as well as a thorough review of the curriculum and ways ofeffectively integrating engineering into their existing courses. Teachers are also required to takeone technical elective. These technical electives are typically offered as a part of the "SummerAcademy". In 2013, two electives were offered - one in the area of energy and the other in thefundamentals of the electrical and computer engineering disciplines. This paper presents anoverview of the "Fundamentals of Electrical and Computing Systems" course, the topicscovered, feedback received and some reflections based on the first offering of the course. A totalof seven in-service middle and high school teachers took the course during the first offering ofthe course in summer 2013
text showing a instructor message on the board in a classroomtype setting with an audience of two: an antenna engineer and optical engineer. The antennaengineer expresses surprise “Is that all, I can’t believe it” while the optical engineer issupposedly not surprised as he is shown in a “snooze” state. Although the cartoon is probably notintended to be taken too seriously, it does reflect the typical level of emphasis given in these twodisciplines for the use of the Fourier Transform in problem solving. This conclusion is supportedby reference to a sample of four highly respected texts in the areas of electromagnetic fields andantennas5,16,17,18. In three5,16,18 of the four the Fourier approach is not mentioned. In the fourthcase17 it is
and between 1 and 6output devices/actuators. Of particular interest in Table 7 is the number of different types ofsensors and actuators used across all of the teams in this junior-level course. Since the courseincluded frequent opportunities for teams to share what they had learned and receive peer Page 25.1051.11feedback along the way through presentations and progress demonstrations, they were able tolearn vicariously from other projects. In addition, some teams had members with particularinterests or specialties that were reflected in the “above and beyond” features of their designs.For example, the Smart Bowler team had
concept drawing of the game system on each vehicle to support thecompetition. As can be seen, it includes a fixed forward-pointing laser, a 360-degree lightdetector, a ZigBee wireless modem, status lights that reflect team affiliation and vehicle state,and a microprocessor to control the game system. Shots are made by orienting the truck to pointat another game system (on a truck or a team’s base) and then sending a message using lightpulses. Messages are sent in the IRDA standard physical layer serial format9, but a low-powerred (650 nm) laser was employed rather than infrared. The message is one byte in length,including fields with message type (two bits), the team of the shooter (two bits), and the vehiclenumber of the shooter (four bits). A
at Cal Poly both the electrical andcomputer engineering students take a basic electronics manufacturing course in their freshmanyear that includes the design and assembly of printed circuit boards before they begin theircircuit analysis courses. Therefore, the PCB module incorporated into the EE 242 lab is theirsecond experience with PCB design and assembly. The authors believe that this likely accountsfor the higher pre-test scores on Question 47 which may account for the large p-value on theinteraction of Question 47 for the EE 242 experimental group. Therefore, the results forQuestion 47 from EE 361 better reflect the experience of engineering students that have no priorexperience with PCB design and manufacturing.Table 6. Summary of the
in this figure. The “Other” 90% 15.5% 16.5%reasons included sleeping in, subway delays and 100% 7.7% 13.8%commuting, and having a test on that day. Themajor difference in the “Too much work” Figure 3. Primary Reason for Missing Lecturesresponses could be due to the fact that one ofthe other courses in this term modestly reducedtheir design project requirements from 2012 to2013. However, this is likely only part of thereason given that the change was not as drasticas the data reflects. The fact that 16% of theinverted cohort chose “Too early” is likely dueto the fact that of the three lecture sections, onesection did have a 9 AM class, while for thetraditional
of software versions, missing software or hardware components, access rights to drivers, etc. would cause many problems and shall be tested prior to the lab sessions. 2) It is important to clearly state deadlines and consequences of late submission. A lack of hard deadlines and late-submission consequences was also assumed by many students. Despite repeated reminders, a lot of students forgot to submit the model files they used in the lab. The solution was to grade late submissions much more harshly; it is fine if a student needs more time to complete a report, but the quality of the submission must reflect this extra time spent. 3) It is important to clearly specify expectations in a grading rubric
