AC 2012-4481: EDUCATION APPROACH IN JAPAN FOR MANAGEMENTAND ENGINEERING OF SYSTEMSProf. David S. Cochran, Southern Methodist University and Meijo University David Cochran is a professor of industrial and systems engineering management. He is Founder and Prin- cipal of System Design, LLC, Visiting Professor with the School of Business, Meijo University, Nagoya, Japan and faculty of systems engineering, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. Cochran devel- oped the Manufacturing System Design Decomposition (MSDD) to determine the underlying design of the Toyota Production System (and ”lean”) from a systems engineering viewpoint and was Founder and Director of the Production System Design Laboratory in the
AC 2012-4001: THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING SYSTEMICRISK IN ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT EDUCATIONDr. S. Jimmy Gandhi, Stevens Institute of Technology S. Jimmy Gandhi is a faculty member in The School of Systems and Enterprises (SSE) at Stevens Institute of Technology, as well as at Baruch College, which is part of the City University of New York (CUNY). His research interests are in the field of risk management, engineering education and globalization. He got a Ph.D. in engineering management from Stevens Institute of Technology, a master’s in engineering management from California State University, Northridge, and a bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology. He is currently co
AC 2012-5146: A METRIC-BASED, HANDS-ON QUALITY AND PRODUC-TIVITY IMPROVEMENT SIMULATION INVOLVING LEAN AND SIGMACONCEPTS FOR FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING LAB STUDENTSDr. Yosef S. Allam, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach Yosef Allam is an Assistant Professor in the Freshman Engineering Department at Embry-Riddle Aero- nautical University. He graduated from the Ohio State University with B.S. and M.S. degrees in industrial and systems engineering and a Ph.D. in engineering education. Allam’s interests are in spatial visualiza- tion, the use of learning management systems for large-sample educational research studies, curriculum development, and fulfilling the needs of an integrated, multi-disciplinary first
AC 2012-4002: APPLICATION OF CASE STUDIES TO ENGINEERINGMANAGEMENT AND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING EDUCATIONDr. S. Jimmy Gandhi, Stevens Institute of Technology S. Jimmy Gandhi is a faculty member in the School of Systems and Enterprises (SSE) at Stevens In- stitute of Technology and also at Baruch College, which is a part of the City University of New York (CUNY) system. His research interests are in the field of risk management, engineering education, and globalization. He got a Ph.D. in engineering management from Stevens Institute of Technology, a mas- ter’s in engineering management from California State University, Northridge, and a bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology. He is
(1), 26-39. 3. Rugarcia, A., Felder, R. M., Woods, D. R., & Stice, J. E. (2000). The Future of Engineering Education: I. A Vision for a New Century. Chem. Engr. Education, 34(1), 16-25. Page 25.787.74. Wang, S. C. (2009). In K. Jusoff, S. S. Mahmoud, & R. Sivakumar (Eds.) University Instructor Perceptions of the Benefit of Technology Use in E-Learning. International Conference on Computer and Electrical Engineering (pp. 580-585). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. Page 25.787.8
’s) as described in its income statement is as follows3 –Year 3/2008 3/2009 3/2010 3/2011Total Revenue $20,528 $23,372 $28,147 $31,197Cost of Sales $6272 $6250 $7923 $9372Research & $1487 $1218 $1121 $1269DevelopmentSelling, General, & $2158 $2177 $2414 $2474AdministrativeExpensesIncome Taxes $3892 $4644 $5917 $6330 (a) Based on the above data, calculate the present worth of the company. Use an interest rate of 4% per annum. NOTE: We
invaluable input. The author also thanks Dr. Paul Anderson, Director, Roger andJoyce Howe Center for Writing Excellence for his valuable guidance and encouragement Page 25.225.13References:Armstrong, Thomas. (1994). Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.Barrows, Howard S. (2000). Problem-Based Learning Applied to Medical Education. Springfield, IL: SIUSchool of Medicine.Barrows, H. S. (1996). “Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview.” In L.Wilkerson & W.H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice (pp. 3
Operations Research, John Wiley & Sons, New York.2. Hillier, F. S., and Lieberman, G. J., 2001: Introduction to Operations Research (seventh edition), McGraw-Hill, New York.3. Hosein Anexa, Aczel James, and Clow Doug (2006). “The Teaching of Linear Programming in Different Disciplines and in Different Countries”, In: 3rd International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics at Undergraduate Level, 30 Jun-5 Jul 2006, Istanbul, Turkey.4. Albritton M.D, McMullen P. R., and gardiner L. R. (2003). “OR/MS content and visibility in AACSB- acreditted U.S. business schools. Interfaces 33 Num 5 page 83-89.5. Winston, W. L. and Venkataramanan M., 2003: Introduction to Mathematical Programming, Brooks/Cole- Thomson Learning
