of the manipulator from measurements of the inputs and outputs (jointpositions, velocities, and accelerations) and calibrates adaptively the model in the controller.II. Problem StatementThe matrix-vector formulation of the closed-form dynamic model for a robot with N joint axes1 Page 14.161.2is: D(q, λ) q&& + h ( q, q& , λ) = F(t) (1)In (1), q(t), q& (t), and q&& (t) are the joint position, velocity and acceleration vectors; λ is thevector of dynamics parameters; D(q, λ) is the inertial matrix; h ( q, q& , λ) is the coupling vectorthat incorporates the
communications are essential for a simple example of questions and answers(denoted Q/As) and up to more detailed example in mind. Intentional communicationswith confirmation on a real-time basis are also essential for better mutualcomprehension in distance education and learning[4][8]. Here, it enables users to send and confirm not only the individual learners’ Q/As, butalso their more in-depth intentions, with fewer disturbances present in a class context.Teaching staff can also control communication in many timely situations for a betterprogression of class context, with their logged data displayed during the process. At thesame time, mutually intentional communications are more available between learnersand teaching staff, or among learners. Student
-eight responses were received with interesting findingsas shown in Table 1, 2, and Figure 1 below. Table 1: Survey Results Related to Curriculum and Assessment (N=88) Curriculum Assessment Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Strongly Disagree 1% 3% 1% 3% 3% 1% 10% 9% 2% 3% 0% 2% 5% Disagree 15% 18% 1% 31% 27% 28
the localleaders to determine the needs of the Q. #1 72%people and to obtain technicalinformation required for the project(such as stream locations, water flow Q. #2 81%rates, etc.).Upon arrival, all of the projects were Q. #3 79%implemented; however, many of theprojects had to be adjusted based on the 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%local materials available. Materials which students had been told would beavailable were actually difficult to find. This was probably due to miscommunication betweenthe NGO contact and the engineering students.Most of the interviews conducted showed that
Foundation of China for Innovative Research Page 22.377.9Group (No. 50921002), the project of the construction point of the national special discipline, the project of the national teaching group and the China Education Ministry Key Lab OpenProject (CPEUKF08-08).Reference[1] X-X ZHANG, Y-M Zhao, J-T Liu, et al. Mineral processing education in China. XXV International Mineral Processing Congress, September 6-10, 2010, Brisbane, Australia: 3095-3098.[2] Y-Q He, Y-M Zhao, J-T Liu, et al. Exerting the advantages of national key discipline, outstanding the training of engineering
languages otherthan English to see if they have equal usages. Newmark (1988,pp: 125-147) believes that animal metaphors are used to a great extent inorder todescribe inferior or undesirable human habits and attributes. Davids and Bentahila (1989, pp: 49-68) examined animal terms in British English and MoroccanArabic. They use different theories like similarity and relevance to categorize animal metaphors. Holmes (1992; Quoted by: Hsieh 2006) gives examples of the chicken metaphor in hersociolinguistic analysis of sexism in language. Sutton (1995; Q by: the same) studies linguistic discrimination against females and makes astrong argument about the metaphor "women are animals ". Tomita (2000, pp: 1-15) works on a large amount of
acknowledged and valued. Theseteam discussions allowed for discussions on conflict resolution and intercultural differences inteamwork which allows for shared context to improve team dynamics [8]. This was an importantpiece of working on an inter-cultural, online team project to ensure team cohesion and distributionof work [5]. These discussions lead to conversations about how teamwork is done in Brazil andthe USA and the differences in work cultures.Project Details and OutcomesThe project was split into three deliverables: 1. Background research on a Google Site, 2. Grouppresentation and question and answer (Q&A) session, and 3. Group report. The project assignmentwith detailed explanation of deliverables can be found in Appendix A. The first
