specific examples from the story and reference any external citations employed in your summary (your statement should be less than 250 words and include at least two citations supporting your stance) d. Post Two: (10 points total) at least one professional and thought provoking criticism of someone else’s concluding statement (i.e., While I agree with your overall conclusion, I believe you could improve your argument by… etc.) 3) Instructions for submission of OPTIONAL written homework (handwrite all work; use 8.5x11 paper; label: name, date, assignment, and page numbers; box final answers): a. (12 points total; 4 points each) Chapter Review p. 507ff #’s
volume, ∑ is the rate of entropy dt j Tjflow in the form of low-level heat across the control surface, ∑ m& s i i i is the rate of entropychange associated with mass flow into the control volume, ∑ m& s e e e is the rate of entropy changeassociated with mass flow out of the control volume, and υ& cv is the rate of entropy productionwithin the control volume. For a closed system the
engineers ranked project management with 5’s strongly agreeing PSO 5b Page 26.678.16was addressed satisfactorily.Students’ questionnaire responsesResults from the open-ended responses from student questionnaires highlighted what studentsperceived as strengths and areas for improvement before and after completion of the firstsemester design course. Students perceived their strengths prior to completion of the designcourse to include knowledge of water/wastewater treatment technologies enhanced anddeveloped through the MEnvE curriculum. Select students also viewed soft skills such ascommunication and time management as strengths. Areas for improvement
Page 26.351.7 access procedures.Table 2. Data indicating status of lights (on or off) and photosynthetic photon flux density(PPFD) (umol/m2/s) in the raw data (left) and simpler (though approximate) virtual data at 5minute intervals (right) (January 27, 2014) Raw Data Virtual Data Time Light_9 PPFD Time Light9_% on PPFD 9:15:00 9:15:00 1.00 133.71 9:16:05 133.89 9:20:00 0.93 138.97 9:18:05 138.71 9:25:00 1.00 161.27 9:19:39 FALSE 9:30:00 0.37 166.70 9:19:49 TRUE 9:35
predictions for4 https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/naivebayes/naivebayes.pdfWeek 1/Art 1 (i.e., row 1, columns 2-5, shaded in blue), suggest that three students (S3, S4, S9)carried forward (repeated) significant content from Art 1 (Week 1) into subsequent essays. Asimilar pattern appears for S7, whose essays were nearly all classified as Week 3, suggesting thatthere was very little change in what this student was reporting across the homework essays.Basically, the algorithm could not detect significant shifts in the content of that student’s essays.Table 1. Confusion Matrix for Naïve Bayes Predictions for the Week Students ComposedArt and Narrative Essays. Students are shown as S#, e.g., S1. ACTUAL
Semester(s) Taught (*to be taught) 1 Direct Potabilization Spring 2016, Spring 2017 2 Recover Value from Solid Waste Spring 2016, Spring 2017, Spring 2018 3 Discovering Green Chemistry Spring 2016 4 The Internet of Sustainability Fall 2016, Fall 2017 5 Data Analytics for Energy Fall 2016, Spring 2018 6 Modeling Complexity Fall 2016, Fall 2017, Spring 2019* 7 Deconstructing a Garbage Gyre Spring 2017 8 Environmental Impact in Automotive Systems
in effective engineeringdesign learned more than a decade ago that the give-and-take process that characterizes afunctioning, well-motivated team is a key element to a project’s success.In the Center for Engineering Design and Entrepreneurship (CEDE), the capstone design coursesequence is supported in an organized setting where students interact with the sponsor (industrialor public entity) and the academic faculty. Project teams of three to five students each address aunique project, with guidance of an advisor and sponsor liaison. For a project team the students,advisor(s) and liaisons may come from different academic disciplines. Students are assigned toprojects based on their stated interests which are expressed in a project
Lundeberg, M. A., B. B. Levin and H. L. Harrington, eds., Who Learns What From Cases and How? The Research Base for Teaching and Learning with Cases, 1999, pp. 3-23.6. Chinowsky, P. S. and J. Robinson, “Enhancing Civil Engineering Education Through Case Studies”, Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 1, 1997, 45-49.7. Russell, J. S. and B. G. McCullouch, “Civil Engineering Education: Case Study Approach”, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering, 116, 2, 1990, pp. 164-174.8. Raju, P. K. and C. S. Sankar, “Teaching Real-World Issues through Case Studies”, Journal of Engineering Education, 88, 4, 1999, pp. 501-508.9. Richards, L. G., M. Gorman, W. T. Scherer and R. D. Landel, “Promoting Active Learning with
isotherms of phenol andchlorophenols onto granular activated carbon: Part I. Two-parameter models and equationsallowing determination of thermodynamic parameters. J. Haz Mat., 147, 381-394.Hutchins, R.A. (1974) New Method Simplifies Design of Activated Carbon Systems. Chem.Engr., 80, 133-138.Langmuir, I. (1918) The adsorption of gases on plane surfaces of glass, mica, and platinum, J.Am. Chem. Soc., 40, 1361-1402.Pfluger, A., D.M. Roux, and M.A. Butkus. (2012) “A Hands-On Experience in Air PollutionEngineering Courses: Implementing an Effective Indoor Air Pollution Project,” Proceedings ofthe 2012 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, American Society forEngineering Education, San Antonia, TX.Senthilkumaar, S., Kalaamani, P
. Discovery Press, 2019.[2] L. W. Anderson et al., A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Abridged Edition, 1 edition. New York: Pearson, 2000.[3] D. Sayers, The Lost Tools of Learning, 1 edition. Fig, 2011.[4] C. S. Dweck, Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, Reprint, Updated edition. New York: Ballantine Books, 2007.[5] J. Dunnicliff and D. U. Deere, Eds., Judgment in Geotechnical Engineering: The Professional Legacy of Ralph B. Peck, 1 edition. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1984.
