-levelcourses, the lab managers distribute the appropriate lab equipment to the remote sites at the startof the semester. Remote student laboratory check-offs are typically handled by faculty andstudent alone via webcams and web conferencing software during scheduled office hours.Next we sought to improve office hours for distance courses through the use of webconferencing software and pen-tablet technology which allowed students and faculty to write onthe same electronic piece of paper.4 With the growth of the program, we expanded our use oftechnology to allow real-time troubleshooting of lab equipment/work and the assessment ofhigher-level design projects at a distance.5After spending the last several years about improving distance course logistics
midterm exams. As a result thestudents do not put a uniform effort in learning during the course but, under pressure from theirother courses, apply themselves to the EFW course for only a short period of time just before theexams, resulting in an uneven and incomplete learning.To overcome the problems described above we are developing a conceptually novel one-semester EFW course for engineering junior undergraduate students and establishing a newundergraduate EFW laboratory. This course is a four credit-hour lecture/lab course (three credithours are for the lecture component and one credit hour for the lab component of the combinedcourse). A novel style of teaching this EFW course is based on the interactive approach –experiment – theory
, microelectromechanical systems, and the electrical and magnetic properties of materials.James Drewniak, Missouri University of Science and Technology James L. Drewniak (S’85-M’90-SM’01-Fellow’07) received B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1985, 1987, and 1991, respectively. He joined the Electrical Engineering Department at the University of Missouri-Rolla in 1991 where he is one of the principle faculty in the Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory. His research and teaching interests include electromagnetic compatibility in high speed digital and mixed signal designs, electronic packaging, and electromagnetic compatibility
school, and community college students to expose and increase their interest in pursuing Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Dr. Astatke travels to Ethiopia every summer to provide training and guest lectures related to the use of the mobile laboratory technology and pedagogy to enhance the ECE curriculum at five different universities.Dr. Mohamed F. Chouikha, Howard University Dr. Mohamed Chouikha is a professor and chair of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineer- ing at Howard University. He received his M.S. and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Colorado–Boulder. Dr. Chouikha’s research interests include machine learning, intelligent control, and
Electromagnetics, Physics of Semiconductor Devices, High Frequency Circuit Design, Antenna Design and Analog Electronics. Prior to joining WNE, Dr. Burke was with the EM Observables Division of Mission Research Corporation (MRC) from 1995 to 2000. From 1992 to 1995, Dr. Burke was with the MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation (MSC) Corporation. From 1990 to 1992, Dr. Burke was with Compact Software as a senior research engineer. From 1987 to 1990, Dr. Burke was with the Microwave Electronics Laboratory at the University of Massachusetts. From 1984 to 1986, Dr. Burke was with the Hughes Aircraft Corporation. Page 26.57.1
and applied electronics. Dr. Yahya previously served on the faculties of KFUPM, KSA (94-98); Tuskegee Univ., USA (99-2000) and Sharjah Univ., UAE (2003-2009). He taught more than twelve graduate and undergraduate courses and developed several courses and laboratories. Dr. Yahya was a member of technical staff at the Advanced Optical Network- ing Group, Lucent Technologies during 2001 and 2002. He was responsible for designing, testing and evaluating optoelectronic subsystems to support the company telecom business. Dr. Yahya’s research interests include Smart metering and energy conservation; Performance monitoring and optimization of solar PV power systems; Powering Methods for sensors and mobile devices based on
International Conference Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2001.7. P.S. Hong, D.V. Anderson, D.B. Williams, J.R. Jackson, T.P. Barnwell, M.H. Hayes, R.W. Schafer, and J.D. Echard, “DSP for Practicing Engineers: A case study in internet course delivery,” IEEE Trans. on Education, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 301-310, August 2004.8. LabVIEW User Manual, http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/320999b.pdf9. LabVIEW Run-time Engine, http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/epd/p/id/485010. NI Speedy-33 User Manual, http://digital.ni.com/manuals.nsf/websearch/104061C41B6A2362862570460052AEE911. Sharon Gannot and Vadim Avrin, "A Simulink© and Texas Instruments C6713® based Digital Signal Processing Laboratory", The European
development positions in industry. From 1991 to 2002, he was a Staff Engineer with Tellabs, Naperville, IL. Additionally, in 1991, he was with AT&T Bell Telephone Laboratories, Naperville; from 1988 to 1991, he was with R. R. Donnelley & Sons, Lisle, IL; and from 1985 to 1986, he was with Zenith Electronics, Glenview, IL. His interests include adaptive filtering, speech enhancement, wireless and wireline communications, and engineering education. Dr. Dunne is a member of the IEEE, Eta Kappa Nu and ASEE. Chirag Parikh, Grand Valley State University Chirag Parikh is an Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Grand Valley State University, Grand Rapids, Michigan. He