. ASEE 2015 Annual Conference Proceedings. Seattle, WA.15 Getleman, J. (2010). Africa’s Forever Wars. Retrieved December 5, 2016 from http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/02/11/africas-forever-wars/.16 (2017). Map of Africa, Africa Map. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/search?q=maps+of+africa&biw=1680&bih=920&tbm=isch&imgil=uOh2ofl xPuUI3M%253A%253BWo- WmyxY4EIBDM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.africaguide.com%25252Fafmap.ht m&source=iu&pf=m&fir=uOh2oflxPuUI3M%253A%252CWo- WmyxY4EIBDM%252C_&usg=__geMtA1KsRoJpDEskKayDnLAdGGo%3D&ved=0ahUKEwiKyf juw8LSAhUB4YMKHV_IDesQyjcIKQ&ei=Ua29WMrcE4HCjwTfkLfYDg#imgrc=uOh2oflxPuUI3 M:17 (2017). African Flags. Retrieved from
developing the Course Syllabus (Form 1). The course syllabus contains thecourse outcomes mapped to the program outcomes. The measure for assessment is the CourseAssessment Form (CAF) (Form 2-a) where the course objectives and outcomes are listed andmapped to the program outcomes, as shown in Figure 3. The form lists three performancemeasures: students (S), Faculty (F), and Quantitative (Q).A) Measuring Course OutcomesThe course outcomes are measured using three indices: Student Assessment, FacultyAssessment, and Quantitative Assessment. Page 13.41.6Student Assessment of the Course:By the end of each semester, students evaluate the course using the
tobetter explore the educational contents of engineering ethics education under globalization.AcknowledgementsWe acknowledge the support of the Scholarship from BUAA. We would like to express oursincere appreciation to the anonymous reviewers, whose constructive feedbacks and insightshelped to improve the quality of the paper.References[1] S. Yu, “New approaches to engineering ethics research,” Journal of Social Science of Harbin Normal University, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 11-13, 2016.[2] S. Zhang, “Review of domestic engineering ethics research,” Journal of Hunan Institute of Engineering (Social Science Edition), vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 87-89, 2005.[3] Z. Li, H. Cong, Q. Wang, etc., Engineering Ethics. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press
improvement decisions are arrived at based on the results ofthe feedback loops. Irrespective of the tools and methods used, the adoption of the pilot program,or a variation thereof, should be based on quantitative results that show measurable Page 11.1257.11improvements in student learning outcome. Course Course Assessment Data [Q] Q = Quarterly Student A = Annually S = Semiannually Course
, conclusions orrecommendations presented in this paper represent the views of the authors only.References[1] J. Allum and H. Okahana, “Graduate enrollment and degrees: 2005 to 2015,” Wash. DC Counc. Grad. Sch., 2016.[2] Institute of International Education, “Open Doors Data,” 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.iie.org/Research-and-Publications/Open-Doors/Data#.WKYZLm8rKUk. [Accessed: 16-Feb-2017].[3] Y.-H. Kuo, “International teaching assistants on American campuses,” Online Submiss., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 63–71, 2002.[4] B. S. Plakans, “Undergraduates’ experiences with and attitudes toward international teaching assistants,” TESOL Q., pp. 95–119, 1997.[5] N. LeGros and F. Faez, “The intersection between intercultural competence and
Q Programs 1 100 151 152 1 Computer Science & Engineering MS Spring 2015 2 99 148 150 1 Petroleum Engineering ME Spring 2015 3 97 148 158 1 Computer Science & Engineering MS Spring 2015 4 95 148 153 1 Biomedical Engineering PhD Spring 2015 5 91 145 161 1 Mathematics (interdisciplinary) PhD Spring 2015 6 90 144 150 1 Aerospace Engineering MS Fall 2015 Conditional 7 87
Long-term Education Reform and Development Plan (国家 中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要), http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A01/s7048/201007/t20100729_171904.html3. R. Jones, Exporting American Higher Education, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 20094. Z. Zhou, C. Pezeshki, Understanding Change and Development of Engineering Education in China, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 20145. R. Parker, Motivation and Vision of xxx, Journal of International Higher Education (internal journal), Vol. 4, No. 3, Sept. 20116. Q. Zhu, B. Jesiek, J. Yuan, Engineering Education Policymaking in Cross-National Context: A Critical Analysis of Engineering Education Accreditation in China, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 20147. X. Tang, Q. Zhu, H. Pang