offering.AcknowledgementsThis material is based in part upon work supported by the National ScienceFoundation General & Age-Related Disabilities Engineering (GARDE)Program under grants CBET–1067740 and UNS–1512564. Opinions, findings,conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authors acknowledge the students that participated in this effort and their work in termsof example images and data that they provided for this paper. This material was included withthe written permission of the students. References[1] "iHealth Feel Wireless Blood Pressure Monitor," iHealth Labs Inc., 2017, https://ihealthlabs.com/blood-pressure-monitors/wireless
conceived problems not yet faced, but looming on the horizon;issues in the news; issues facing the Coast Guard on a daily basis and issues being discussed inthe current module in the class lectures.When presented with the course’s new outline, the other E&CE section members enthusiasticallyagreed with the course’s new direction. The course changes were submitted to the Academy’sCurriculum committee and then the Academic Council who both approved the changesbeginning the fall semester of 2004. To reflect the course’s new direction, in the fall of 2005 thecourse name was changed to “Introduction to Electrical and Computer Engineering” (IECE).Appendix C includes an overview of the new course’s lesson plans.FeedbackDuring the three semesters since
perceptions about the projectassignments and their educational value, the following open-ended questions were asked in the post-project surveys:Q11. What was the most valuable aspect of lab project #?Q12. What was the least valuable aspect of lab project #?Q13. Use the space below to add any additional comments.The following student comments are grouped based on the educational aspects of the projects, andprovide insight on what the students’ valued. The responses and feedback were positive and in favor ofthe projects educational value. Negative comments reflected the perceived difficulty of the projects. Themajority of the negative comments related to the lack of procedures and instructions.1) Aspect of Lab Design Project: As a complementary
electrical phenomena persisted fromfreshman to senior levels. Novices reported that this mental model already was created beforeentering college. The ‘product’ of such an incorrect understanding reflects the popular analogy ofelectricity and water. When learning new material about the ‘invisible’ world, students sought‘visible’ analogies in the observable world. Often the water analogy was presented by instructorsor in books or students made this assumption by themselves because it is “visible”. Althoughstudents understood that the water analogy cannot elucidate all electric properties, theyrepeatedly applied features of plumbing-systems to electrical circuits and diagrams. At thenovice level, the water analogy is widely used but does not have yet a
, nodal analysis, KCL, KVL. This module incorporates all modules leading up to this and could possibly represent a final exam. 6. Summer 2011 Proposed Course Design6.1 Overall Course design goalsA metastudy by the Department of Education yielded the result that promoting students’reflections of their level of understanding is more effective than online learning that does notprovide trigger for reflection. 13 The design of the summer 2011 tries to incorporate thisphilosophy wherever possible. Feedback and prior research from faculty, staff and students fromBinghamton University’s ECE department and other institutions will be used. It is our goal tointegrate all these different ideas and concepts in a very clear and concise manner
material are thoseof the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References 1. J. Mitola; G. Maguire; ―Cognitive radio: Making software radios more personal,‖ IEEE Personal Communications, Aug. 1999. 2. S. Haykin; Cognitive radio: Brain-empowered wireless communications,‖ IEEE Journal in Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 23, pp. 1-20. 2005. 3. E. Seymour; A. Hunter; S Laursen; T. Deantoni; ―Establishing the benefits of research experiences for Page 22.1548.17 undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three year study.‖ Science Education, vol. 88
activelyinvolved in the learning process (based on the results of each survey feedback), which is inagreement with its decision to register in the course. The students feel very comfortable learningat its own pace but not so much deciding in what order to learn. It is very plausible that, whilethe course materials and virtual lab are available at any time, the sequential presentation of someof the scientific content of the modules limit in what order the modules could be completed. Thetasks to complete each module are clearly stated and the perceived interactivity of the course andexperiments reflects that the choices that students make are meaningful and not just not for thesake of making choices. However, in general, the responses amongst the surveyed