of a group scientific research project [16]. The second course(EV350) focuses on the environmental engineering design solutions needed to address theseproblems in the developed world, which provides students with the framework to understand thedesign solutions for the third and fourth grand challenges while still considering the first twogrand challenges. They are introduced to these design problems through engaging classroomexperiences and in-class demonstrations, practice through working an individual engineeringdesign project, and solidify their understanding through group lab experiences and field trips toboth drinking water and wastewater treatment plants [17]. The third course (EV450) allows thestudents to employ innovative engineering
reform and engineering education research grant,Departmental Level Reform (DLR), awarded to a group of engineering and education faculty inthe university [4, 5, 6]. The first course in the program, Engineering Exploration (ENGE 1024),is the most affected course by the DLR project. This course primarily focuses on hands-ondesign, problem solving, professional ethics and skills, contemporary issues like sustainability,globalization, nanotechnology, and critical thinking skills [7]. This course is taken byapproximately 1700 freshmen every year. The course delivery format includes one 50-minutelecture followed by one 110-minute hands-on workshop every week.One of the learning objectives of this course is gaining the ability to develop and
multiple countries, to ourknowledge, differences between students from different countries were not explored. Thus, wealso explored the impact of U.S. versus non-U.S. perspectives on student knowledge. Hypotheses:H0: There is no difference in the knowledge scores between U.S. and foreign studentsHA: There is a difference in the knowledge scores between U.S. and foreign studentsThe data were subject to Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances. The project team failed toreject the null hypotheses for all categories of environmental knowledge; there is no difference inknowledge scores between U.S. and foreign students. It appears that first-year engineeringstudents at Purdue University have similar perspectives on the environment, regardless
officer 14%Dept Committee 9%Dean/Administrator 7%College Committee 4%University Administrator 2%External Entity 2%University Committee 0%Faculty members were selected by 93% of respondents. However, this response option is vague.For example, it could mean that they were solely responsible for approving a project proposed bystudents, or the faculty approval could be one step of a larger process. Faculty members werethe only approver indicated by 25 of 56 (45%) institutions. This implies no formal approvalprocess, yet it doesn’t rule out that they could be filing decisions with the department. This rateis 42% for doctoral
Development” focuses on engineering incontext in the developing world– i.e., developing solutions with respect to political, social,environmental, and economic factors, instead of just engineering ones. A water treatment systemfor a remote village may be highly effective, but if it cannot be operated or maintained by thepeople whom it is supposed to help, it is of no real use. In the same way, latrines that generatebiogas for people to use as cooking fuel may sound like a good idea, but if they are equippedonly with western-style toilets they may not be culturally acceptable and the whole project willfail. Through these two small examples, one can see how a geographer and an engineer cancreate a better solution by working together than they can
they remove. Nearly all of the students recalled the lime and soda ash process(Figure 3). However, numerous students only provided one method instead of two. By the finalexam, however, the majority of the class remembered other methods, particularly, ion exchange.One possible reason for this is that students presented projects as a method of reviewing for thefinal exam. 80 70 Percentage of Students 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Midterm Exam Final Exam
Engineering Thought. International Journal of Engineering Education 20(3): 412-415.5. Mills, J.E., and Treagust, D.F. (2003). Engineering Education – Is Problem-based or Project-based Learning the Answer? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education 2(2): 2-16.6. Bhandari, A. and Erickson, L.E. (2005). Case Studies Can Fill a Critical Need in Environmental Engineering Education. Journal of Environmental Engineering 131(8): 1121.7. Nair, I., Jones, S., and White, J. (2002). A Curriculum to Enhance Environmental Literacy. Journal of Engineering Education 91(1): 57-67.8. Broman, G.I., Byggeth, S.H., and Robert, K. (2002). Integrating Environmental Aspects in Engineering Education. International Journal of
park became a city-owned park, there weresome ambitious plans for its development; however, later it was decided to keep it as a naturalarea with an emphasis on environmental protection [10] and education. This was because thelocal community wanted restoration of the native ecosystem and some development to make thepark more attractive as a site for recreational activity and public visitation but the emphasis wason carrying it forward as a natural area. In 1996, none of the partners of the project came forwardto take responsibility for managing the Wetland Park. Finally, Hilltop University was contractedto serve as a manager thereof [10].Since the region has a dry and semi-arid climate with periods of drought and water scarcity, thebiggest