-engagement-visible/.[16] Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence: Intercultural Communication Center, “Recognizing and Addressing Cultural Variations in the Classroom,” 2006.[17] Q. Zhu, “Toward a Globalized Engineering Education: Comparing Dominant Images of Engineering Education in the United States and China,” Am. Soc. Eng. Educ. Annu. Conf. Expo., 2019.[18] W. Sun and Q. Zhang, “How to Build an American Classroom Environment in a Chinese Engineering College,” Am. Soc. Eng. Educ. Annu. Conf. Expo., 2015.[19] G. J. Ryan, L. L. Marshall, K. Porter, and H. Jia, “Peer, professor and self-evaluation of class participation,” Act. Learn. High. Educ., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 49–61, 2007.Appendix – Final Version of the Participation Log
engineers. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence (pp. 362-373). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.[25] Davis, M. (2006). Integrating ethics into technical courses: Micro-insertion. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(4): 717-730.[26] Richards, L. G., Gormon, M., Scherer, W. T., & Landel, R. D. (1995). Promoting active learning with cases and instructional modules. Journal of Engineering Education, 84(4): 375-381.[27] Jesiek, B. K., Zhu, Q., Woo, S. E., Thompson, J., & Mazzurco, A. (2014). Global engineering competency in context: Situations and behaviors. Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, 8(1).[28] Jesiek, B. K., Woo, S. E., Zhu, Q., Ramane, K. D., & Choudhary, N. (2015
’ responses to questions g through l. Figure 6: Results for the Education Category of the SurveyFocus Category - Cultural Awareness:This category of the survey focused on determining if the FLEAP provided a change in theparticipant’s cultural awareness. The questions focused on assessing the students’ understandingof the culture of different countries and viewpoints of the international market. Results from thefive questions were all relatively positive with most questions being answered as “slightlyimproved” or “greatly improved.” The overall category average was 3.56, which was the averageof all the participants’ responses to questions m through q. Figure 4: Results for the Cultural Awareness Category of the
enthralled with the one-on-one interactions with this iconic teamas seen in Figure 4. The presentation content and TTU team’s competency boosted the Indianteams’ energy as reflected in the written student feed-back shown below in Table 1. The resultsshow that students gave high scores (8.26 or higher out of 10) to the TTU team’s presentationstyle, competency, and with the Q & A session. Page 26.1659.7 Figure 2. Vellore workshop Figure 3. Demonstration by the 2011 championship vehicle Page 26.1659.8Figure 4. One-on-one interactions with TTU Baja team members and Indian
, PowerPoint, pictures (JPEG), video (MPEG) can2 highest be posted Files in English and Japanese can be posted and represented correctly3 highest (non-garbled) Posted threads can be classified/identified according to , for example,4 highest project theme, Q&A. Those, who registered for specific topic(s), can get a notice when a5 second target/specified topic is postedDuring the current academic year, the collaboration software has been used to foster interaction.At the US-based school, teams of students practice international videoconferencing by holdingmeetings with students and faculty at different locations on campus
Education." Journal of Engineering Education 87(3): 211-214.Meiksins, P. and C. Smith (1996). Engineering Labour: Technical Workers in Comparative Perspective. London, Verso.Miles, M. and A. Huberman (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications Inc.Orr, J. (1996). "Talking About Machines: An Ethnography of a Modern Job." Collection on Technology and Work: 172.Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research. Newbury Park, California, Sage: 145-198. Page 11.1312.8Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action
Carolina, Charlotte Miguel Pando is Associate Professor, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Department, UNC, Charlotte.Dr. Samuel T. Lopez, University of North Carolina, Charlotte Page 25.834.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 International Service as a Means of Improving Retention of Engineering Students Brett Q. Tempest, Sandra L. Dika, Miguel A. Pando & Samuel T. Lopez University of North Carolina at CharlotteAbstract One of the most significant challenges facing engineering education is