trendcontinues, the learning curve for tomorrows’ engineers grows steeper and the gap betweendesigning embedded systems in industry and teaching embedded systems development at auniversity widens. Educators are therefore challenged to adapt to advances in embedded systemswhile maintaining courseware that is broken into simple building blocks capable of maintainingcontinuity along the growth path. This requires a rich hands-on curriculum that encapsulatesmodular hardware, software, and courseware that can scale from fundamental concepts to moreadvanced topics.This paper introduces a modular demonstration, development and learning hardware platformand an example set of progressive laboratory exercises that help to meet this challenge. Theplatform includes
principlesthey are meant to illustrate become lost in a blizzard of factoids about perishable tools andtechniques that have little long-term value.Various drags also combine to make curricular change difficult. Sources of drag include thelogistics of laboratory technologies. These tend to be expensive in dollars, with price magnifiedby the number of copies needed in the teaching environment. Another expense is the time spentby faculty and technicians to install and make new technologies functional for teaching purposes,including time to learn new tools and techniques and to address in advance the problems thatstudents are likely to encounter. The latter costs are particularly hard to quantify and articulatefor purposes of resource allocation within the
use of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) providedby manufacturers and the second approach is to teach the course with the systems approachwithout focusing on hardware, instruction set, and assembly language. Along the same lines, anexample of introducing IoT technology in an embedded networking course, specifically using theTexas Instruments (TI) ARM-based Connected Launchpad is documented in [6]. The design ofan Embedded Systems Laboratory to support rapid prototyping of robotics and IoT isdocumented in [7]. An interesting and creative approach was used to disseminate the informationneeded for both traditional laboratory experiments and student design projects; an extensive Wikisite called the “mbed cookbook Wiki” was used to provide
Engineering, California Baptist University, Class of 2020, gibsonfleming@outlook.com c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 An Electronics Lab Project—Tutorial and Design of Printed Circuit Board “big_blinky”Abstract - Laboratory projects can be strategically used to improve the Electrical and ComputerEngineering (ECE) curriculum across all four years, according to National Science Foundation(NSF) research in which we participated. In this “spiral model” approach, lab component themesare introduced in the freshman year and revisited with increased sophistication andinterconnection in the following years. Labs are thus used as a “cohesive framework” thatconnects and
attitudes in students are developed using structuredlectures, laboratory session, and projects. For most of the students, it is very difficult to see theconnection between topics covered in the lectures or in the course. Thus, there is an urgent needfor focusing student attention towards the fundamental or core ideas related to the topic underdiscussion as take away points. We implement a teaching approach with “thought bubbles”,commonly used in arts and cartoons, to present core ideas to students as discussion questions.“Thought bubbles” (aka clouds) are used to pose as introductory questions for initiatinglecture/discussion and as concluding thoughts. This approach helps student to be attentive and tograsp what will be covered during the session
(Design and testing of CE, CB) The following two projects illustrate how the lab projects were structured. Sample Lab Exercises The purpose of the first project was for the students to use their understanding of basic op amp circuits to design a linear transfer function circuit which converts a DC input voltage over a certain range into a DC output voltage from 0 to 0.5, 1, or 1.7 volts. The linear transfer function circuit consisted of a non-inverting amplifier, a summing amplifier, and a voltage follower providing a DC reference voltage using a Zener diode. The objectives of this laboratory were to design, simulate, construct, and test the op amp circuit designs outside of the classroom and then assemble these sub
. IntroductionTwo digital design courses are offered at Bucknell University: one is entitled “DigitalSystem Design” and the other is called “Advanced Digital Design.” Both courses consistof three hours of lectures and laboratories weekly. Digital System Design, offered to thejunior class, focuses on logic synthesis; schematic capture is used for design entry.“Advanced Digital Design,” offered to senior and graduate students, addresses system-level design methodologies; the detailed breakdown consists of VHDL, register-transfer-level design methodologies, advanced topics in logic synthesis, and technology mapping.This paper addresses the pedagogic considerations of teaching “Advanced DigitalDesign” using VHDL.The design description of a digital system may
