Conference Session

ERM Potpourri I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Reem Nasr, Boston University; Steven Hall, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Peter Garik, Boston University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

2In fact, the domain of integration should be the domain for which both g(t − τ ) and u(τ ) arenon-zero.Participant S59’s response could better illustrate this participant reasoning. Participant S59obtained the same expression that participants S02 and S24 obtained for y(t), but his writtensolution was more elaborate and indicative of the reasoning underlying his response. He wrote: ∞ y(t) = g(t − τ )u(τ ) dτ −∞ −1 2 = g(t − τ )u(τ ) dτ + g(t − τ )u(τ ) dτ −∞ −1

Conference Session

Knowing our Students, Part 1

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dale Baker, Arizona State University; Stephen Krause, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

Page 12.561.4characteristics, there was a broader range of characteristics listed and therefore a longer list ofthemes.Table 1. Technical and Tinkering Skills Themes Technical Skills Themes Tinkering Skills Themes Knowledge/background Knowledge/background Technical Technical Problem(s) Problem(s) (How things) work (How things) work Think/reason Think/reason Tool(s) Tool(s) Creative Creative Analytical Analytical Interest Interest Hands-on Hands-on Curious/inquisitive Curious

Conference Session

ERM Potpourri II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Jonassen, University of Missouri; Sanjay Rebello, Kansas State University; Carlos Wexler, University of Missouri; Zdeslav Hrepic, Fort Hays State University; Gregory Triplett, University of Missouri

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

majors. We have developed a web-basedenvironment that presents pairs of problems and then asks questions about thoseproblems one at a time (see Figure 1 for sample questions related to work-energy). Page 12.1013.4Problem 1 (Giancoli 6-19) Problem 2 (Giancoli 6-23)A 0.088kg arrow is fired from a bow whose string A 0.25kg softball is pitched at 26m/s. By the time itexerts an average force of 110N over a distance of reaches the plate a distance 15m away it has slowed0.78m. to 23m/s.Neglecting air resistance, what is the speed of the Neglecting gravity, what is the

Conference Session

Service Learning Courses

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tao Hong, Purdue University; William Oakes, Purdue University; Susan Maller, Purdue University; Carla Zoltowski, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

with maximum likelihood estimation was created as inputfor the analyses due to the fact that all the items are ordinal in nature. Demographicvariables (gender and major) served as covariates or the multiple causes individually to Page 12.400.6investigate latent mean differences and potential sources of item bias. The analyses in thisstudy were conducted in two major steps. First, CFAs were conducted to fit the one-factor theoretical models to the data. Parameters were estimated and several fit indiceswere used to examine the fit of the models: Satorra-Bentler’s (S-B) chi-square statistic(χ2) 14 , ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom (χ2/df), Root

Conference Session

New Models for Teaching and Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Margherita Landucci, Liceo Artistico Statale; Fabio Garganego, Municipality of Venice

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

of formulae. For example, ourintuition tells us that the words tree or eat can not be broken down into any meaningful parts.In contrast, the words trees and eating seem to be made up of two parts: the word tree, eatplus an additional element, -s (the ‘plural’) or –ing (the ‘past o present participle’). In thesame way, our intuition tells us that the chemical word Fe can not be broken down into anymeaningful parts. In contrast, the word Fe(s) seems to be made up of two parts: the word Feplus an additional element (s), which indicates the solid state of aggregation.Inflectional versus derivative morphemes‘Tree’, ‘eat’ and ‘Fe’ are called free morphemes; while ‘–s’, ‘-ing’ and ‘(s)’ are called boundmorphemes. Two or more morphemes in

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kelli Higley, Pennsylvania State University; Thomas Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University; Peggy Van Meter, Pennsylvania State University; Christine B. Masters, Pennsylvania State University; Jonna Kulikowich, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

students are making. These errorsin turn can be used as a starting point for identifying the interventions that are required. Moreinsight into the differences among the clusters and the types of interventions required to addressthem will be obtained through ongoing analysis of the cluster results and through the think-aloudportion of the study that is currently underway.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantEEC- 0550707. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National

Conference Session

Service Learning Courses

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan Maller, Purdue University; Tao Hong, Purdue University; William Oakes, Purdue University; Carla Zoltowski, Purdue University; Paul McDermott, University of Pennsylvania