presented in Table 2. It can be observed that thecurrent data shows similar learning preferences with the previous data, validating the integrityand reliability of the data. Table 2: Comparison of Current Data with Previous ResultsPopulation AC SE VI SE Tota Reference T N S Q l PercentagesIowa State, Materials Eng. 63 67 85 58 129 Constant [8]Michigan Tech, Environmental Eng. 56 63 74 53 83 Paterson [9]Ryerson University, Electrical Eng.Students 2000 53 66 86 72 87 Zywno & Waalen
. Paradigm Shift: Unified and Associative Feature-based Concurrent Engineering and Collaborative Engineering, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, v19, n6, pp. 625-641.4. Peng, X., Leu, M.C., and Niu, Q. 2009. Integration of collaborative engineering design using teamcenter community in mechanical engineering curricula. Product Realization: A Comprehensive Approach, Springer Editor, pp. 205-223.5. Tipnis, V.A., 1999. Evolving issues in Product Life Cycle design: Design for sustainability. Chapter 13, in Handbook of Life Cycle Engineering: Concepts, models and technologies, Edited by A. Molina, A. Kusiak and J. Sanchez, London. Kluwer Academic Publisher. Pp. 399-412.6. Su, X., Prabhu, B.S., Chu, C.C., and Gadh, R., 2004
companion to education. London: Taylor and Francis BooksNGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc.Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative interviewing. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3, 344-347.Rehmat, A. P., Ehsan, H., Yeter, I., Moore, T., & Cardella, M. (2019). Exploring elementary teachers and students’ perceptions of computational thinking school and imagination station. National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Conference, Baltimore, MD.Ritz, J. M., & Fan, S. C. (2015). STEM and
, in order to doeveryday homework and to perform well in the lab tests. The students spent the last three days ongroup work for their final project. The two instructors monitored the teams’ progress on theirprojects and had constant discussion and feedback sessions. On the last day of the program, eachteam made a presentation on its final project followed by a Q/A session. The final presentationwas evaluated by the two instructors from SIUE, a faculty member from Universiti TeknologiMalaysia (UTM) and the TU professors (the authors of this paper).After the final presentation was done, an assessment form was handed out to the students tocollect the program evaluation from the students. The questions used in the assessment formwere as follows
. Donayre and D. E. Carrillo, “Education andpractice: The Peruvian experience,” in the 17th International Conference on SoilMechanics and Geotechnical Engineering: The Academia and Practice of GeotechnicalEngineering. ICSMGE 2009, Alexandra, Egypt, October 5-9, 2009, M. Hamza, M.Shahien, Y. ElMossallamy, Eds, Routledge, 2009. pp: 2737-2740.[12] J.B. Ochs, T.A. Watkins and B.W. Boothe, “Creating a Truly MultidisciplinaryEntrepreneurial Educational Environment,” Journal of Engineering Education. vol. 90,pp. 243-250, Jan. 2013.[13] J. Zhang and R. Wu, “Survey on the Educational Mode for Geology EngineeringPractice,” Education Teaching Forum. pp. 143-145, Jan. 2019 (In Chinese).[14] Q. Xiao, G. Zheng, Y. Chao, N. Yang and K. Qin. “Survey on the Field
-Organization ofEngineering Education in the United States, Europe, and Latin America. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4),433–447; Mitcham, C. (2009). A historico-ethical perspective on engineering education: From use and convenienceto policy engagement. Engineering Studies, 1(1), 35–53; Sato, Y. (2007). Systems Engineering and ContractualIndividualism: Linking Engineering Processes to Macro Social Values. Social Studies of Science, 37(6), 909-934;Zhu, Q. (2010). Engineering Ethics Studies in China: Dialogue Between Traditionalism and Modernism.Engineering Studies, 2(2), 85–107
2017 ASEE Southeast Section Conferenceprompt/adaptive feedback on individual or group works. Q 8: The in-class activities helped you improve your understanding of the lectureThis metric is directly connected to the first 4 discussed above. It directly gives the impact of theclass structure and approach on the overall main goal which is student learning. Responses arechosen from the following list: (1) Strongly agree, (2) Agree, (3) Neither agree or disagree, (4)Disagree, (5) Strongly disagree.Students from UC campus are more likely to agree that the activities in class have contributed toimprove their understanding of the lecture. Similar observation was made for most students of theother campus. A percentage of students have disagree or were