Paper ID #12830Video Based, Game Integrated Concept Tutors – Effectiveness in FreshmanCoursesDr. Eliza A Banu, Auburn University Dr. Eliza Banu has a Bachelors degree in Electrical Engineering from Polytechnic University of Bucharest and completed her Ph.D. program in Mechanical Engineering at Auburn University in 2014. Dr. Banu’s research interests are in the dynamics of impact of rigid bodies and human with granular matter as well as developing innovative instructional materials. She has been working with LITEE (Laboratory for Innovative Technology and Engineering Education) at Auburn University since 2010.Mr. Sai
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 A Guided Approach to Technical Report Writing for Undergraduate Engineering StudentsAbstractLearning how to write technical reports can be difficult for undergraduate engineering studentsthat have had very little, if any, experience with technical report writing in their high schoolclasses. The laboratory course “Engineering Measurement and Data Analysis” is required for allundergraduate engineering students at Grand Valley State University, with a major focus of thiscourse being technical report writing.In order to guide the students in preparing technical reports, templates were designed to act as anexample of how to present their laboratory results in a
Paper ID #11641Pre-defined roles and team performance for first year studentsDr. Jess W. Everett, Rowan University Jess W. Everett has worked in four distinct areas: waste management operations research, contaminated site assessment and remediation, education innovation, and sustainable engineering. He has employed a wide variety of techniques, including computer modeling, laboratory experiments, field testing, and surveys. His current research focuses on energy conservation, alternative energy generation, engineering learning communities, and hybrid courses (courses with classroom and on-line aspects).Dr. Jenahvive K Morgan
engineering. This introductory freshmanengineering course has been offered since 1994, and is highly valued by faculty and students.2 Inthe laboratory section, they work in teams of 8-12 with a $200 budget (funded by our College ofEngineering) to solve a real-world, client-based engineering design problem proposed mostly byindividuals in the local community. Our regular clients often encourage others in the communityto apply to our program. To further recruit clients and projects, mass emails are sent out in thefall, spring, and summer to past clients, University researchers, and to local non-profitorganizations. For example, one of our clients is the United Cerebral Palsy (UCP) of our county.What started as one lone project in 2012 to build a stair
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
given rapid growth in first-year and transfer enrollments. Before the restructuring, the first-year program consisted of two, 2 credit courses calledIntroduction to Engineering I and Introduction to Engineering II. Introduction to Engineeringcourses were run out of the College of Engineering but were staffed with faculty and TeachingAssistants from the individual departments. Introduction to Engineering I was taken by all students independent of engineering major,usually in the first semester on campus, and therefore had a fall term enrolment approaching 600plus students and approximately 100 students in the second semester, mostly transfer students.The first course was run in the form of 2 lectures and 2 hours of laboratory per
to the different engineering disciplinesand principles associated with engineering design. Consequently, by the end of the course, itwas our expectation that students would be able to: 1. Articulate the fundamental differences between the engineering disciplines 2. Work in a team environment to solve engineering problems 3. Write technical communications for various audiencesWe used a combination of laboratory worksheets, laboratory reports, quizzes, concept maps, anda final paper assignment to evaluate student learning.The course was taught by six faculty and was comprised of five modules (engineering topics andpanel sessions) that introduced students to the various engineering degree programs. The fivecourse modules
, communication skills, andprofessionalism. As a foundation for sustained success in mechanical engineering, additionalcourse topics include: lifelong learning, time management, community and professional service,and career development. Laboratory: two hours.Course Objectives: Students who successfully complete the course requirements should be ableto: 1) Explain the engineering profession and engineering ethics. 2) Use technical communication skills to explain the results/analysis of introductory laboratory exercises. 3) Explain engineering analysis and design. 4) Analyze data collected during laboratory exercises. 5) Analyze the impact engineering has had on the modern world. 6) Design a simple engineering device, write a design
