and EngineeringGraphics,” Proceedings of Mi-Atlantic Conference, Kean University, NJ 2003b.5. Mehta, Y. A. “Innovative Techniques To Teach Civil Engineering Materials Laboratory,” Proceedings of theASEE Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, UT 2004.5. Mehta, Y. A. “Innovative Techniques to Teach Transportation Engineering,” Proceedings of the ASEE AnnualConference, Chicago, IL 2006.6. Mehta, Y. A and Riddell, W. “Dynamics Course for Sections with both Civil and Mechanical Engineers”Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, Pittsburgh, PA 2007. Page 14.517.7
and faculty in institutions of higher education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Teaching and Assessment of Innovation and Creativity in Civil Engineering: Why? How? Now!AbstractThe goal of this paper is to inspire and equip civil engineering educators to integrate creativity andinnovation in their teaching practices. Among the six strategic goal statements adopted by theASCE Board of Direction is “Civil Engineers develop and apply innovative, state-of-the-artpractices and technologies.” Engineering education should set the stage for these skills andmindsets. In the recent activity to update the Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge (CEBOK3),creativity and
AC 2012-2963: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT PEDAGOGICAL TECH-NIQUES TO TEACH MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL PAVEMENT DESIGNGUIDEDr. Yusuf A. Mehta, Rowan UniversityDr. Leslie Ann McCarthy P.E., Villanova University Page 25.333.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Comparison of Different Pedagogical Techniques to Teach Mechanistic- Empirical Pavement Design GuideABSTRACTMechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) is relatively new design methodologyfor conducting pavement structural and materials design. MEPDG is a significant departurefrom the current Association of American Society of Highway
2006-1980: PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING: A MULTI-FACETED APPROACH TOIMPROVING STUDENT LEARNINGMatthew Roberts, University of Wisconsin-Platteville MATTHEW ROBERTS is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Dr. Roberts earned his B.S. in Civil Engineering from Brigham Young University in 1993 then spent four years in the U.S. Air Force as a civil engineering officer. He received his Ph.D. from Texas A&M University in 2002 and has been teaching structural engineering topics at the University of Wisconsin–Platteville since then. Page 11.989.1© American Society for
Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.[9] Civjan, S. (2010) "Core Teaching Aids for Structural Steel Design Courses" American Institute of Steel Construction. Retrieved from https://www.aisc.org/education/university- programs/ta-core-teaching-aids-for-structural-steel-design-courses/[10] Hale, M., Freyne, S., Durham, S. (2007) “Student Feedback And Lessons Learned From Adding Laboratory Experiences To The Reinforced Concrete Design Course” Proc. ASEE Annual Conf. & Expo., Honolulu.[11] Behrouzi, A. (2016) “Physical Artifacts in Introductory-level Reinforced Concrete Design Instruction” Proc. ASEE Annual Conf. & Expo., New Orleans.[12] Robinson, I. (2002) “Survey of Education and License Requirements for Structural
traditional in-person instruction. This prompted the faculty to schedule a series offormal discussions throughout the fall term to allow a critical review of the model. Because thisreview of the model was precipitated by the unique environment in which educators foundthemselves, this paper is largely focused on teaching and learning outside of a physicalclassroom or laboratory. This new environment may be described as remote teaching, distanceeducation, virtual instruction, or online learning. As our faculty were new to any of thesemodalities, we used these terms interchangeably but soon learned that they are each unique. Toensure clear understanding, the terms remote, virtual, and online are defined for the purposes ofthis paper in Table 1. It
Stephen Cooper, “Something Old, Something New: Integrating Engineering Practice into the Teaching of Engineering Mechanics,” Journal of Engineering Education, Apr, 1995, pp. 105-115.6. Shapira, Aviad, “Bringing the Site into the Classroom: A Construction Engineering Laboratory,” Journal of Engineering Education, Jan, 1995, pp. 1-5.7. Tongtoe, Samruam and Siegfried Holzer, “Learning Statics with Multimedia,” Annual Conference of the American Society of Engineering Education – Southeast Section, 2001. Page 12.174.11