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

derive homogeneous subtypes of individual EPICSstudents, based upon their scores across measures of eight program outcomes.Specifically, the present study includes: (1) examination of how EPICS students weregrouped in terms of their evaluation on the professional skills and objectives defined byABET EC2000 Criterion 3, and analysis of the characteristics on specific profile pattern(s)found; (2) investigation of possible explanatory (e.g., demographic background variables)reasons of the way they were grouped. For instance, mean scores of the two gendergroups were compared to see if significant difference existed between male and female intypal prevalence. Additionally, future research direction was also discussed

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Paul Steif, Carnegie Mellon University; Jamie LoBue, Carnegie Mellon University; Anne Fay, Carnegie Mellon University; Burak Kara, Carnegie Mellon University; Steve Spencer, Carnegie Mellon University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

AC 2007-368: INDUCING STUDENTS TO CONTEMPLATECONCEPT-ELICITING QUESTIONS AND THE EFFECT ON PROBLEMSOLVING PERFORMANCEPaul Steif, Carnegie Mellon University PAUL S. STEIF Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pa Degrees: Sc. B. 1979, Brown University; M.S. 1980, Ph.D. 1982, Harvard University. Research area: engineering mechanics and education.Jamie LoBue, Carnegie Mellon University Undergraduate Student, Mechanical EngineeringAnne Fay, Carnegie Mellon University Director of Assessment, Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA Degrees: B.A. 1983, York University; Ph. D. 1990, University of California

Conference Session

Curricular Innovations

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Hillary Hart, University of Texas-Austin; Christy Moore, University of Texas-Austin

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

mentored to provide such labeling seemsvanishingly small. William S. Cleveland has provided useful insight on how to design graphicsfor clarity and to eliminate distortion of data,18 but his work is not generally cited in Engineeringpublications and courses.Problems with publishing research (questions about anomalous data, duplicate publication,authorship status, plagiarism, and copyright violations) have been addressed by numerousresearchers.19,20,21 Much of this work, however, has come out of the medical community, whichhas developed ethical codes in response; as an example, see the explanation of applicable codeson publication and authorship developed by the American Psychological Association.22Responsible Conduct of Research (2003)23 uses

Conference Session

Curricular Innovations

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Maura Borrego, Virginia Tech; Lynette Osborne, National Academy of Engineering; Ruth Streveler, Purdue University; Karl Smith, University of Minnesota; Ronald Miller, Colorado School of Mines

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

.Before actual measures of network growth can be discussed, the concept of strong andweak ties must be defined. Within a network or community, there are variations in thestrength of the connections between different members. For engineering education, hereare some example ties, listed in order of increasing strength: 1. heard of a person and/or her work 2. met that person once 3. talk with that person semi-regularly, regularly or frequently 4. cite the other person’s scholarly work 5. collaborate with the person on proposal(s) or conference paper(s) 6. coauthor a journal article with this personTo run a social network analysis, the researcher must decide which level is mostappropriate to the study. For example

Conference Session

ERM Potpourri I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elif Kongar, University of Bridgeport; Tarek Sobh, University of Bridgeport

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

with the conventional output/input ratio analysis. Defining basicefficiency as the ratio of weighted sum of outputs to the weighted sum of inputs, the relativeefficiency score of a test DMU p can be obtained by solving the following DEA ratio model (CCR)proposed by Charnes, et al.1: Page 12.697.4 3 s ∑v k =1 k y kp max m ∑u x

Conference Session

The Critical First Year in Engineering Education

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Pilar Pazos, Northwestern University; Denise Drane, Northwestern University; Gregory Light, Northwestern University; Annette Munkeby, Northwestern University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

.036 5.370 1.114 25.894 satm 5.036 1 .025 1.001 1.000 1.002 sex(1) 1.117 1 .291 .656 .300 1.434 minority 7.307 2 .026 minority * Completed 2 or more workshops 4.496 2 .106 gender * Completed 2 or more workshops .020 1 .886 .853 .096 7.583 Constant 4.198 1 .040 2.322a Variable(s) entered

