Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Teresa L. Larkin, American University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

student writing as a learning and assessment tool in her introductory physics courses for non-majors. She has been an active member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) for over 25 years. Dr. Larkin served on the Board of Directors for ASEE from 1997-1999 as Chair of Professional Interest Council (PIC) III and as Vice President of PICs. Dr. Larkin has received numerous national and international awards including the ASEE Distinguished Educator and Service Award from the Physics and Engineering Physics Division in 1998. Dr. Larkin received the Outstanding Teaching in the General Education Award from AU in 2000. In 2000 – 2001 she served as a

Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Timothy J. Garrison, York College of Pennsylvania

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

(mechanics) course has been completelyrestructured. Prior to the restructuring, the course had a traditional structure, consisting of aseparate lecture (3 hours three times per week), laboratory (3 hours once a week) and recitation(1.5 hours once a week). Beginning in 2009, the traditional structure was discarded in favor of asingle, blended class meeting 2.5 hours three times per week. Moreover, the new class wasdesigned to operate as an active learning course (i.e. with very little lecture) by making use ofseveral active learning methods including peer instruction (aka think-pair-share) and interactivepeer laboratories. The implementation of the active learning methods was done in phases overseveral years and each phase was assessed using the

Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

James G. O'Brien, Wentworth Institute of Technology; Gergely Sirokman, Wentworth Institute of Technology; Franz J. Rueckert, Wentworth Institute of Technology; Derek Cascio, Wentworth Institute of Technology

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

. The teamworkfostered by the competitive atmosphere encouraged peer-learning so that everyone couldcontribute. Before the conclusion of the first game, most students were able to grasp the overalllesson and contribute to the advancement of the team’s objectives.Although in general the students had a grasp of the topic from lecture, as in any new assignment,students are often initially hesitant. Groups would at first labor over the initial placement ofcards. As the game evolved, they were able to make quicker and more informed decisions. Oftenthey had to reconcile their initial moves with the changing board, making decisions later in thegame to create new parallel or series combinations and offset earlier errors. In lecture, studentsoften

Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Franz J. Rueckert, Wentworth Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

eventually raises aWIT flag. Each stage acts as a showcase for a particular topic. At the midpoint of the semester,the groups present the RGMs to the class. Their presentations must explain how each stageoperates and the chosen physics principle it demonstrates. The group is graded on the physicscontent of their presentation, their adherence to criteria, and an individual schematic write-up. Aportion of the grade is reserved for an undefined “wow factor.” The details of the latter are leftpurposely ambiguous. Designers flourish mastering the interplay between aesthetics and utility,and rise to an open ended challenge. Page 26.615.4Figure 1 An

Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew Elby, University of Maryland, College Park; Eric Kuo, Stanford University; Ayush Gupta, University of Maryland, College Park; Michael M. Hull, Wayne State College

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

’ traditional problem-solving.8 But instructor effects might account forsome of these results, since more dedicated instructors are perhaps more likely to attemptreforms. Mazur’s study at Harvard8 avoided this issue, since he gave the same exam to his ownstudents 6 years apart; but the small gains in problem-solving performance he documented (from63% to 69% correct) could have arisen from his improved skill, developed over six years, atteaching problem-solving efficiently, enabling him to spend some class time on Peer Instructionwithout a trade-off. Furthermore, the lack of any published PER results (that we know of)highlighting a trade-off, such as higher conceptual gains at the expense of lower performance ontraditional problems, could result from

Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stephen W. McKnight, Northeastern University; Christos Zahopoulos, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

3. The usefulness of quantitative problems (and particularly numerical worked examples which 79% found helped them learn, as noted previously) in understanding material is characteristic of engineering students in our experience. The importance of examples and applications of theory for engineering students was one of our guiding principles in writing the book to feature concrete applications and phenomena that arise from the scientific principles.Figure 2  Response of Engineering Leadership students on difficulty of problems based from draft text.  Page 26.1357.9 The "x" problems in the book help