thismaterial can be covered in a large-class setting, including how it can be examined. Our datasuggests that spreadsheets must be incorporated into quizzes and or examinations in order toassess student abilities in these areas. Thus, while our teaching has evolved to includespreadsheets, so must our examination procedures.IntroductionCapital investments require analyses by engineers with tools and insight into whether theinvestment is sound. The field of engineering economy provides these tools. In order to make asound decision, a three-phase approach to evaluate the risk of a project is necessary: 1. Identify the risk, or risks, of an investment project. 2. Analyze the identified risk(s) of the project. 3. Assess how the identified risks
placed ‘on the clock’. This initiated a timeframe, usually a week,within which students had two challenges to complete in order to be eligible to take that topictest.The first challenge, the student needed to acquire a completely worked-out problem thatillustrated the concept of the just completed topic. This problem could be one of the studentsown devising or from a textbook, class web page, or any other source. The student then wouldschedule an appointment with the instructor to do an oral presentation of the problem. Thestudent would explain step by step the procedure(s) used in the solution of the problem. Thisprovides the instructor an opportunity to examine the students’ critical thinking skills. If thestudent is unable to completely
the complete problem.‖ (http://www.incose.org/practice/whatissystemseng.aspx) 2. A sub-field of electrical engineering. ―[E]mphasis is attached to the use of systems theory in applications [and] … tends to emphasize control techniques which are often software- intensive.‖9 3. A sub-field of industrial and systems engineering. The word ―system‖ is often added to industrial engineering to emphasize the interactions of parts of a system to create the overall behavior of the system. 4. A sub-field of engineering management or technology management. ―[S]ystems engineering includes taking into consideration all aspects of the life cycle of the system. Thus the systems engineering approach is said to
necessary ingredient for successful engineeringproject completion?Does any project team member non-commitment 131 6can affect successful completion of engineeringproject?Do you think project manager’s close relations with 134 3his/her project team members contribute towardssuccessful engineering project?Does project management team;s loyalty towards 132 5hid/her project can cause projects overrun in termsof time and cost?Do you think project manager’s promoting a clan 131 6type (family) project culture can contributestowards successful engineering projectcompletion?Data AnalysisIt is evident from the results of the data collected
forrstudents. What were available weere several resources r foccused on thee constructionn industry thhatcould be used to expo ose students to better unnderstand tim me value of m money. Simoonson7 (20055),“Diggingg into Constrruction Dataa” Business Economics-A E April 2005, ddescribes booth free and ppaiddata sourrces. Some free fr resourcees include thee Bureau of Census, the Bureau of E EconomicAnalysis (BEA) and the Bureau of o Labor Staatistics (BLS S). Aside from m a wealth oof informatioon 8about con nstruction laabor in a speccific
field over the next five years. Nearly allstudents (94%, 17 of 18 students) reported that participation in the IRAM course(s) had betterprepared them to work in the IE field. Of the 10 students who provided suggestions on how tofurther improve the IRAM laboratory or the courses, all reported that the both the courses andlaboratory could be improved by providing more access to and use of modern robotics andautomation equipment. One student suggested including guest speakers who are currently Page 25.715.11working in the field as a part of the courses.Early evidence also indicates that students are having some success
Page 25.517.5responsibility and that success or failure is the work of the leader. Students, not in the leaderrole, seem likely to shun accepting responsibilities and particularly lack a feeling ofresponsibility for failures.Leadership Differentiated. At this stage, engineering students are able to differentiate their viewand recognize leadership being non-positional, and “as-needed”. Leadership is starting to berecognized as a process. Those in positional roles engage in shared, participative leadership.Their responsibilities shift from making things happen to facilitator and community builderwithin their group(s). In so doing, students recognize that that leadership can be demonstrated byanyone in the group. Students not in positional roles