student interactions are effective in achievingstudent-centered and inquiry-based learning, both which are proven approaches for building Page 26.1277.2students’ problem solving and laboratory skills5. Research on the outcomes of SCALE-UP inengineering and mathematics show students participating in SCALE-UP classrooms exhibitedhigher levels of efficacy with the course material6. There is additional evidence of improvedacademic performance, conceptual understanding, and skills development in studentsparticipating in SCALE-UP classrooms compared to traditional lecture-based instruction7.PurposeThe GE Program is committed to continuously improving
second major undertaking was repurposing the laboratories that support the ENES 100 course to better reflect the new project. For example, hot wire cutters and a small wind tunnel that were used extensively for the hovercraft project were placed in storage and drill presses and mechanical fastening tools were purchased for the OSV project. Additional laboratory modifications included developing the vision system and building inlab test beds (7 x 14 ft sand boxes). A notable shortcoming in the project transition was the lack of time and expertise to Page 26.95.9develop laboratory equipment to test the output of motors or the wheelsand
had the following stated goals10: • Solve problems involving applications of algebra and trigonometry in engineering. • Solve problems involving applications of vectors and complex numbers in engineering. • Solve problems involving applications of systems of equations and matrices in engineering. • Solve problems involving applications of derivatives in engineering. • Solve problems involving applications of integrals in engineering. • Solve problems involving applications of differential equations in engineering. • Use MATLAB to solve a variety of introductory engineering mathematics problems. • Conduct a variety of physical experiments using engineering laboratory equipment. Write proper technical
traditionalmethods should remain as the major part of teaching. In Weisner & Lan[7] student learning iscompared in engineering laboratories on process control and monitoring. Computer-basedsimulation experiments are used as teaching tools for one group of students while another groupuses tactile experiments. The study reveals that student learning is not adversely affected bycomputer-based experiments. A similar comparison study is reported in Olin et al. [8], wheresimulation-based laboratory components are introduced a group of electrical engineeringstudents and their learning performances are assessed against a control group. The group thatused simulation-based environments outperformed the control group. The study in Fraser et al. [9]also reports
Paper ID #13106FAST learning: Follow Accomplishments of Senior TeamsDr. Fernando Garcia Gonzalez, Florida Golf Coast University Dr. Fernando Gonzalez joined FGCU as an Assistant Professor in the Software Engineering Program in the fall of 2013. Previously he has worked at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas, the U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico and at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, Florida. Dr. Gonzalez graduated from the University of Illinois in 1997 with a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering. He received his Master’s degree in Electrical
INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING KOLB’S CYCLE. Concrete Reflective Abstract Active Experience Observation Conceptualization Experimentation Examples Brainstorming Analogies Case study Field work Discussion Lecture Field work Laboratories Journals Model building Homework Observations Logs Papers Laboratory Primary text readings Peer review Projects Projects Problem sets Rhetorical questions Simulations Readings
Scholar.Dr. Brian P. Self, California Polytechnic State University Brian Self obtained his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Engineering Mechanics from Virginia Tech, and his Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Utah. He worked in the Air Force Research Laboratories before teaching at the U.S. Air Force Academy for seven years. Brian has taught in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo since 2006. During the 2011-2012 academic year he participated in a professor exchange, teaching at the Munich University of Applied Sciences. His engineering education interests include collaborating on the Dynamics Concept Inventory, developing model-eliciting activities in mechanical engineering
-Declaration 84.3 82.2 85.2 87.7 89.9 Retention (%)improved retention. During the 2013-14 academic year WTSN 111 and WTSN 112 lengthenedthe laboratory from 1-1/2 hours per week to 2 hours and went to a single 1-hour lecture per weekfrom the previous two 1-hour lectures per week. However, improved retention had already beenseen in the 2012-13 academic year, the year previous to the introduction of the new projects Also, in the 2012-13 academic year the class sizes in WTSN 103 and WTSN 104 werereduced from 32 students per section to 24 students per section. And as previously noted, thesame 24 students in an WTSN 103 section were together in the WTSN 111 laboratory