Conference Session

Assessment and Evaluation in Engineering Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mysore Narayanan, Miami University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

and Mills’ ideas.A comparison between Dr. Boylan’s research and author’s data is shown in Appendix G.[Copyright for VARK version is held by Neil D. Fleming, Christchurch, New Zealand andCharles C. Bonwell, Green Mountain, Colorado, USA]. Page 12.289.10APPENDIX B (Rubrics courtesy of W S U, Pullman, WA) Rubrics based on Likert Scale5 Has demonstrated excellence. Has analyzed important data precisely. Has provided documentation. Has answered key questions correctly. Evidence of critical thinking ability. Has addressed problems effectively. Very good performance

Conference Session

Assessment and Evaluation in Engineering Education II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jenefer Husman, Arizona State University; Christa Lynch, Arizona State University; Jonathan Hilpert, Arizona State University; mary ann Duggan, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

sciencesreport doing so due to poor instruction [4]. Accordingly, this line of research has sparked aninterest in improving the quality of education engineering students receive by improvinginstruction through increased understanding of student learning and motivation [3]. From a motivation perspective, some of the most important steps students taketoward a career in science and engineering (S & E) are in choosing the right coursework,experiences, and mentors to get them there. Over the past few years, researchers haveamassed a substantial body of knowledge regarding how students think about their personalfutures. They argue if we want to understand why students choose one career path overanother, and why they choose to persevere or abandon

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching and Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Collura, University of New Haven; Samuel Daniels, University of New Haven; Jean Nocito-Gobel, University of New Haven; W. David Harding, University of New Haven

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

University of New Haven Faculty, Madison, CT, March, 2003. See NSF Engineering Coalitions Website: http://www.foundationcoalition.org/home/keycomponents/firstyearcurriculum.html http://www.foundationcoalition.org/home/sophomore/index.html6. Collura, M., Daniels, S., Nocito-Gobel, J., Aliane, B, Development of a MultiDisciplinary Engineering Foundation Spiral, ASEE 2004 Annual Conference, Curricular Change Issues, session 26307. Collura, M.A. A Multidisciplinary, Spiral Curricular Foundation for Engineering Programs., NSF Department-Level Reform Planning Grant, EEC-0343077, $99,928 August 14, 2003.8. Bruner, J., Toward a Theory of Instruction, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1966.9

Conference Session

Assessment and Evaluation in Engineering Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rose Marra, University of Missouri; Barbara Bogue, Pennsylvania State University; Demei Shen, University of Missouri; Kelly Rodgers, University of Missouri

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

study of first-year S&E students in 1990 found that fewer than 50percent had completed an S&E degree within five years.3 Furthermore, retention of engineeringstudents is a primary goal of Women in Engineering (WIE) and Multicultural Engineering(MEP) programs.Understanding why some students leave engineering to study another discipline at theiruniversity is an important factor in addressing low retention. Studies from Seymour and Hewitt6and Brainard and Carlin7 provided our communities with results essential to developing anunderstanding of why students from those institutions during that time period chose to leaveengineering. However, WIE, MEP, college of engineering administrators and faculty have anongoing need for these data from

Conference Session

The Critical First Year in Engineering Education

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dan Budny, University of Pittsburgh; Alaine Allen, University of Pittsburgh; Jessica Quarcoo, University of Pittsburgh

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

random roommate , would you? 100% 90% 80% 70% Percentage (%) 60% Males 50% Females 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Yes No Re s pons e Males Vs. Female 90.00% 80.00

Conference Session

Curricular Innovations

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janice McCain, Howard University; Lorraine Fleming, Howard University; Dawn Williams, Howard University; Kimarie Engerman, University of the Virgin Islands

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

persistence, goal setting, andresilience. The persistence factors highlighted in this study include students’ motivation andcommitment to their educational goals4.MotivationStudents are motivated to enter and complete engineering programs by a myriad of sources.Parents, teachers, mentors, and even other students provide the kind of guidance and supportneeded to complete an engineering degree program5. Some students require a great deal ofsupport from teachers and mentors, while others persist on limited support or under their ownvolition. In this study, students that are motivated out of “a true sense of choice, a sense offeeling free in doing what [s/he] has chosen to do” are considered dogged6.An important aspect of motivation is found in the

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

P.K. Imbrie, Purdue University; Joe Jien-Jou Lin; Tayo Oladunni, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Kenneth Reid