evidenceof certain FE and PE topics in the capstone course. We will also explore the connection betweencapstone course design and student career efficacy to help develop a common guideline for anyIndustrial Engineering capstone course.Bibliography1. Beyerlein, S., Davis, D., Trevisan, M., Thompson, P., & Harrison, K. (2006). Assessment framework for capstone design courses. Proceedings of the 2006 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.2. Dunlap, J.C. (2005). Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course prepares students for a profession. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(1), 65-85.3. Farr, J.V., Lee, M.A., Metro, R.A., & Sutton, J.P. (2001). Using a
continuing to overlook a population of technically-capableresources that stands ready to contribute to an organization’s and on a larger scale or nation’ssuccess.References1. Lombardi, M. (2011). Hiring to Win: Secrets to Sourcing and Selecting Top Talent, Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://talentmgt.com/events/view/hiring-to-win-secrets-to-sourcing-and-selecting-top-talent.2. Bell, R. (2011). Survey Shows Talent Shortage Grows Despite High Unemployment, Retrieved September 22, 2011, from http://www.workforce.com/article/20110519/NEWS01/305199997.3. High, M. S. & Nowakowski, J. M. (2011). What do markets tell us about demand for engineers in the workplace?, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual
), and high strain deformation of materials. She is currently a Co-PI in NSF S-STEM and ADVANCE-PAID grants. She is actively involved in outreach activities that introduce middle school students to engineering. Page 25.696.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012Highly Relevant and Productive Collaborations between Industries and UniversitiesIntroductionEngineering education is enhanced by collaborations between industries and universitiesthat provide a platform for students’ internships, research, and development ofprofessional and leadership skills
industrysponsored. Student teams face challenges when defining objectives for an ambiguous project,controlling scope creep, achieving buy-in, and selling their results to the sponsor. These areskills that are not taught in most engineering curriculums prior to the capstone course(s). Ourobservations are consistent with the observations by other researchers who have studied thedesign process. Wilson et. al 2 highlighted how students in the capstone course setting strugglewith setting milestones and soliciting feedback at the right times. Developing and effectivelycommunicating the project plan and status are critical to the success of the project. As noted byYildirim3, there is a need for understanding the relationships between design activities
thinking. These options should be further explored to potentially createbetter simulation games for the education of lean manufacturing in the future.Bibliography1. Visionary Products, “Lean zone office,” (http://www.visionaryproducts.biz/Portals/0/Files/ VPF-0001_Visionary-Products.pdf).2. Superteams, “The 5S Numbers Game,” (http://www.superteams.com/5s-game.php).3. Mirehei, S. M., Kuriger, G., Wan, H., and Chen, F.F., 2011, “Enhancing Lean Training for the Office Environment through Simulation and Gaming,” International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 8(2), pp.206-221.4. Wan, H., Tadikonda, B.M., and Kuriger, G., 2011, “Lean Training via the Internet: Two Flash-based Simulation Games,” 2011 Annual Industrial
future is... beyond modular. The Technology Teacher, 56(7), 28-29.11 Virtual Machine Shop. (n.d.). Retrieved August 2011, from http://www.kanabco.com/vms/index.html12 Smith, R. (2007). Virtual machine shop. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from www.jjjtrain.com/vms/index.html13 Bugeja, M. (2007, September 14). Second thoughts about Second Life. Retrieved June 21, 2008, from http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2007/09/2007091401c.htm14 Volk, K. S. (1993, Spring). Enrollment trends in industrial arts/technology teacher education from 1970-1990.15 Rogers, G. (1998). Concerns about technology education laboratories. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 35(3), 97-10016 Rogers, G. E. (1996). The untapped resource. Journal of
, 2009, pp. 819-827. 2. Caldwell, J.E., “Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips,” Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 2007, pp. 9-20. 3. Fies, C. and J. Marshall, “Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 2006, pp. 101-109. 4. Patterson, B., J. Kilpatrick, and E. Woebkenberg, “Evidence for Teaching Practice: The Impact of Clickers in a Large Classroom Environment,” Nurse Education Today, 30(7), 2010, pp. 603-607. 5. Karaman, S., “Effects of Audience Response Systems on Student Achievement and Long-Term Retention,” Social Behavior and Personality, 39(10), 2011 pp. 1431-1440. 6. Black
this ‘cycle’ in other ASEE publications. Page 25.221.9APPENDIX B : Sample Spreadsheet for Collecting Data STUDENT # X T Q M RUBRIC: FLUID MECHANICS RUBRIC BASED ON THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICAL THINKING RUBRIC COURTESY OF W. S. U. WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY PULLMAN, WA. 99164. LIKERT SCALE WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION : 5 4 3 2 1 1 Break down all barriers. √ 2 Create consistency of purpose with a plan. √ 3 Adopt the new philosophy of quality. √ 4 Establish high Standards. √ 5 Establish Targets / Goals