sabbatical period in the laboratory of Dr. Kurt Fischer at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, she has spent the past several years developing a common language in order to bridge and translate the findings of developmental science to first year college engineering and science education.Dr. Robert M. Henry P.E., University of New Hampshire Associate Professor of Civil Engineering University of Pennsylvania - BSCE 1973, PhD 1981 Areas of interest: structural analysis, engineering educational software, engineering education, using Minecraft to teach engineering ideas to middle school childrenProf. Ernst Linder, University of New Hampshire (UNH) 2001 - present: Professor of Statistics, Dept. of Mathematics &
. Transform Teaching and Learning: Improved retention as a result of expanding our undergraduate teaching assistance (UTA) programs and institutionalizing a formal UTA training pedagogy. A working knowledge in best practices will enable them to be both effective and engaging in the laboratory and/or classroom. 2. Increase Faculty and Student Interactions: Improved retention as a result of implementing University-wide and discipline-specific (intentional) community building activities that foster STEM students’ sense of identification with STEM departments.This project’s conceptual framework is built around three mutually intersecting groups: STEMfaculty, STEM undergraduates, and STEM Undergraduate Teaching
mostly lecture with pauses for questions inone of the physics classes, to shared problem solving in one of the mathematics classes, tostudent led activities in engineering. Student interactions with each other during class rangedfrom very little, particularly in the large lecture halls, to almost constant collaboration in classeswith laboratory formats. Implications for faculty development for the improvement of freshmanengineering programs are discussed.Introduction This study examines the relationship between the pedagogical beliefs and practices offaculty teaching required freshman courses for engineering students. Research shows that facultymay hold beliefs about teaching that, in the ideal, are learner-centered, but in reality
powered car.In Engineering Foundations, students are also introduced to a number of professional skills, suchas technical writing, communication, engineering ethics, and the engineering design process.Technical writing is covered by requiring the students to prepare laboratory reports for each ofthe four hands-on experiments. Communication is emphasized through a group presentation thatrequires the students to research one of the fourteen Grand Challenges10 identified by theNational Academy of Engineers and to present their findings to the class. Ethics is coveredduring a lecture that uses practical examples and role playing to emphasize the challenges inmaking ethical decisions in an engineering context.As mentioned previously, the Engineering
. Page 26.1124.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Making Meaning of Data: Exploring Representations of Classroom Activities from a First Year Engineering CourseAbstract Real-time, pedagogical feedback can be useful for instructors and graduate teachingassistants in assessing the effectiveness of their instructional activities. This is especially usefulin first-year engineering classes, where laboratory and team activities may be more common.The G-RATE, Global Real-Time Assessment Tool for Teaching Enhancement, is a tool toprovide research- based feedback for instructors about their classroom interactions across fourareas based on the “How People Learn” framework1
Paper ID #12230Spatial Visualization Skills Intervention for First Year Engineering Students:Everyone’s a Winner!Dr. S. Patrick Walton, Michigan State University S. Patrick Walton received his B.ChE. from Georgia Tech, where he began his biomedical research career in the Cardiovascular Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. He then attended MIT where he earned his M.S. and Sc.D. while working jointly with researchers at the Shriners Burns Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital. While at MIT, he was awarded a Shell Foundation Fellowship and was an NIH biotechnology Predoctoral Trainee. Upon completion of his doctoral studies, he
can work on their engineering designprojects, to provide enhance opportunities for students to work on real-world design challenges,and to enrich design projects with practical training in topics such as entrepreneurship. Surveyresults indicate that freshman students felt it helped them develop skills in engineering designand prototyping.Finally, in its ‘Living with the Lab’ initiative to support over 400 first-year students, LouisianaTech’s classroom / laboratory / shop facility was designed to support 40 students at a time(working in teams of 2 to 4) and is equipped with 11 tables for project work, note taking, andgroup interaction.17 The walls of the laboratory are lined with 86 linear feet of cabinets withstainless steel counter tops. The
