- vancement, Tucson, Ariz.; ”Faculty Research Award,” Southeast Missouri State University, COSM, 2010; ”Tony B. Award,” Association of laboratory Automation, 2010, 2011; Center of Nanoscale Science and Technology-University of Maryland, College Park (CNST-UMD) Scholarship, 2009-2011; and Marquis ”Who’s Who in America,” 2009. He has involved both undergraduates (22 to date) and graduates (five) in his research projects. He has established a laboratory for Nano-biotechnology and micro- and nanoflu- idics at Southeast and created and developed interest at the pre-college level by incorporation of science in K-12 classroom.Dr. Ken Surendran, Southeast Missouri State University Ken Surendran is a professor in the Department of
Center of the City University of New York in 1991. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Incorporating Quantum Technologies into Engineering CurriculumAbstract: This paper first reviews the present status of quantum technologies that are rapidlymaking inroads to various fields of science and engineering. The author then suggests, in light ofthese developments, how one may incorporate the key principles, ideas, and topics of newquantum technologies into undergraduate quantum mechanics courses and laboratories to prepareand equip future engineers. Concrete examples of curriculum changes in modern physics,quantum mechanics, and advanced quantum mechanics courses are presented based on threeyears of
the first course ofCalculus for engineering students, and it has been taught once a year since 2012. The goal for thecurricular project is to complete a sequence of three Fis-Mat courses corresponding to the firstthree courses of Physics and the three Calculus courses for engineering students. So far, we havegained experience in a) implementing Modeling Instruction as well as teaching from a Modelsand Modeling perspective, b) taking advantage of the classroom settings, c) tailoring theactivities to enhance active learning, d) using the technology and the laboratory equipment in anefficient and meaningful way, and e) designing activities that provide formative and summativeassessment to all (students, teachers, and researchers).The main goal
. A construction of knowledgethrough meaningful activities, reflected in socio-constructivist ideas, rather then acquisitionthrough transmission in formal instruction, became important for deeper conceptual knowledgedevelopment, and scientific inquiry became an integral part of the learning sciences.Our instructional module should be effective in improving students learning based uponeducational theories such as multiple intelligences and constructivism. The unit provides alearning environment based on several principles of Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory. Avariety of learning activities are included, such as discussions that promote student–studentinteractions, group projects that allow for creative elements and laboratory
challenges of this environment is that on a given day, all classroomsare used at about ninety percent capacity. Hence, we do not have the facilities orinfrastructure to move our massive amounts of introductory physics courses into a studioor laboratory based setting for some of the larger scale pedagogy initiatives. Further, withsuch saturation of our overall facilities, professors are typically never in the sameclassroom twice per day, making even tasks such as carrying demonstrations orspontaneous live experiments cumbersome. The setting at Wentworth is not unique andwe believe that our findings will benefit similarly sized institutions that are consideringthe inclusion of MLM content in their introductory physics sequence. Conducting thestudy at
of approximately 6-8 End of Chapter problems turned in weekly and several inclass homework problems in which the students we required to work with a partner tosolve a homework problem in 10 minutes.Along with the use of online learning systems, many other variables are involved in theprevious 4 years including variation in student population, textbooks, changes in mypresentation of material in lecture, and changes in the accompanying laboratory sectionmake it impossible to suggest that online learning systems alone affect student criticalthinking skills and conceptual understanding of physics as measured by the commoncumulative final exam. Any change in the average grade earned has been negligiblethrough the years. The addition of ORION
. The course also includes a Page 22.260.3laboratory component. Students complete approximately 12 laboratory experiments over thecourse of one semester. Topics typically include kinematics, Newton‘s Laws, conservation ofmomentum and energy, rotational motion, and fluid mechanics. As such, numerous strategies,including the writing strategies to be described, have been developed that center around theaccommodation of students‘ diverse learning styles [27 – 33]. Students that enroll in the course most often do so to satisfy the university‘s sciencerequirement for graduation. The students come from a wide-array of academic
