a professor at both Purdue University and Arizona State Univer- sity, Mary’s specialty is computer and technical graphics. Dr. Sadowski received her B.S. from Bowling Green State University, her M.S. from The Ohio State University, and her Ph.D. from Purdue University.Dr. Sheryl A. Sorby, Ohio State University Dr. Sheryl Sorby is currently a Professor of STEM Education at The Ohio State University and was re- cently a Fulbright Scholar at the Dublin Institute of Technology in Dublin, Ireland. She is a professor emerita of Mechanical Engineering-Engineering Mechanics at Michigan Technological University and the PI or coPI on more than $9M in grant funding, most for educational projects. She is the former As
peer assessment plan, students handed a print of the multiview drawing in tothe instructor at the beginning of lab then the assignments were redistributed to the students sothey could assess the drawings and mark any errors. Correctly identifying the majority of theerrors on the drawing they marked up was part of each student’s grade. Actual grading andassigning point values to the errors was not part of the peer review, this was done by theinstructor.Grades on the individual assignments along with final project and exam scores were compared tothose from previous semesters. Grades on the individual assignments improved significantly butthere were no significant differences in the exam grades or overall grades. This may be due, inpart, to the
three dimensions is a cognitive skill that is linked to success in engineering.Spatial visualization skill and its correlation with students’ success has received much attentionin technical education. The ability to understand important topics in engineering drawing such asorthographic projection, isometric drawing, hidden views, and sectional views is very critical asit represents the fundamentals of engineering drawing education. However, research shows thatsome learners with poor spatial ability had trouble understanding basic fundamental concepts ofengineering drawing. This study investigates the correlation between spatial visualization abilityand academic success in a Technical Drawing course which has three sections (i) hand drafting,(ii
’ to test and refinepolytechnic approaches and to help drive the reformation of the technology learning experience.During the fall semester of 2014, the PPI began with its first cohort of freshmen students, self-selected from departments across the College of Technology. The PPI experience incorporatedcombined studio and seminar experiences that provided collaborative learning opportunities intechnology, programming, English, and communications, with an emphasis on project-basedproblems. One of the novel approaches taken by the PPI was the elimination of course-basedobjectives, and the adoption of competency-based goals in their place. The faculty members whoparticipated in the PPI were released from other teaching loads and were designated as
broadening of the initial perception hasoccurred. The survey is conducted anonymously but pre and post survey can be associatedthrough the use of random codes. The project was determined to be exempt from review by theInstitutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (IRB).Some survey questions are listed in Figure 3. Page 26.392.4Figure 2 - Learning process diagramFigure 3 – excerpt of introductory surveyIn this initial study, the research team decided to focus on sketching, spatial visualization andvisual expression as an essential preparation for the introduction of CAD and modeling tools.The intent is to expand this
which improve the efficiencyof delivery of course content while maximizing value-added student activities where interactionswith the instructor and TAs are prized. These techniques include a “flipped classroom” model, on-line video instructional materials, efficient content modularization and customizability, automatedfeedback, integrated assessment mechanisms and team-based in-class activities. A high proportionof class time is structured to support creative project work where students appropriate CAD skillsby applying them to creative problem solving. It is the opinion of the authors that this blendedlearning methodology has the potential to provide a just-in-time delivery of instruction which canbe customized to meet an individual student’s
psychological tools on their own 7. Experts,within the context of this theory, have mastered the signs and symbols of their culture. Forengineering and technical graphics, experts may have mastered several languages (e.g.,orthographic projection, the semantics of a computer-aided design program, geometricdimensioning and tolerancing, etc. – Figure 1). Educators are responsible for helping studentslearn the languages of graphics within a collaborative environment where the students can seehow this language fits within the larger context of an industry or enterprise 6. Figure 1. Signs and Tools within Engineering Graphics.Cultural-Historical Theory and Engineering GraphicsEngeström developed an activity theory based on Vygotsky’s
). Visiting Assistant Professor: Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts – Low- ell, Lowell, MA, (2003-2004). Design and Advanced Materials Engineer: Advanced Mechanical Design Section, G.E. Aircraft Engines, General Electric Corp., Cincinnati, OH, (2000-2002). Project Engineer and Program Manager: Composites Technology Division, Foster-Miller, Inc., Waltham, MA, (1998-2000).John Glossner, Daniel Webster College Dr. John Glossner is Associate Professor of Computer Science at Daniel Webster College. He also serves as CEO of Optimum Semiconductor Technologies. Prior to joining OST John co-founded Sandbridge Technologies and served as EVP & CTO. Prior to Sandbridge, John managed both
