run during a 13-week fall semester, and in recentyears have had an enrollment total averaging 800 students. A second offering is made availablein the spring or summer semesters, usually with a much smaller class size.Prior to July 2015, ENGG 233 followed a traditional lecture format. Content was deliveredduring three one-hour lectures each week in a large theater-style format. Students practiced theirapplication skills in C++ programming during a two-hour weekly laboratory period withguidance from graduate student teaching assistants. In 2015, the faculty decided to redesign thecourse with emphasis on algorithmic thinking and exploratory, applied learning [Pears, 2007].The language of focus was changed to Processing, a Java-based language
., she worked as a postdoctoral fellow in the Physics Education Research Group at Ohio State with Alan Van Heuvelen.Richard Freuler, Ohio State University Richard J. Freuler is the Faculty Coordinator for the Fundamentals of Engineering for Honors (FEH) Program in the OSU Engineering Education Innovation Center, and he teaches the three-quarter FEH engineering course sequence. He is also a Professor of Practice in the Aerospace Engineering Department and Associate Director of the Aeronautical and Astronautical Research Laboratory at Ohio State. Dr. Freuler earned his Bachelor of Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering (1974), his BS in Computer and Information Science (1974), his MS in
Paper ID #31733Work in Progress: Impacting Engineering First-year Students Retentionthrough a Non-conventional Engineering Learning CommunityDr. Sonia M. Bartolomei-Suarez, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus Sonia M. Bartolomei-Suarez is a Professor of Industrial Engineering at the University of Puerto Rico Mayag¨uez (UPRM). She graduated with a BS in Industrial Engineering from UPRM (1983), a MSIE (1985) from Purdue University, and a PhD in Industrial Engineering (1996) from The Pennsylvania State University. Her teaching and research interests include: Discrete Event Simulation, Facilities Planning, Material
opportunities to solve engineeringproblems in a laboratory with sophisticated engineering tools and thus develop an appreciationfor the engineering profession. The contact of community college engineering students with theengineering profession is often even more meager.Engineering programs at two-year institutionsNearly forty percent of engineers who graduated between 1999-2000 attended a communitycollege at some point during their studies[7]. Despite this broad contribution of communitycolleges in our engineering education system, the equipment and financial resources available tothese two-year undergraduate institutions remain considerably less than that of their four yearinstitution counterparts. In addition, due to the lack of resources or time
Paper ID #25316Using More Frequent and Formative Assessment When Replicating the WrightState Model for Engineering Mathematics EducationDr. Leroy L. Long III, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Dr. Leroy L. Long III is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Fundamentals at Embry-Riddle Aeronau- tical University in Daytona Beach, FL. He earned his PhD in STEM Education with a focus on Engineer- ing Education within the Department of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University (OSU). He earned his Master’s in Mechanical Engineering at OSU and his Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering at Wright State University. Dr
interest and letters of support from their college’s dean anddepartment chair to the Assistant Director of Residential Education. Candidates are interviewedto determine optimal fit with their intended community’s curricular component and within aresidence hall system where relationship building is a critical element of the position. Serving asFiR is considered part of the faculty’s teaching workload and faculty receive course release forone semester during each year of service in this capacity.Membership in a RC community incurs no additional cost to the students beyond that of theirUniversity Housing contract. The University, as a whole, has made a commitment to the successof our living-learning communities by pledging financial and in-kind
) 13. Structural Engineering (CL)demonstrations (D), computer labs (CL), and/or hands-on 14. Transportation (D)laboratory experiments (L) that were developed by faculty 15. Digital Logic (L)throughout the College of Engineering. Generally, the modules 16. Electromagnetic Fields (D)were not prepared by the faculty teaching the class and were 17. Motors (L)often topics beyond their particular area of expertise. Therefore, 18. Manufacturingthe instructors would meet the day before the module was to be 19. Pneumatics (L)taught, providing an opportunity to discuss the material and to 20. Environmental Engineering
instruction and twohours of laboratory per week. This paper presents the design of the course, including anassessment-based approach for selection and rotation of supplemental instruction work groups,explores results of the pre- and post-assessments for two semesters of Engineering Physics I, andpresents implications for this course as well as for interfaces with subsequent courses inengineering curricula.IntroductionEngineering programs in the School of Engineering at Southern Illinois University Edwardsvillerequire two semesters of University Physics, a calculus-based sequence with associated labs.These courses are taught in the Department of Physics and require a pre-requisite of Calculus Iwith a grade of C or better and a co-requisite of Calculus