topics –thereby making the structure of the lecture more interesting in the process. This is exhibited inTable 3. Table 3: Causes of failures with Examples Important causes of failures Example(s) 1 Failure in communication Challenger space shuttle disaster, Airline accidents ( Tenerife airport disaster) 2 Quality related failures BP oil spill, Therac 25 (the computerized radiation therapy machine) 3 Failure in leadership Exxon Valdez Oil Spill - Joseph Hazelwood, the person selected to be the ships leader, consumed
statisticalsignificance. This work will inform modifications to enhance the course in future semesters.Modifications to the course will be monitored and impact on performance and perception will bequantified. 1. Twigg, C.A., “Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: Redesigning Large-Enrollment Courses”, The Pew Learning and Technology Program, Troy, New York (1999). Available from Center for Academic Transformation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute http://www.center.rpi.edu. 2. U. S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2010. 3. WileyPLUS, http
general overview of productdevelopment process (see Table 3). Students form a start-up company and design a newproduct, develop a (rough) design of processes to manufacture this product, build acorresponding financial model and a business plan. This course is described in details in nextsection. Stage 2 is divided into two semesters: during the first semester lectures cover ProcessDesign and students are learning hands-on fundamentals of specialized software platform(s)for process modeling and simulation. Based on the knowledge and experience gained in the PPI class, in the following semesterstudent groups contact local companies, develop project proposals, and carry out projectsaccording to the joint agreement. Student teams offer services
. Assessment criteria can include: (a) Whether the problem was accurately defined (the Problem as State & Problem as Understood)? (b) Did the solution(s) solve the problem? (c) Did the student engage in critical thinking? (d) How is the solution going to be implemented? (identify concerns). (e) During student presentations: evaluate the use visuals, and presentation preparation & skills. (f) During group/team presentations: evaluate the quality of collaboration and initiatives undertaken by individual team members.(3) Student input should be part of the assessment process: Use class discussions to evaluate/critique PBL assignments/activities. Select
, No. 1, pp.7-24, 2010.3. W.L. Johnson, N. Wang and S. Wu: “Experience with Serious Games for Learning Languages and Cultures”, Proceedings of SimTecT Conference, Australia, 2007.4. V. Brezinka and L. Hovestadt: “Serious games can support psychotherapy on children and adolescents”, Proceedings of the 3rd Human-computer interaction and usability engineering of the Austrian computer society conference on HCI and usability for medicine and health care, 2007.5. M. Mayo: “Games for Science and Engineering Education”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 50, No. 7, pp. 31 – 35.6. R. Van Eck: “Digital Game-Based Learning: It’s just not the Digital Natives who are restless”, Educause Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 17 – 30.7. D. Charsky: “From
in 1975, and his master’s in civil engineering from UAA in 1999.Dr. Neal A. Lewis, University of Bridgeport Neal Lewis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Technology Management, School of Engineer- ing at the University of Bridgeport (Connecticut). He has more than 25 years of industrial experience, having worked for Procter & Gamble and Bayer. Along with coauthors, he has received the 2005 Ted Es- chenbach award for the best article in the Engineering Management Journal and the 2009 Grant Award for the best article in The Engineering Economist. Neal received his B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Missouri, Rolla (now Missouri S&T) in 1974, M.B.A. from the University of New
of the attempt scores for each homework assignment. Thenumber of attempts and range of attempts were calculated after manipulating the submission dataexported from ANGEL to Microsoft Excel®. The homework submission variables describingthe students’ interaction with the online homework included the time between the first and lastattempt of the homework assignment and the time between the first attempt and the due date ofthe homework assignment. These variables show when students started the online homeworkassessment and how long they took to complete their homework attempt(s). These data werecalculated by using the submission time stamp data from ANGEL for the time of eachsubmission. A macro was written in Excel to transform submission time