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

, L. Baker-Ward, E. Dietz, and P. Mohr, (1993) "A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention I. Success and Failure in the Introductory Course," Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 15-21, 1993.House, J., (2000). “Academic Background and Self-Beliefs as Predictors of Student Grade Performance in Science, Engineering and Mathematics," International Journal of Instructional Media, vol. 27, pp. 207-220, 2000.Immekus, J., S. Maller, P.K. Imbrie, N. Wu, P. McDermott, (2005). Work In Progress: An Analysis of Students’ Academic Success and Persistence Using Pre-College Factors” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, 2005.Jagacinski, C. and LeBold, W., (1981). “A Comparison of Men and Women

Conference Session

Assessment and Evaluation in Engineering Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

rebecca devasher, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Patrick Ferro, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Sudipa Mitra-Kirtley; David Mutchler, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; shannon sexton, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Anneliese Watt, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Julia Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

this option.AcknowledgementsThis project is funded in part by Microsoft Research, as well as with support fromHewlett-Packard Philanthropy, DyKnow, Inc., and our institution.Bibliography[1] DyKnow Vision, Inc. http://www.dyknowvision.com/[2]T. Angelo and P. Cross. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. 2nd ed. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1993.[3] S. Kirtley interviewed in “New Interactive Software Is an A+ Tool,” Converge Online. [Online]. Available:http://www.convergemag.com/story.php?catid=232&storyid=96769[4] S. Kirtley, D. Mutchler, J. Williams, et al, “The world is our classroom.” Presentation at the HP HigherEducation Mobile Technology Solutions Conference, November 4-5, 2004.[5] S. Kirtley, Z. Chambers

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joachim Walther, University of Queensland; David Radcliffe, University of Queensland

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

demands of professional engineering practice.Major reviews of education in the 1990’s in the USA2 and in Australia 3, resulted in significantchanges in both countries. The respective reports resulted in ABET’s Program Outcomes(EC2000)4 and the Australian Graduate Attributes5 (AMEA), which both advocated a shift of theinstructional paradigm from the previously input-, content- and process-oriented system to anoutcomes-based approach.The concept of outcomes-based education revolves around a list of desired educationaloutcomes. In the application of this concept to instructional design, the outcomes are brokendown into learning objectives6, 7, subsequently learning activities are selected and delivered inorder to achieve the learning outcomes. The

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey Froyd, Texas A&M University; Larissa Pchenitchnaia, Texas A&M University; Debra Fowler, Texas A&M University; Nancy Simpson, Texas A&M University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

intend students to learn as a result of instruction41. Theoriginal taxonomy was developed by Benjamin S. Bloom42 in the early 50s and it hassince been translated into 22 languages and is one of the most widely applied and mostoften cited references in education43. The original taxonomy represented a multi-tieredmodel of classifying thinking according to six cognitive levels of complexity:Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. Thetaxonomy was later revised by Lorin W. Anderson and David R. Krathwohl40 and the sixlevels of learning in the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (together with representative verbsused to write learning outcomes at each level of learning) are:‚ Remember (recognize, recall…)‚ Understand

Conference Session

Knowing Our Students, Part 2

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mica Hutchison, Purdue University; Deborah Follman, Purdue University; George Bodner, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

: National Academies Press, 2007.4. Bandura, A., Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control, New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997.5. Pajares, F., "Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings," Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66, No. 4,1996, pp. 543-578.6. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B., Lyons, H. and Treistman, D., "Relation of ContextualSupports and Barriers to Choice Behavior in Engineering Majors: Test of Alternative Social Cognitive Models,"Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 4, 2003, pp. 458-465.7. Schaefers, K. G., Epperson, D. L. and Nauta, M. M., "Women's Career Development: Can TheoreticallyDerived Variables Predict Persistence in Engineering Majors?," Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 44, 1997,pp

Conference Session

New Models for Teaching and Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew Morozov, University of Washington; Deborah Kilgore, University of Washington; Cynthia Atman, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

su at al rro nk er l un di ng s Figure 3: Interpretation of Midwest Floods Problem codesThe aggregate percentages of statements within the design detail and design context areas of thecoding scheme are shown in Table 5. Design detail refers to the

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tuba Pinar Yildirim, University of Pittsburgh; Joel Townsend, University of Pittsburgh; Mary Besterfield-Sacre, University of Pittsburgh; Larry Shuman, University of Pittsburgh; Harvey Wolfe, University of Pittsburgh

