Conference Session

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering Division: Engineering Alignment with Core Curriculum (Physics)

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Luke D. Conlin, Stanford University; Doris B. Chin, Stanford University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics, Pre-College Engineering Education Division

  1.0   0.5   0.0   Incorrect  WT  Pre-­‐Video  Q   Correct  WT  Pre-­‐Video  Q   Marble  Machines   Wind  Tubes   Figure 8. Performance on Wind Tubes related posttest items, clustered by condition and performance on WT pre-video question. Wind Tubes tinkerers performed the best, if they got the pre-video question correct.Data analyses on the marble-related posttest questions showed a similar trend, but were lessclear-cut (see Fig 9). ANOVA revealed a

Conference Session

Engineering Physics Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kanti Prasad, University of Massachusetts, Lowell

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

xj= 0.49 𝜇m The total amount of dopant introduces into the substrate Q(t) is given by √4𝐷𝑡 Qt = Cs= 2.9 * 1015 atoms/cm2 √𝜋 Example 2.3.2 Drive-In Calculate the junction depth xj of the sample in example 2.3.1 after Drive-In at1100°C for 4.5 hours. 𝑄𝑇 −𝑥 2 C(x,t)= exp( ) √𝜋𝐷𝑡 4𝐷𝑡 2𝐶𝑠 √𝐷𝑡 5.18∗1015 Qt =( )predep = √𝜋 √𝜋 5.18∗1015 Where Cs’(t) = = 2.5*1019/cm3 𝜋√(𝐷𝑡)𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒−𝑖𝑛

Conference Session

Engineering Physics Technical Session 1

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bala Maheswaran, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

AnalysisThe survey was done at the end of the semester, so the students had a clear view of the activitiesand were able to answer questions regarding the impact of the group activities (see a sampleproject in appendix D). Seven survey questions were asked (see appendix A). About fortystudents took part in the survey. In addition, students were asked to rate other groups’ projects(see appendix B). The data obtained for each question and peer rating were analyzed using abasic excel spread sheet. The following survey questions (q) were analyzed for this report.q1. Rate the weekly group/team activities from very interesting (5) to uninteresting (1).q2. Rate how much you helped other group/team members to learn physics concepts during theweekly group