. in nuclear engineering. All faculty do have a Ph.D. in one of theinterdisciplinary fields represented in this program.Procedure 6.0 – Criteria 6Classrooms, laboratories, equipment, tools, and computing resources are reviewed annually, ormore frequently as situations warrant. Course evaluation forms described in the Criteria 3procedures are used as a tool for assessing facilities. Data is kept regarding additions, renovationand upgrades to classrooms, laboratories, equipment, tools, and computing resources. Theamounts requested, provided and spent are tracked by the department head.Procedure 7.0 – Criteria 7Institutional support and financial resources are reviewed annually to ensure that they aresufficient to assure quality and continuity of
concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics, 58, 858-86731. Thornton, R. K., & Sokoloff, D.R. (1998). Assessing student learning of Newton’s laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula. American Journal of Physics, 66 (4), 338-352.32. Trowbridge, D., and McDermott, L.C., (1980). Investigation of students understanding of the concept of Velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 58, 1020-1028.33. Trowbridge, D., and McDermott, L.C. (1981). Investigation of students understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 48, 242-253
Paper ID #20410Physics is the soul of Engineering in General and Electrical Engineering inParticularDr. Kanti Prasad, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Dr. Kanti Prasad is a professor in the department of electrical and computer Engineering and is found- ing Director of Microelectronics/VLSI Technology Laboratories at the University Massachusetts Lowell. Professor Prasad initiated the Microelectronics/ VLSI program in 1984, and is teaching 16.469/16.502 VLSI Design and 16.470/504 VLSI Fabrication courses since its inception. From the spring of 1986 Pro- fessor Prasad developed 16.661 Local Area/Computer Networks, and
the authors’ institution is such a program which hasbeen conducted for the past 18 years to create awareness and interest among secondary schoolstudents about the transportation industry with support of Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT). This four week residentialprogram that is designed with the introductory technical coursework, laboratory experiments,hands on activities, field trips and training in communication skills. In addition to theinstructional activities, the financial support is also used for the food, accommodation and afterclass activities for the student participants and also for their mentors, who are undergraduatecounselors.The program curriculum introduces the topics of
University Dr. Adam Fontecchio is an Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Vice-Dean of the Graduate College, and Director of the Center for the Advancement of STEM Teaching and Learning Excellence (CASTLE). He is the recipient of a NASA New Investigator Award, the Drexel Graduate Student Associ- ation Outstanding Mentor Award, the Drexel University ECE Outstanding Research Achievement Award and the International Liquid Crystal Society Multimedia Prize. In 2003, he received a NASA/ASEE Sum- mer Faculty Fellowship to research NEMS/MEMS adaptive optics in the Microdevices Laboratory at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Dr. Fontecchio received his Ph.D. in Physics from Brown University in 2002. He has authored
difficulty levels;• development of skills in simulation, analysis, and modeling.Characteristics of the structure of the developed project:• working in groups;• application problems that make use of prior knowledge (already acquired in classes) andnew knowledge (which would still be exposed later);• use of sequential scripts with a backstory;• integration with other basic sciences;• teacher as facilitator and moderator of activities;• number of students undergoing activity: 1000 (65% enrolled in morning courses and 35% inevening classes);• number of students per team: 04• all extra classroom work with supervision and evaluation by laboratory teachers.The project used both Problem and Project Based Learning approaches. Problem Based andProject Based
their practicaluse in the classroom and laboratory. We will show that by organizing student learning outcomesand course objectives around the principle of operational definition we can simplify theassessment of student learning, determine student strengths and weaknesses, and developstrategies to increase student achievement.While the ABET General Criteria 5 on curriculum is silent on calculus-based physics theprogram criteria are not. The program criteria for Architectural Engineering states; “Theprogram must demonstrate that graduates can apply mathematics through differential equations,calculus-based physics, and chemistry.” The program criteria for Mechanical Engineering states“basic science” while Electrical Engineering mentions “physical
appointed as an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow (1979-81); NSF-JSPS Fellow, KEK, Japan (1986); and Fellow of the American Physical Society (1985). He served as a project director at the Department of Energy (1990-91), was Associate Chair (1995-98) and then Chair of the Department of Physics and Astronomy (1998-2007). He is on the editorial board of theEuropean Physics Journal C. Prof. Bodek was awarded the 2004 APS W.KH. Panofsky Prize in Experimental Particle Physics ”for his broad, sustained, and insightful contributions to elucidating the structure of the nucleon, using a wide variety of probes, tools, and methods at many laboratories.” In 2004, Prof. Bodek received the University of Rochester Award for Excellence in Graduate