discussion on the significance of the service activity.The completed portfolio is submitted not only to the Peer Review Committee but also to ExternalReferee(s). For contract renewal, at least one External Referee will be determined by the candidate aswell as the division chairperson. In cases of tenure, the candidate will recommend three ExternalReferees and the division chairperson will select an additional three External Referees. The yearfollowing the portfolio submission the faculty member is observed in the classroom by at least threetenured faculty from the division (any field of engineering or computer science).SupportThe small branch campus has offered a positive experience, particularly in providing a supportivedepartmental culture where
QRMA III, which is supported by NIGMS/NIH,Award Number R25GM108593 References1. Medema G, Ashbolt, N. QMRA: Its Value for Risk Management. Microrisk, Microbiological Risk Assessment: A Scientific Basis for Managing Drinking Water Safety From Source to Tap. Microrisk, 2006.2. Ashbolt NJ, Schoen ME, Soller JA, Roser DJ. Predicting pathogen risks to aid beach management: the real value of quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA). Water research, 2010; 44(16):4692–4703.3. Bambic D, McBride G, Miller W, Stott R, Wuertz S. Quantification of pathogens and sources of microbial indicators for QMRA in recreational waters. 2011.4. Weir MH, Shibata T, Masago Y, Cologgi DL, Rose JB. Effect of Surface Sampling and Recovery of Viruses and
, R.D., J-S. Shih, and S.L. Sessions. 2000. Comparative risk assessment: an internationalcomparison of methodologies and results. J. Hazardous Materials. 78: 19-39. Page 12.1288.6
technician, Ray Rust, for hisdemonstration and insights offered while running the jet engine with biodiesel. Thismaterial is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNo. 0511322. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNSF. For further information please visit http://green.kettering.edu.Bibliography1. National Academy of Engineering (NAE). “Grand Challenges for Engineering.” Washington, D.C., February 15, 2008.2. “Kettering Industrial Ecology Team.” http://green.kettering.edu (accessed November 1, 2008)3. Lynch-Caris, Terri, Jennifer Aurandt, Craig Hoff, Andy Borchers, Jackie El-Sayed, Ben
and Redesign the Business case for sustainabilityFigure 2: Different Methods of Instruction and Creative Activities Adopted within the CourseStructureConclusionThis paper demonstrated the re-design of a course on sustainability. The course will be offered toall students across campus. It seeks to build on this singular strength: diversity of educationalbackgrounds. This is done to try and enhance creativity of students insofar as the decisionmaking process is concerned. The authors intend to share the results of this unique experimentin future publications at this forum.References1. S. L. Hart, Beyond Greening: Strategies for a sustainable world
resource was being destroyed by toomany people demanding too much from a declining resource.By the early 1990’s, a newer term, industrial ecology evolved, wherein theinterrelationships among industry, environment and society were recognized. The termgained substantial credence when the text Industrial Ecology was published first in 1995 3followed by a second edition eight years later. Subsequently, the International Societyfor Industrial Ecology sponsored the publication of a new scientific periodical entitled theJournal of Industrial Ecology, starting in 1997. Selected applications of industrialecology appeared in a special issue of a companion periodical, the Journal of Cleaner
Engineering collection.AcknowledgmentThe Center for Sustainable Engineering is funded by NSF Grant DUE-0442618, and by EPAGrant Agreement X3-83235101. Although work in the Center has been funded in part by the Page 14.1183.4EPA, this paper has not been subjected to the Agency’s peer and policy review and thereforedoes not necessarily reflect the views of the agency, and no official endorsement should beinferred.Literature Cited:1. C.I. Davidson; C.T. Hendrickson; H.S. Matthews; M.W. Bridges; B.R. Allenby; J.C. Crittenden; Y. Chen;E. Williams; D.T. Allen; C.F. Murphy, S. Austin, Adding Sustainability to the Engineer’s Toolbox: A Challenge
reflect the views of the agency, and no official endorsement should beinferred.Literature Cited:1. World Commission on Environment and Development, “Our Common Future,” Oxford University Press,Oxford, U.K. (1987).2. D. Allen; B. Allenby; M. Bridges; J. Crittenden; C. Davidson; C. Hendrickson; S. Matthews; C. Murphy;D. Pijawka, Benchmarking Sustainable Engineering Education: Final Report (2008) Page 14.897.8
National Science Foundation is gratefullyacknowledged (BES-0238858 to D.B. Oerther).References 1. Brundtland Commission, 1987, Our Common Future. 2. Lantagne, D. S. (2001) Investigation of the Potters for Peace colloidal silver-impregnated ceramic filter: intrinsic effectiveness and filed performance in rural Nicaragua. Alethia Environmental, Allston, MA 02134, USA Page 11.1120.6