addition to his teaching activities, he has started several successful electronics companies in Columbus, OH.Michael Parke, Ohio State University Dr. Parke has been teaching courses in the First-Year Engineering Program at The Ohio State University for the past eight years. He earned dual B.A. and B.S. degrees in Mathematics and Physics from Humboldt State University and a Ph.D. degree in Physical Oceanography from U.C. San Diego. He worked for 12 years at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on satellite missions and the design of satellite missions. He then worked at the Center for Space Research at the University of Colorado and later at The Ohio State University, on global applications of
2006-78: DISCOVERY BASED LEARNING IN THE ENGINEERING CLASSROOMUSING UNDERWATER ROBOTICSLiesl Hotaling, Stevens Institute of Technology Liesl Hotaling is Assistant Director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education (CIESE), Stevens Institute of Technology. She received a B.S. in Marine Science from Fairleigh Dickinson University, a M.A.T. in Science Teaching from Monmouth University and a M.S. in Maritime Systems from Stevens.Richard Sheryll, Center for Maritime Systems, Stevens Institute of Technology Richard Sheryll is a Research Associate and Ph. D. candidate in Ocean Engineering at Stevens Institute of Technology. He received a B.S. in Oceanography and an A.S
afashion that lends itself to a sequential presentation of mathematical concepts that evolveover the 14 week semester.Lab Structure:There are eight laboratory sessions that were set up to achieve two goals: emphasizemathematical concepts, and introduce an aspect or two of the engineering disciplines.These two-hour lab sessions were developed with two constraints in mind; portability andminimal use of computers. Portability is needed because of the desire that anyengineering faculty member should be able to teach this course in any classroom in theengineering building or on campus. The second constraint is to enhance the courseportability, and to limit computer use to outside classroom assignments, and homework.So, even though the course includes
data considered includes (1) a survey administered at the end of the semester to the ENES 100 instructional team of faculty, undergraduate teaching fellows, and undergraduate laboratory assistants, (2) end of the semester course evaluation results, and (3) the authors’ reflections on the project transition. Each of the three authors was intimately involved with the course transformation, taught one or more sections of the course in the Fall 2014 semester, and participated in most faculty planning meetings and one or more student focus groups. Despite a large number of students being invited to participate in these focus groups from each section, these were poorly attended and so a detailed analysis of the focus group results has been omitted
get the answercorrect. In the second modality, students will be given an identical set of assignments with a limitednumber of attempted submissions to the auto-grader. To date, outcomes have been assessed for bothstudent groups through direct comparison of homework grades and through student surveys. In futureiterations of this work it is proposed that the results of common examinations also be used to determinewhich strategy optimizes individual student performance.2 BackgroundThis study describes the results of student outcomes under varying homework assessment strategies inEGR 102: Introduction to Engineering Modeling. EGR 102 is a freshman laboratory course with 200-350students per semester, divided into 30 student laboratory groups
AC 2011-1957: USE OF FLUENT SOFTWARE IN A FIRST-YEAR ENGI-NEERING MICROFLUIDIC DESIGN COURSEBarbara Elizabeth Carruthers, The Ohio State University Barbara E. Carruthers is a Mechanical Engineering graduate student at The Ohio State University and a Graduate Teaching Assistant for the OSU Fundamentals of Engineering for Honors (FEH) Program. Ms. Carruthers with graduate with her M.S.M.E. from Ohio State in 2012.Paul Alan Clingan, The Ohio State University - EEIC Lecturer - First Year Engineering Program Engineering Education and Innovation Center The Ohio State University MS - Chemical Engineering - Bucknell University - 1988 BS - Chemical Engineering - Buck- nell University - 1986
information to be represented as a combination of words, texts,pictures, and diagrams. This type of concept representation complements different learning stylesand focuses on the visual mode of teaching in the engineering disciplines (Bringardner, 2016).The first video created for this initiative introduced breadboarding and circuit buildingfundamentals. Once of the course laboratory exercises requires students to use fundamentaldigital logic to solve a problem, translate the equations to a digital interface - LabVIEW, andbuild a circuit using the National Instruments educational breadboard. It was common forstudents to struggle with breadboard wiring when trying to translate instructions from the labmanual text to the hands-on experience. This