primarily on laboratory time: the first third of the course is 90% lectureand the last two thirds of the course are based on 90% laboratory time. During the last two thirdsof the course, we provide students with the necessary references, lecture for the first 10 minutes,and direct their learning using experimentation. We are currently using the Board of EducationBasic Stamp platform to teach majors and non-majors how to control and integrate various inputand output components (such as sensors, speakers, lights, motors, etc.) using microcontrollers.Despite this being the first year robotics were introduced to non-majors as the last of their threecourse sequence, over 75% of 36 students surveyed indicated that they would recommended theirpeers to
Member of Tau Beta Pi, and a Life Senior Member of IEEE. His research activities include organizational process improvement and unmanned aerial vehicles.Allan Arb, U.S. Air Force Academy PhD, received his BSEE from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1991. Upon graduation, he was stationed in San Antonio, TX where he conducted research and analysis on various military and commercial radar and weapon systems. He graduated from the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) with an MSEE in 1996 and a Ph.D. from AFIT in 2001. He has spent time in the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory, and is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer
problemsolving skills. In a regular quarter, the course typically has 150 to 250 registered studentsencompassing freshmen to fifth year seniors, resulting in a wide distribution of the studentdemographic. ENG6 is a platform that allows the largest number of students to be reached in theshortest amount time.In ENG6, four major components determine a student’s grade: weekly homework assignments,weekly computer laboratory sessions, two projects, and a final exam. Homework assignments aredesigned to help student mastery of technical programming concepts and MATLAB languagemechanics. The multiple choice final exam is employed to test student understanding offundamental MATLAB programming concepts. Lab sessions in traditional offerings are optionaland are
59% passage rate from theprevious year’s traditional face-to face lecture class. Fall semester 2012 flipped classroominstruction was augmented with enhanced content and problem-based learning in Spring 2013,resulting in a passage rate of 87%, while the content of the course nearly doubled. For Fall 2013,an in-class laboratory segment using National Instruments myDAQ was added to the Spring2013 version of the course to include the hands-on approach. The passage rate of 91% wasachieved. It appears that adaptation of high quality MOOC content using a blended approach inconjunction with a highly structured, in-class team-based, problem-based and hands-on approachcan produce significant benefits in effectively improving student learning and
students may enjoyopportunities to reinforce course topics through hands-on learning, such as what would be foundin classroom laboratories. Others might benefit more from practice problems that allow them toreinforce course topics through problem solving. Providing a plentiful variety of choicesbenefits students in picking and choosing how they might best learn course concepts7.Third, course concepts should be designed to encourage interest, and thus, stimulate intrinsicmotivation among students. Providing course materials and activities that are applicable andmeaningful to students’ future coursework and/or careers encourages students to becomeinterested in course topics because they are closely related to future goals. Fourth, studentsshould
. Page 24.1216.2In addition to its pedagogical role, this library also serves a practical role in providing studentshands-on experience using microcontroller peripherals in the course of their laboratory exercisesand also scales to enable students to employ multiple microcontroller peripherals in the course oftheir capstone design experience. This library has been used since late 2008, and Google Analyt-ics numbers for the library’s website give 84,000 visits since January 2009, with approximately52% of these visits originating from within the United States.2. BackgroundSweller’s Cognitive Load Theory5, 6, 7 (CLT) provides a framework for understanding why stu-dents learn (or do not learn) new concepts and problem solving strategies. CLT focuses
students who completed the course in their second year) and one laboratoryengineer. The expected course commitment from students is 13 hours per week: pre-classpreparation including reading, numerical tasks and online quizzes (2-3 hours/week), classeswith active learning methods (245min on Mondays and 445min on Tuesdays, a total of 6teaching hours in ProLab per week), laboratory sessions (3-4 hours fortnightly), andcompulsory assignments (3-4 hours fortnightly). All assignments must be satisfactorilycompleted for students to be allowed to sit the final examination, which counts for 100% of thecourse grade.Students who fail the end-of-semester final examination are entitled to take a resit-examinationthree months later. If they pass the resit