Paper ID #12106Evaluation of a dual first year student advising programDr. Jess W. Everett, Rowan University Jess W. Everett has worked in four distinct areas: waste management operations research, contaminated site assessment and remediation, education innovation, and sustainable engineering. He has employed a wide variety of techniques, including computer modeling, laboratory experiments, field testing, and surveys. His current research focuses on energy conservation, alternative energy generation, engineering learning communities, and hybrid courses (courses with classroom and on-line aspects).Ms. Maria Perez-Colon, Rowan
, vol. 67, 505-524, 2007.[13] Layton, R. A., Loughry, M. L., Ohland, M. W., & Ricco, G. D., “Design and validation of a web-based systemfor assigning members to teams using instructor-specified criteria”, Advances in Engineering Education, 2 (1), 1-28,2010[14] Abarca, Javier, et al. (2000) “Introductory Engineering Design: A Projects-Based Approach,” Third Edition,Textbook for GEEN 1400: First-Year Engineering Projects and GEEN 3400: Innovation and Invention, IntegratedTeaching and Learning Program and Laboratory, College of Engineering and Applied Science, University ofColorado Boulder. Available online athttp://itll.colorado.edu/index.php/courses_workshops/geen_1400/resources/textbook
Paper ID #11270Improving Student Success and Retention Rates in Engineering: An Innova-tive Approach for First-Year CoursesDr. Steffen Peuker, California Polytechnic State University Dr. Steffen Peuker holds the James L. Bartlett, Jr. Assistant Professor position in the Mechanical Engi- neering Department at the California State University in San Luis Obispo. He is teaching courses, includ- ing laboratories, in the HVAC&R concentration and mechanical engineering including first-year courses. Dr. Peuker’s educational research focuses on increasing student retention and success in engineering through implementation of a
enhancing collaboration between peers andpotentially easing the difficulty of the engineering curriculum for some students. Strategies thathave been found to be effective for learning in engineering classrooms and promoting community-building amongst students include cooperative learning activities, model-eliciting activities,problem-based learning, inquiry-based laboratories, and learning communities.3 The use of studentself-assessment tools can help students to increase self-efficacy and confidence in theirengineering-related abilities.11 Many universities are currently utilizing multi-pronged approachesthat include improvements to mentoring and academic advising, the development of a communityof belonging, and improvements to teaching in the
course were identical with the exception of minor changes to theactual content of the team projects. Specifically, projects for the control group (andcorresponding weighting for course grades) included a sailboat (10%), a racecar (20%), abiomimetic design (20%), and a video game (30%). In contrast, the training group projectsincluded a musical instrument (10%), a structure (10%), bridge (25%), and racecar (40%). Bothcohorts were required to sketch, construct, present and test their designs in the laboratory. Page 26.689.7Adapting the theoretical foundation of CC, we created a simple and clever acronym, SUIT,which was the basis for a 90-minute
includesa 1-credit course devoted to selection of an engineering major. This includes hands-on activitieslead by faculty and industry professionals to learn about each of the engineering disciplinesoffered.At the Private institution, the students are exposed to a basic engineering design process throughmulti-week projects that are not intended to aide in engineering discipline selection. However,students complete a series of homework assignments throughout the semester that aid inselecting their major, understanding engineering career options, and integrating into the Collegeof Engineering.At the Large Land Grant, the students are exposed to a variety of engineering disciplines throughweekly laboratory experiences, but selection of a major is not a
Paper ID #12655Summer Engineering Enrichment Program Results Exceed ExpectationsDr. Robert W. Whalin, Jackson State University Dr. Whalin, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and Director, Coastal Hazards Center, Jackson State University. He is Director Emeritus of the Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. He received his PhD in Oceanography from Texas A&M University in 1971 and is a Registered Professional Engineer. Dr. Whalin was Director of Army Research Laboratory (1998-2003; Adelphi, MD), and Technical Director /Director of Waterways Experiment Station (1985-1998; Vicks- burg