airbornenanoparticles. These units must be designed for an extremely high efficiency to capture thesmallest nanoparticles (<2nm). Many research projects are currently under consideration todevelop new filtration system for collecting nanoparticles. Electrostatic precipitators (ESP) canalso be used to control the emission of nanoparticles effectively.There are several existing federal laws (The Substances Control Act, The Occupational Safetyand Health Act, The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, The Clean Air Act, The Clean Water Act,and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) that can provide a legal bias for controlling andregulating engineered nanomaterials. However, these laws lacks specific guidelines fornanoparticles production, handling or labeling. New
core knowledge did not differ between the instructionaltechniques, but students in the inquiry-based course demonstrated significant improvement in“innovative thinking abilities.” These observations were corroborated by Leon-Rovira et al.9; theauthors also found that student creativity was enhanced as a result of integration ofactive/inquiry-based techniques. Problem-based learning approaches have also been employedand resulted in positive student feedback.6 Some curricula are integrating entire courses(predominantly upper level design courses) based on such techniques. Quinn and Albano4 reporton a problem-based learning course (i.e., senior year project) in structural engineering in whichstudent feedback is positive. A problem-based capstone
science and energy resources is shown in Table1.Table 1: Sample participant schedule for Green Techfacturing three-day camp. Day Timing Activity1 Early morning Check-in Introductions Describe “green” manufacturing Late morning Tour facility with renewable biofuel power plant, solvent recovery and reuse, and wastewater treatment Early Afternoon Environmental Science Project at University Pond and Arboretum Late Afternoon Discussion of days learning activities Review
Paper ID #8972Assessing Student Writing Competencies in Environmental Engineering CoursesDr. Philip J. Parker P.E., University of Wisconsin, PlattevilleDr. Ben Bocher, University of Wisconsin, Platteville Over the past ten years, Ben’s work in environmental engineering has focused on anaerobic biotechnolo- gies. His projects have included studying the effects of anaerobic digester configuration on methane pro- duction rates, examining digestion of secondary residuals from brewery wastewater to enhance bioenergy generation, investigating the relationship between microbial community structure and digester perfor
respondents, 80% were teaching coursesrelated to sustainability. Among the courses being taught in sustainable engineering,approximately 50% focus on evaluation tools such as Life Cycle Assessment. About 25%integrate sustainability concepts into traditional engineering courses in order to broaden thestudents’ skill set and awareness. Only 15% are cross-disciplinary courses taught in conjunctionwith other departments that address economic, political, and social aspects of sustainableengineering. It was also reported that 70% of survey respondents have some research activityrelated to sustainability in engineering. Additionally, about a quarter of a billion dollars wasidentified in funding for sustainability-related projects in the United States with
; Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA since 2001; Pro- gram Manager of Center for Sustainable Development & Global Competitiveness, Stanford University; and Part-time Ph.D adviser of Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China. He graduated from Harbin Architectural & Civil Engineering Institute, Harbin, China (1976), received a Masters of Engineering de- gree from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China (1984) and a Ph.D. degree in Environmental Engineering from Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI (1991). Dr. Wu was Engineer/Project Leader of Michigan Biotechnology Institute (1992-2001) and the Manager for Asia-Pacific Business Development (1998-2001). In the 1980s, he was an
&demonstra0ons& • Enthusiasm& • Positive rapport with students • Frequent assessment of student learning • Classroom assessment techniques • Out-of-class homework and projects • Appropriate&use&of&technology&Figure 2. The ExCEEd model2 with key elements used for in-class activities emphasized in boldtype.The three introductory courses of this study all included an introduction to the following topics:Environmental
thesingle class of instruction since they completed a design project which included softening. (iv)Finally, the population of students especially in the graduate class was relatively small. Page 11.1204.7 3.5 Before 3 After Question 1 Keywords 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5
- ter resources engineering design and permitting. In addition to her corporate experience, Dr. Parks served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Mali, West Africa, supporting a local Non-Governmental Organization on water sanitation projects. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Classroom-based games for student learning and engagementAbstractIt is now generally accepted that active learning methods can help students learn material at adeeper level, and that students enjoy game-based learning. However, most game-based learningresearch has focused more on engagement benefits rather than learning, and many lackcomparison groups and details on procedures and assessment techniques. Research
., Reiser, R., Hruskocy, C., & Ruckdeschel, C. (1999). Strategies for teaching project-based courses. Educational Technology, 39(2), 56-59. 12. Keller, F. (1968). Goodbye, teacher. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 79-89. 13. Gagne, R. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Reinhardt, and Winston. Page 26.1298.11
://subjectguides.library.american.edu/citation 6. References should be linked by numbers or name(s) of the authors in the textPRESENTAION (3 Points) 1. Presentation is on , but submit the electronic copy on or before . 2. 3-min Power Point Presentation on your project (3 Points) Five-Six slides including title slide Tentative contents and the structure of the report a. Title b. Issue c. Introduction d. Data e. Analysis f. Conclusion g. References Page 26.394.13