example, models16 and tutorials for introductory physics,17 among others.These strategies have been designed by researchers of the discipline (physical or mathematical)working in academic departments at universities, and are based on rigorous research that hasdocumented improved student learning through the use of these strategies. One strategy that hasbeen very successful in classrooms with spaces for laboratory type work is presented byThornton and Sokoloff18. This strategy, which requires investment from the beginning of the Page 23.766.4course, has been successful in student learning. At the beginning, students make predictionsabout a
learning, and amixture of these methods. Smolnikar and Mohorcic presented a framework for developing PICmicrocontroller hardware circuits and software code for embedded application [1]. Theirpedagogy targets traditional EE students. Sakar and Craig showed several projects to incorporatePIC microcontrollers into a computer architecture course [2]. Birsan and Sharad introduced ajust-in-time approach to teach embedded systems [3]. Meshkova et al describe a novellaboratory and project course called SMEAGOL (Small, Embedded, Advanced and GenericObjects Laboratory) that incorporated several active learning approaches [4]. Ferreira et alpresented a multifunctional module called MILES (Microcontroller Learning System) formicrocontroller-based system
program. He received his masters of science in physics from Caltech for his work in the field of nano-scale mechanical resonators. Before arriving at Caltech, he earned his bachelors of science in physics from the University of Florida.Juan Pedro Ochoa-Ricoux, California Institute of Technology J. P. Ochoa-Ricoux was born in Mexico city in 1980. He obtained his B.S. in Physics Engineering with Honors from the ITESM (Monterrey Tech) in 2003. Since then he has been a graduate student at the California Institute of Technology, where he studies the phenomenon of neutrino oscillations in the MINOS Experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. He also served as a physics instructor for the
disciplines in Spanish, focuseson integrating physics and calculus for first-year engineering students13. The Fis-Mat coursemeets three times a week for a total of 5 blocks of 80 minutes each in three sessions (one blockon Monday and two consecutive blocks on Wednesday and Friday). In terms of teaching load,two blocks correspond to the Physics course, two blocks to the Mathematics course and oneblock corresponds to the Physics Laboratory. Both professors were present and participating atall times. During the actual sessions there was no distinction between the blocks, each professorled the class depending on students’ needs. The course program was structured in a coherent andarticulated way without paying much attention on whose block corresponded
, when students are learning water content soil laboratory tests, this is usually a verygood starting point of a one dimensional knowledge thread. The Atterberg limits, for exampleshrinkage limit (SL), liquid limit (LL) and plastic limit (PL) are essentially all fundamental watercontent which are just measured at different stages of their states. So is the optimum watercontent used in the standard proctor test or modified compaction laboratory test to achieve themaximum dry density. I believe that civil engineering student, and especially those who declaregeotechnical engineering as their profession, should be constantly reminded of how importantthe concept of water content is in their future professional life.Water content is defined as weight
this study in three sections of Classical Physics II, the second semestercalculus-based introductory physics course, and in one section of the upper-level Electricity andMagnetism. Classical Physics II is taught in a modified workshop style, with lecture, laboratory,and problem-solving combined into a two and a half hour class period. The students in the courseare predominantly Electrical and Mechanical Engineering majors, but it is also a required coursefor Chemistry, Biology, Geology, and Physics majors. Electricity and Magnetism (E&M), on theother hand, is lecture based, although in the last two years the instructor has added an optionalproblem-solving session that is well attended by students. E&M is almost exclusively taken
AC 2012-5386: TEACHING COLLEGE PHYSICSDr. Bert Pariser, Technical Career Institutes Bert Pariser is a faculty member in the Electronic Engineering Technology and the Computer Science Technology departments at Technical Career Institutes. His primary responsibility is developing curricu- lum and teaching methodology for physics, thermodynamics, electromagnetic field theory, computers, and databases. Pariser has prepared grant proposals to the National Science Foundation, which produced the funding for a Fiber Optics Laboratory. He served as Faculty Advisor to the IEEE and Tau Alpha Pi National Honor Society. Pariser was instrumental in merging Tau Alpha Pi National Honor Society into the ASEE. In addition