, and develop asynchronously9.In engineering education, there are two major types of courses: theoretical and experimental.Theoretical courses are usually held in the classroom. All the students sit and listen to theinstructor. Experimental courses are usually held in the laboratory, and students can movearound freely. Theoretical courses are predominantly an auditory environment in which thecurriculum, textbooks, teaching methods, and the teachers themselves are sequential. The over-reliance on auditory-sequential methods in these courses works against the visual-spatiallearners. Laboratory courses are predominantly a kinesthetic environment. The students who arevisual-spatial learner face disadvantages in mastering material in the normal
middle school, high school, and community college students to expose and increase their interest in pursuing Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Dr. Astatke travels to Ethiopia every summer to provide training and guest lectures related to the use of the mobile laboratory technology and pedagogy to enhance the ECE curriculum at five different universities.Prof. Petru Andrei, Florida A&M University/Florida State University Dr. Petru Andrei is Professor and Graduate Program Director in the Department of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering at the Florida A&M University and Florida State University (FAMU-FSU) College of c American Society for Engineering Education
logic before introducingstudents to the ‘higher-level’ topics of microprocessors and the Internet Of Things (IOT). Analternative and potentially more motivating approach is to reverse this sequence. This paperdescribes the design of a new hardware kit and sequence of laboratory exercises which aim togive students hands-on experience with Embedded systems and IOT at an early stage in theiracademic careers. The kit is based on a low-cost, wireless-networked, 32-bit ARMmicrocontroller with integrated Cloud support. The sequence of lab exercises which buildincrementally on one another is described in detail, and the experience gained running them forthe first time is reported. Outcomes relate to the ability to extend knowledge from an
CoursesBelow is a brief description of the four required courses, as well as a description of the virtuallaboratory in which all labs for the three core technical courses are run. Several of the electivesand graduate courses also are implemented in the environment. More details about the coursesincluding a recent syllabus can be found on the Iowa State University Information Assurancewebsite [4]Virtual Laboratory – ISELabThe ISELab virtual laboratory provides a real world networking environment for students. TheISELab provides 120 publicly addressable IP ranges “borrowed” from the Internet. These IPranges are connected to the backbone “Internet” network within the ISELab to allow students towork in or run their own “corporate” network. ISELab is air
outcomes were assessed for the actual course (F and J),but all could be considered. These assessment tools are representative examples, and moreexamples could be created. The new ABET outcomes would also be able to map similarly to thecourse activities. Student Outcome Potential Assessment Tool(s) Mathematics: cryptology proof; science: electromagnetic (A) An ability to apply knowledge of mathemat- side-channel attack recreation or simulation; engineering: ics, science, and engineering any of the laboratory assignments listed in Table 1 (B
Paper ID #18226Correlation of Admission Data to Undergraduate Student Success in Electri-cal EngineeringDr. Harry O. Aintablian, University of Washington, Bothell Harry Aintablian is a Lecturer of Electrical Engineering. He has a Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engi- neering from Ohio University. He has eighteen years of experience in aerospace power electronics/power systems at Jet Propulsion Laboratory and at Boeing Space Systems. He has five years of full-time teaching experience in electrical engineering. His research interests include the application of power electronics to space systems and to alternative energy
additional weekly 50 minute recitation section.At the conclusion of the course, all students took a survey. The survey was designed by the firstauthor and refined by a faculty member in the College of Education at Florida InternationalUniversity. Survey questions were focused on labs, overall course experience, lectures, andinstructional methods.The majority of the questions were either yes/no responses or based on a 1-5 Likert scale with 1being the lowest and 5 being the highest response. The following questions, which required a 1-5 response were asked of students in all three sections: • How effective were the Laboratories in learning about circuits? • How confident do you feel in performing the following tasks on your own after
Paper ID #13086A Concise Antennas Course based on a Single Semester of ElectromagneticsPreparationDr. Steven S. Holland, Milwaukee School of Engineering Steven S. Holland (M ’13) was born in Chicago, IL, in 1984. He received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from the Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE), Milwaukee, WI, in 2006, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and computer engineering from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, in 2008 and 2011 respectively. From 2006 to 2011, he was a Research Assistant working in the Antennas and Propagation Laboratory (APLab), Department of Electrical and Computer