as food and transportation made amajor difference. One student commented, “I was surprised by how much food productioncontributes to water footprints. When we buy food that’s been shipped from other states andcountries, we’re tapping into distant and often limited water supplies.” Another student noted,“One of the major things I did not factor in was all the water needed to process the food I eat.”Following the discussion of the class’s results, the instructor described the World HealthOrganization’s quantity of water required for life in the developing world at 7.5 L/d.15 Studentswere surprised to learn how little water was considered necessary given their own calculations ofpersonal use. One student commented, “I think this project did a
themselves (Table 3) we see there are significant differences in only two cases. It may benoted that in every case but one when this comparison is made, the groups perceive that there aremore differences than seem to actually exist. The one exception is students. They perceivefewer differences than seem to actually exist. Perhaps this is due to their lack of experience.Why do these perceived differences exist? The data obtained from this project cannot answerthis question, but it is important to understand these preconceptions may exist among groups andindividuals so that problems in the design process may be avoided.These data may also be analyzed in another way that could be useful. The weights assigned toeach group by themselves can be compared
AC 2009-2452: THERMODYNAMIC CONSIDERATIONS IN DETERMININGWORLD CARRYING CAPACITYScott Morton, University of Wyoming Scott Morton received his Bachelor and Master degrees in Agricultural Engineering from the University of Wyoming in 1972 and 1978 respectively. He worked as an engineering consultant, a self-employed business owner, and a plant engineer before joining the University of Wyoming Mechanical Engineering faculty as a Research Scientist in 1999. He holds four patents and has two pending. Current research activities are in the areas of wind and solar renewable energy and computer aided laboratory instruction. Some of his many projects include radial flow and augmented flow
and math-driven nature of engineering students.Intuitive learners prefer to investigate possibilities and relationships. These learners are morecomfortable with abstractions and mathematical formulations. Intuitive learners can use the casestudies to investigate “what if” scenarios in their projects. The sequential preference by thestudents would suggest use of cases that present facts where students can use well-establishedmethods such as laboratory procedures to solve a problem that could enhance learning. This isconsistent with the model we chose to use for the cases combined with the laboratory exercises. The majority of the students represented visual learners (95%). The mean score for verballearners was 6.8 and the mean for
the matter is theEarth’s capacity to sustain a burgeoning global population which makes increasing demands onlimited resources [5]. Projections of resource exhaustion continually change based onimprovements in technology and consumer behavior. In 2017, global resource consumptionovershot the sustainable rate of use of a year’s worth of the Earth’s resources by early August.This day, observed as Earth Overshoot Day, occurs earlier each year [6]. At the present rate, thehuman population will consume two years’ worth of the Earth’s resources that can be sustainablyreplenished each year by 2034. Thus, ensuring a healthy environment in the future requiresembracing environmental sustainability. We define environmental sustainability as the ability
purposes, they arenot harnessing the full pedagogical potential of LMS tools [15]. The hybrid approach hasresulted in increases in student-led learning [17], enhancements in student achievement,motivation and satisfaction [18, 19] and increases in student enrollment [20]. Research hasindicated that students’ perceptions and attitudes about the hybrid approach compared to face-to-face learning, are favorable and acceptable for the discipline of environmental engineering [21].However, the same study was not able to statistically prove that the hybrid option improved thequality of teaching and learning [21].The current project combined traditional face-to-face lecturing with voluntary on-line tutorials(short PowerPoint videos). Video lectures are
display box as shown below. Each box included the course syllabus, book(s), project work, homework/tests papers with samples of the good, the bad and the ugly, evaluations of oral and written presentations and other miscellaneous material. These packets, along with the Self Study, were placed in the team room for their use during the evaluation. Display Boxes Closing Statement: Prior to the final meeting with the President, the team met with the respective Department Chairs to discuss their findings and ask for any additional information that they may have overlooked. A Draft Statement of the findings is presented at this meeting. This is the time when the Institution can dispute or defend any of the
- project management, 17 - business and public administration, and 18 -leadership.Given the background related to individuals’ needs for autonomy and the importance thatengineers possess both technical and non-technical skills, the following research questionsmotivated this study:(1) To what extent do top-ranked environmental engineering programs allow students to make choices in their courses (such as free electives and technical electives)? a. How do choice opportunities in EnvE compare to chemical and civil engineering degrees? b. How do choice opportunities in EnvE compare to non-engineering degrees in chemistry, math, and physics?(2) What is the balance of required technical and non-technical courses in top