07 2 sections, 200 students total 1 section, 150 students Summer 07 None 1 section, 150 students Fall 07 1 section, 150 students 2 sections, 300 students total Spring 08 2 sections, 300 students total 2 sections, 300 students totalIn addition to the lectures, the M&I course entails many changes in the laboratory component ofthe course. In the M&I labs, there is a strong connection between lab and lecture content—theactivities in lab each week are designed to explore and reinforce the concepts being discussed inlecture that particular week. (In contrast, many of the labs in the traditional introductory courseat Georgia Tech are on topics
Paper ID #13421Engineering Program Growth with Mesh Network CollaborationDr. Hank D Voss, Taylor University Dr. Hank D. Voss, Taylor University Dr. Hank D. Voss received his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from University of Illinois in 1977. He then worked for Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratories prior to coming to Taylor University in 1994. He is currently a Professor of Engineering and Physics at Taylor University. Some of the courses that he regularly has taught include Principles of Engineering, Intro to Electronics, Statics, Advanced Electronics, Jr. Engineering Projects, FE Review, Control Systems
-majors and a brief overview of each is presented below.Physics 100 (Physics for the Modern World)The Physics for the Modern World course is an introductory physics course designed for non-STEM majors. The course also includes a laboratory component. Students that enroll do so tosatisfy the university’s Natural Sciences requirements towards graduation within the generaleducation core of classes. Non-majors who enroll are typically studying such areas asinternational relations, business, history, philosophy, literature, the visual arts, communications,and political science. The course covers essentially the same span of topics as are covered in thefirst-semester calculus physics course for STEM majors. The only difference is simply the levelof
Paper ID #16886Using Engineering Design Notebooks to Evaluate Student Understanding ofPhysics Concepts in a Design ChallengeDr. Pamalee A. Brady, California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo Pamalee Brady is an Associate Professor at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She teaches courses in structural systems, concrete, steel and wood design as well as structural engineer- ing courses for architecture and construction management students. Prior to joining the faculty at Cal Poly she worked in applied research at the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory in Champaign
Accreditation Cycle. 2010, Baltimore, MD: ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission.2. Gentner, D, & Stevens, A. L. (1983) Mental Models, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.3. references forthcoming4. Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography – Students' and Teachers' Conceptions and Science Education (STCSE), Retrieved January 17, 2011, from http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse5. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3): 141-151.6. Thornton, R., & Sokoloff, D. (1990). Learning motion concepts using real-time, microcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics. 58, 858-867.7. Thornton, 19968. Thornton, R., & Sokoloff, D. (1998). Assessing
industrialscale or with researchquality as required in the workplace or graduate laboratory This paper describes the integration of industrialscale and researchquality highperformance computing (HPC) into a senior/graduate level fluid dynamics course. This paper focuses on a combined senior levelgraduate level course (enrollment of 12) in fluid dynamics at the University of Central Oklahoma, a predominantly undergraduate institution (PUI) . A HPC cluster, Buddy has been deployed recently at the UCO. The first author operates and administers the Buddy cluster and serves as instructor of the fluid dynamics course, providing an opportunity to advance the course outcomes to include a high impact project that takes advantage of distributed computing
, reinforces thegraphical connections between the various representations of the motion and connects to a largerproblem-solving framework.1 Brasell, H. “The Effect of Real-time Laboratory Graphing on Learning Graphic Representations of Distance andVelocity,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24, (1987).2 van Zee, E.H., Cole, A., Hogan, K., Oropeza, D. and Roberts, D. “Using Probeware and the Internet to EnhanceLearning,” Maryland Association of Science Teachers Rapper 25, (2000).3 Beichner, R. J., “The Effect of Simultaneous Motion Presentation and Graph Generation in a Kinematics Lab,”Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27, 803-815 (1990).4 Mokros, J. R. and Tinker, R. F. “The Impact of Microcomputer-Based Labs on Children’s Ability to
utilized include Homework, Quizzes, Laboratory Reports, Midterm Exam, and Final Exam. While all tools are used to assess achievement of SLO’s, for brevity we discuss in the following only the results from Final Exams from the 2006-07 and 2007-08 academic years, and Midterm Exams from the 2007-08 academic year. Tables 7 and 8 show the individual student results from academic year 2007-08 for General Physics I, and General Physics II respectively. Table 7. General Physics I Individual Student Results.2007-08 Midterm Exam Final ExamStudent ID SLO2