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

priority. At recent engineering educationconferences (e.g. Best Assessment Processes in Engineering Education Symposiums, ASEE, FIE)the number of evolving approaches for evaluating engineering programs, as well asmethodologies for measuring various student outcomes is growing more rich. Yet, severaltroublesome issues still remain. First, most of these “assessment” methods had not been fullyevaluated. Second, many focus on final products via performance appraisals particular to theoutcome(s) using rubrics as the assessment tool. Third, many engineering administrators stillvoiced concerns about the costs associated with organizing, implementing and maintaining aneffective assessment program, given limited resources of time, people (i.e. raters), and

Conference Session

Student Teams and Project-Based Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Adam Carberry, Tufts University; Merredith Portsmore, Tufts University; Chris Rogers, Tufts University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

before administering the surveys. Futureassessment of the surveys and knowledge assessment will be performed using a group of expertsin the field ensuring interrater reliability. With the changes made, the results should show Page 12.1418.9ultimately how beneficial or not participation in a program like STOMP really is.Bibliography1. Chickering, A.W. and Z.F. Gamson, Seven principles of good practice, in AAHE Bulletin. 1987. p. 3-7.2. Brown, J.S., A. Collins, and S. Duguid, Situated cognition and culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 1989. 18(1): p. 32-42.3. Dewey, J., Education and experience. 1938, New York: Simon and

Conference Session

Cognitive and Motivational Issues in Student Performance I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dawn Williams, Howard University; Lorraine Fleming, Howard University; Marcus Jones, Howard University; Ashley Griffin, Howard University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

Education, 29(4) 425-450.10. Gladieux, L. E., and Swail , W. S. (1998). Financial aid is not enough: Improving the odds of college success. College Board Review, (185), 16-21, 30-32.11. Warburton, E. C., Bugarin, R., and Nunez, A. M. (2001). Bridging the gap: Academic preparation and Postsecondary success of first-generation students. Education Statistics Quarterly, 3(3) 73-77.12. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Commissioned report for the National Symposium on Post Secondary Student Success: Spearheading a dialogue on student success.13. Howe, D (1996). Too much homework? I tell my daughter to strike. New Statesman (129) 4471(22).14. Kuh, G.D. (1993). In

Conference Session

ERM Potpourri II

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shane Brown; Devlin Montfort; Kip Findley

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

of MaterialsAbstractStudents often have far less conceptual understanding in core engineering courses thanfaculty assume. The first wide-spread application of the Force Concept Inventory in theearly 1980’s highlighted students’ lack of understanding in fundamental physicsprinciples. Recently, educators have been reevaluating student understanding of conceptsin the standard science and engineering curriculum using concept inventory instrumentsin topics such as thermodynamics, mechanics, and fluid mechanics. The objective of thisstudy is to develop a methodology to observe specific examples of difficulty inconceptual understanding which could be used to infer specific student misconceptions.To achieve this task a pilot study was undertaken

Conference Session

New Models for Teaching and Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Malgorzata Zywno, Ryerson University; Mary Frances Stewart

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

AC 2007-1608: A SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS'INTERACTIONS WITH AN ONLINE LEARNING OBJECT IN THE CONTEXT OFTHEIR LEARNING STYLESMalgorzata Zywno, Ryerson University MALGORZATA S. (GOSHA) ZYWNO Gosha Zywno, M.Eng. (U. of Toronto), Ph.D. (Glasgow Caledonian U.), is a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Ryerson University. Dr. Zywno is a recipient of several university, national and international teaching excellence and achievement awards, including the 2005 ASEE Sharon Keillor Award, 2002 3M Teaching Fellowship and 2005 Canadian Engineers’ Medal for Distinction in Engineering Education. Her research interests are in active, collaborative learning with technology. She has

Conference Session

The Critical First Year in Engineering Education

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Linda Lindsley, Arizona State University; Veronica Burrows, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

AC 2007-750: DEVELOPMENT OF AN ONLINE TEXTBOOK AND RESEARCHTOOL FOR FRESHMAN ENGINEERING DESIGNLinda Lindsley, Arizona State UniversityVeronica Burrows, Arizona State University Page 12.527.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Development of an Online Textbook and Research Tool for Freshman Engineering DesignAbstractIn many engineering design texts, the solution(s) to design problems are provided along with theproposed problem. Therefore, the student will read about the solution rather than take the time tothink about the problem being presented. This paper explores the development of and pilot studydone on an online textbook and