Product Design & Entrepreneurship course, where students develop their own product concepts.Dr. Lelli Van Den Einde, University of California, San Diego Van Den Einde is a Teaching Professor at UCSD. She teaches core undergraduate courses in Structural Engineering, is the chair of the ABET committee responsible for the continuous curricular improvement process, incorporates education innovations into courses (Peer Instruction, Project-based learning), is responsible for TA training (preparing next generation faculty), serves as faculty advisor to student or- ganizations, hears cases of academic misconduct as a member of the Academic Integrity Review Board, and is committed to fostering a supportive environment for
taught a wide variety of engineering courses in First Year Engineering and Mechanical Engineering at Ohio State. She has received four teaching awards in the last three years at both the College and the Departmental level at OSU.Dr. Sheryl A. Sorby, Ohio State University Dr. Sheryl Sorby is currently a Professor of STEM Education at The Ohio State University and was re- cently a Fulbright Scholar at the Dublin Institute of Technology in Dublin, Ireland. She is a professor emerita of Mechanical Engineering-Engineering Mechanics at Michigan Technological University and the PI or coPI on more than $9M in grant funding, most for educational projects. She is the former As- sociate Dean for Academic Programs in the College
of Technology in Dublin, Ireland. She is a professor emerita of Mechanical Engineering-Engineering Mechanics at Michigan Technological University and the PI or coPI on more than $9M in grant funding, most for educational projects. She is the former As- sociate Dean for Academic Programs in the College of Engineering at Michigan Tech and she served at the National Science Foundataion as a Program Director in the Division of Undrgraduate Education from January 2007 through August 2009. Prior to her appointment as Associate Dean, Dr. Sorby served as chair of the Engineering Fundamentals Department at Michigan Tech. In this capacity, she was responsi- ble for the development and delivery of the newly adopted First
students learn the computer-aided manufacturing programFeatureCAM. In the laboratory portion of the course students are guided through the process forcreating numerical code for the machining of various components; this course is denoted – CAMCourse. There is also a project that entails students creating the required numerical code for themanufacture of an artifact of their choosing of moderate complexity.As mentioned previously, the Revised Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Visualization ofRotations (Revised PSVT:R)20 is used to assess spatial ability in this work. The Revised PSVT:Ris a multiple choice test that consists of 30 questions that ask respondents to evaluate how one setof rotations is related to another set of rotations. An example
course, students learnthe basic skills necessary for visual technical communications and spatial visualization. Topicsinclude engineering sketching and drafting, orthographic projection of multi, sectional, andauxiliary views, dimensioning, tolerances (the first half of the semester), and solid modelingusing the Computer Aided Design (CAD) tools (the rest of the semester). In a typical class, theinstructor delivers a short lecture followed by a class activity based on the lecture. For example,in a class that teaches multi-view of objects, the class activity is to derive the multi-view for agiven set of objects on an assignment sheet. The instructor helps the students during this activity.Once they complete the class activity, they are allowed to
floor pattern; steps were also installed to reach the raised floorplatform. Inside this perimeter, more stone blocks were installed as the bases for columns, andstone plinths were then placed on top of these column bases. Between these column basesmasonry strip foundations, functioning as grade beams, were installed. These strip foundationsdivided the floor space into cells that were filled with soil up to the floor elevation level. Finally,installation of stone slabs would complete the temple floor. Notice that in Stage VI of Fig. 2, thecolumn plinths project from the floor; the circular columns supporting the structure would beplaced on these plinths. The Hall of Central Harmony is depicted in Fig. 4; its frontal view is depicted on top of
. Page 26.381.7Student performance on a graphics exam in a first-year engineering course required by allengineering majors at Michigan Tech was compared for students taking the PSVT:R on paperand through the LMS to determine if there was a difference in spatial ability between thesegroups. In the first-year engineering course, ENG1101, approximately five 1.5 hour classsessions are spent on sketching topics, followed by an exam. The graphics topics covered in thiscourse include isometric and oblique sketching, orthographic projections of normal, inclined, andcurved surfaces, rotations, reflections, and planes of symmetry. Students scoring 60% or belowon the PSVT paper and LMS versions were excluded from this analysis because they wererequired to
in Table 1, itseems safe to say that using AutoCAD as a platform for introducing students to solid modelinghelps them to better master solid modeling skills.Since taking DRFT 134, some of the students have learnt to use Solid Edge and some arelearning NX this semester (Spring 2015). In a follow-up discussion in week 7 of this currentsemester, most of the students expressed the sentiment that learning AutoCAD solid modelinghas helped them to reduce the learning curve in Solid Edge and NX. Also, most of the studentswho took DRFT 134 earlier continue to make AutoCAD their preferred solid modeling software Page 26.1488.15in other 3D projects