literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101-109.[8] Draper, S.W., Cargill, J., & Cutts, Q. (2002). Electronically enhanced classroom interaction. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 18(1), 13-23.[9] Van Dijk, L., et al, (2001). Interactive Lectures in Engineering Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 15-28[10] Simon, B., et al, (2010). Experience Report: Peer Instruction in Introductory Computing, SIGCSE ’10 Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Milwaukee, WI, March 10-13.[11] Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction, A User’s Manual, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.[12] Eugene, J. (2002). Learning from past and
performance measures, the working group is considering thedevelopment of pre- and post-tests that can be used by instructors to evaluate the extent to whichcourses are achieving the learning outcomes. Page 15.417.11TABLE 3: Preliminary knowledge table for traffic operationsCONCEPTSBlooms: Comprehension (terms + linkage); Uninterrupted flow: Fundamental traffic flowWiggins: Interpretation modeling/relationships • General speed/flow/density model (parameters q, k, and u) • Greenshields realization: linear model
a common goal (e) an ability to identify, formulate, (p) an ability to identify and (b) An ability to analyze a problem, f. an ability to identify, analyze, and solve and solve engineering problems solve applied science and identify and define the broadly-defined engineering technology problems computing requirements problems appropriate to its solution (f) an understanding of professional (q) an understanding of (e) An understanding of i. an understanding of and a commitment to
facultymember may grade any or all of the teams’ presentations and submittals. The facultymember scores are averaged and used for the team grade. A sample grading rubric, forthe final submittal in Fall quarter 2011, is shown in Figure 1.P3 Submittal /PresentationSubmittal Weight Presentation Weight3.1, 2 Letter and TOC 10 Introduction 53.3 Executive Summary 5 Delivery Style 103.4 Respondent's Qual’s 10 Graphical Quality 203.5 JV Proposal 30 Content Quality 203.6 Project Overview 25 Q+A 103.7 Conceptual Design
, 2009.8 Luo, Q., Qi, C., and Zhou, S. (Dec. 2009) Multimedia Application for Fluid Mechanics Teaching.ComputationalIntelligence and Software Engineering (CiSE). December, 2009.9 Beauchamp, G.& Kennewell, S. (2010) Interactivity in the Classroom and Its Impact on Learning,Computers &Education, 54(3) 759-766.10 Wiggins, G. P., McTighe, J. (2005). Ch. 1, Backward Design? in Understanding By Design, Wiggins andMcTighe, eds. Expanded 2nd edition. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.11 The National Academy of Sciences (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: ExpandedEdition. USA.12 Qualtrics Website: http://www.qualtrics.com
procedures. Page 22.75.5 Table 2. Traffic Operations Knowledge TableConcepts Uninterrupted flow: Fundamental traffic flowBlooms: Comprehension modeling/relationshipsWiggins: Interpretation • General speed/flow/density model (parameters q, k, and u) • Greenshields realization: linear model relating speed and density • Modified speed-flow model as used in the Highway Capacity Manual • Capacity • Levels of service as well as the
change required. C Major curricula change required. O No opinion regarding feasibility.Table 1: The acceptability and feasibility rubric for the CEPC survey completed by the CivilEngineering Department Heads.Each participant was invited to make free-form comments on any of the criteria at the end of thesurvey. The presentation was interspersed with a lively question and answer session. There wasa fair amount of skepticism from the audience in the Q&A session, punctuated with some openhostility to the prospect of more demanding accreditation program criteria. However, the post-session survey results from 59 respondents reflected a more balanced view of this effort.Figure 1 shows the survey
ng un rd bj ec ue al oa ni O m n tT Q ar B
helped me to remember how to find I, Q, etc…. I looked back at it last night.” • “As an individual who had difficulty with Problem Set Zero initially, reworking the problem set really helped cement the ideas.” • “It was helpful. I am glad it was at the start of the semester so I had time to re-work the problems on it.” • “For me I didn’t remember anything from CE300 so it was an excellent review and helps me to better understand the material.” • “Delaying it until we start using the covered material would make sure it is fresh in our minds.” • “Problem Set Zero was so long ago and there was so much material in this block that I don’t think it had an effect at all.”Consideration of both