Collett, W.L. “Multidisciplinary Engineering Student Projects”, in proceedings of 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29, 2011.7. Sattler, M.L. et al. “Engineering Sustainable Civil Engineers”, in proceedings of 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29, 2011.8. Mattingly, S. et al. “Multi-Disciplinary Sustainable Senior Design Project: Design Of A Campus Biodiesel Refinery”, in proceedings of 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 10-13, 2012.9. Mostafavi, A. et al “Integrating Service, Learning, and Professional Practice: Toward the Vision for Civil Engineering in 2025”, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 2016. 142(3): p.B4013001-1 - B4013001- 1010
, J.R., Crittenden, J.C., Small, D.R., Hokanson, D.R., Zhang, Q., Chen, H., Sortby, S.A., James, V.U., Sutherland, J.W., and Schnoor, J.L. 2003. Sustainability Science and Engineering: The Emergence of a New Metadiscipline, Environmental Science and Technology, 37, 5314-5324.4. Young, T., Powers, S., Collins, A., and Ackerman, N. 1996. A Unified Elective Concentration in Environmental Engineering. Proceedings of the 1996 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exhibition, Washington, D.C, June 23-26.5. Newberry, B. and Farison, J. 2003. A Look at the Past and Present of General Engineering and Engineering Science Programs. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(3), 217-224.6. Woolschlager, J
. Despotakis. 2010 “Known and Unknown Weaknesses in Software Animated Demonstrations (Screencasts): A Study in Self-Paced Learning Settings.” Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol. 9, pp. 81-98. 3. Lee, M., S. Pradhan, B. Dalgarno. 2008. “The Effectiveness of Screencasts and Cognitive Tools as Scaffolding for Novice Object-Oriented Programmers.” Journal of Information Technology Education. Vol. 7, pp. 61-80 Page 22.1635.7
and Environmental Engineering, and the Engineering Studies Program. Her research focuses on decision-making for environmental and infrastructure systems. Dr. Jones received a BS Civil Engineering from Columbia University, and a PhD Engineering and Public Policy from Carnegie Mellon University. She is a licensed professional engineer in several states.Christopher Ruebeck, Lafayette College CHRISTOPHER S. RUEBECK is an Associate Professor in the Economics Department at Lafayette College, teaching in the areas of industrial organization, marketing research, introductory Principles and Microeconomics courses, as well as simulation and evolutionary game theory. Dr. Ruebeck holds the
algebraicoptimization; computation. The computations can be carried out in common student versions ofMatlab and Excel (with the optimizing Solver). Page 13.1129.7Figure 2. Oil exploration and depletion versus time. S (the proven reserve) peaks as U (the unproven reserve) is drawn down monotonically through discovery.Living ResourcesBuilding on the dynamic, the idea in this case is to add growth. Unlike the previous case, herewe have the possibility of sustainable steady states. In fact there are many, and theirdiscrimination requires an elaboration of a) the nature of the harvesting regime; and b) theultimate tradeoffs between economic and biological
’ perceived value of the sustainability projects peer-to-peer network3. faculty utilizing the peer-to-peer Faculty questionnaire network to integrate Direct measure of faculty’s perceived value of peer- sustainability concepts into their to-peer network curriculaHypothesis 2: Result in higher orders of significant learningevidenced by assessed through1. students’ application of Performance of partner universities students in sustainability design principles sustainability projects (“application” in Fink’s direct measure of ability to design significant learning taxonomy14) Score on modified Safoutin et al.’s design
proposed Environmental Engineering BOK.IntroductionInternational Science and Engineering (S&E) partnerships for research and educationare essential for maintaining U.S. competitiveness in the 21st century (NationalScience Board, 2008) and existing engineering program outcomes like globalization,contemporary issues, and sustainability lay the foundation upon which these neededinternational partnerships can be built. Unfortunately, a recent survey of engineeringundergraduates found that less than 2% viewed globalization and contemporary issuesas one of the five most important engineering outcomes and only 30-36% felt “well”or “very well” prepared to incorporate global context or contemporary issues intoengineering practice respectively (Atman
. Page 14.223.7From the scores, TAs A and B score higher in areas relating to intellectual merit than TA E, whohas taught this class several times. TAs A and B were both enrolled in the special topics coursewhereas TA E did not take the special topics course. With the exception of ‘demonstratesknowledge’ TAs A and B outperform TA E by approximately 1 point. TA E was expected tohave an equal if not higher score on ‘demonstrates knowledge’ because TA E is a post-doctoral.The data, as shown in Figure 1, suggests that TA E does not effectively demonstrate properties ofintellectual merit, which may be a consequence of limited understanding of the importance ofintellectual merit on teaching effectiveness. TA E received mid 3’s on effectiveness