AC 2007-2076: EXPANDING UNDERSTANDING OF FIRST-YEARENGINEERING STUDENT RETENTION AND TEAM EFFECTIVENESSTHROUGH SOCIAL STYLES ASSESSMENTDaniel Knight, University of Colorado at Boulder Daniel W. Knight is the engineering assessment specialist at the Integrated Teaching and Learning Program and Laboratory. He holds a BS in psychology from Louisiana State University, and an MS degree in industrial/organizational psychology and PhD degree in counseling psychology, both from the University of Tennessee. Prior to joining the University of Colorado at Boulder, he gained extensive experience in assessment and teamwork in an engineering education context through the development and evaluation of a
. Medical implant analysis for structure- function-performance is performed to optimize device design. Biomechanical characterization of tissues is performed to assess clinical treatments and to develop constitutive relationships. Laboratory techniques for structural characterization include SEM, TEM, FEM, SAXS, USAXS, XPS, DSC, GPC, FTIR, AFM, confocal microscopy, wear testing, fatigue testing, fracture mechanics analysis, and nanoindentation. Re- search supported by NIH, NSF, ONR, DARPA, OREF and the medical device industry. Pedagogical experience includes curriculum development in mechanical engineering and bioengineering. Teaching experience includes undergraduate courses on Mechanical Behavior and Processing of
Page 15.789.6shifts to electromagnetic actuators, and we plan to again include oversized class demonstrations.We will continue our efforts to include small group problem solving on a regular basis tostimulate discussion, as this was successful in the first semester.Hands-on Laboratories: Hands-on laboratories planned for the spring include hand-drawing (todevelop this valuable skill), motor characterization (to determine the torque-speed curve for aDC permanent magnet motor), introductory circuits and sensor labs to teach the students theskills required for their design project, and metrology labs to prepare them for more advancedmanufacturing labs during the second year.Team-Based Design Projects: In this second-semester course, we assign a
Paper ID #23868Evidence-based Best Practices for First-year Blended Learning Implementa-tionMs. Emily Ann Marasco, University of Calgary Emily Marasco is a Ph.D. candidate and sessional instructor at the University of Calgary. Her research focuses on creativity in electrical and computer engineering. Ms. Marasco is also an education specialist with EZ Robot Inc. and co-hosts The Robot Program, an educational webseries for teaching robotics through technology to thousands of students, educators, and hobbyists around the globe. Ms. Marasco speaks regularly at conferences and in the community on topics from technical work to
) Course instruction 5) Laboratories 6) Teaching assistants 7) Class size (i.e. large class sizes) 8) Interactions with instructors 9) Working in groupsThe interviews provided meaningful comments on the greatest challenges in the transition andthe first year experience. All interviews were transcribed, and the transcripts carefully reviewedand coded. Three main themes emerged from the examination of the interview transcripts:Social LifeStudents defined how elements of the social atmosphere impacted their experience as a first yearstudent: “Before, you could introduce yourself…Like, I’d want to know other people and they’d want to know me, but now, it’s more like I know the people I know, and I don’t feel that other
first-semester course which has three mainobjectives: (1) to prepare students for the rigor of future engineering classes; (2) to providestudents with a solid foundation of basic engineering skills; and (3) to introduce students to thedifferent engineering majors available at Clemson and possible career options. In Fall 2014, theGE program enrolled 1215 new freshman and 177 new transfer students1.Promoting problem solving development in first year engineering courses is critical to ensuringstudents’ transition successfully into upper-division courses and ultimately to a practicingengineer2. Innovative approaches to teaching problem solving skills have the potential ofappealing to a broader range of students in engineering3. “Traditional
and professional development.Mrs. Amy Barton, Mississippi State University Amy Barton (M.A. in English from Mississippi State University) is an instructor in the Technical Commu- nication Program in MSU’s Bagley College of Engineering. She teaches Technical Writing, a junior-level writing course required of all undergraduate engineering students. She has also taught high school En- glish, Freshman Composition, and Introduction to Literature. Through this varied teaching experience, she has learned to tailor instructional techniques to meet the needs of different types of learners. She focuses on implementing writing-to-learn strategies in engineering courses to keep students engaged and improve critical thinking
of belonging to their program of study. While this was a known problem for theEE program, a closed-loop educational assessment and improvement was conducted to close thegap and relate students to their field of study as early as the first semester of study. In this newapproach to the lower-division courses students will start system view courses and currentprototyping circuits and tools were used to set up the laboratory experiments. The goals of thisstudy were: a) Integration of courses and providing a system view in the lower-division courses. b) Improving retention and engagement in early years of study. c) Closing the gap between lower-division and upper-division courses by practicing system view projects using
Paper ID #12190Assessing and Developing a First Year Introduction to Mechanical Engineer-ing CourseDr. Robert J. Rabb P.E., The Citadel Robert Rabb is an associate professor and the Mechanical Engineering Program Director at The Citadel. He previously taught mechanical engineering at the United States Military Academy at West Point. He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the United States Military Academy and his M.S.E. and PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. His research and teaching interests are in mechatronics, regenerative power, and multidisciplinary engineering.Jason
March 6, 1945 and completed his secondary education in Snyder, Texas. He was granted the B.A. (magna cum laude) and M.E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering from Rice University, Houston, Texas, in 1967 and 1968, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in Applied Physics from Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1974. He was employed as an Aerosystems Engineer in the antenna design group of General Dynamics, Ft. Worth, Texas, from 1968 to 1969. From 1970 to 1974 he was a Teaching Fellow and Research Assistant in applied mathematics and applied physics at Harvard University. He was also a Research Assistant at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories, Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the summers of 1970 and 1971. In 1974
- sultant for the Introduction to Engineering and Design course, and also teaches courses in Science and Technology Studies such as the international history of the Internet, the history of science and race, and science fiction.Prof. Gunter W. Georgi, New York University Polytechnic School of Engineering Gunter W. Georgi, a registered Professional Engineer, is an Industry Professor at the New York University Polytechnic School of Engineering in Brooklyn, New York. Prof. Georgi is the course director for the Introduction to Engineering and Design course. He received his B.S. from Cooper Union and his M.S. and professional M.E. degrees from Columbia University. He has worked many years in the aerospace industry in design
AC 2012-4874: THE TEACHER EFFECT: EXPLAINING RETENTION GAINSIN FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING PROJECTS COURSESDr. Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder Daniel W. Knight is the Engineering Assessment Specialist at the Integrated Teaching and Learning Pro- gram (ITLL) and the Broadening Opportunity through Leadership and Diversity (BOLD) Center in CU’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. He holds a B.A. in psychology from the Louisiana State University, and an M.S. degree in industrial/organizational psychology and a Ph.D. degree in counseling psychology, both from the University of Tennessee. Knight’s research interests are in the areas of reten- tion, program evaluation, and teamwork practices in
Microelectronics, conducting research and development in the realization of advanced semiconductor technologies. From 1992 to 2008 he was with Louisiana Tech University, where he was the Entergy/LP&L/NOPSI Professor of Electrical Engineering, in recognition of his teaching and research contributions in the microsystems and nanotechnology areas. From September 2000 to June 2008 he was the Director of the Institute for Micromanufacturing, where, from 1992, he had contributed to the growth and development of the Institute, including through planning and setting up of laboratory resources and facilities, development and implementation of major sponsored research efforts, and realization of academic courses and curricula, on the
postdoctoral studies at Emory Univer- sity as a Distinguished CCNE Fellow and NIH K99 Postdoctoral Fellow. Dr. Smith’s research interests include nanomaterial engineering, single-molecule imaging, and cancer biology. He teaches undergradu- ate and graduate courses in Bioengineering and is the Associate Head of Undergraduate Programs.Prof. Dallas R Trinkle , University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dallas R. Trinkle is an associate professor in Materials Science and Engineering at Univ. Illinois, Urbana- Champaign. He received his Ph.D. in Physics from Ohio State University in 2003. Following his time as a National Research Council postdoctoral researcher at the Air Force Research Laboratory, he joined the faculty of the
Freshman CourseMuch research in recent years has verified that an active learning style approach to freshmanengineering design courses adds value to undergraduate engineering programs and improvesretention rates. Many universities have established First Year Programs to coordinate theactivities and classes for first year students. However, not all universities have the funds toestablish programs separate from disciplinary programs. How can faculty that are not assignedto a First Year Program efficiently manage multiple sections of a hands-on course with limitedresources?There are several models for teaching basic engineering concepts in electrical, mechanical,chemical, computer, civil and system engineering to freshman engineering students