the overarching fieldof continuum mechanics. The continuum approach permits students to synthesize and analyze knowledge, and our use ofcase studies integrates cultural, political, and ethical issues into a sociotechnical understanding ofengineering mechanics. We describe the development and implementation of this approach atone institution, and how we resolved the challenges involved in transferring the approach to asecond institution. We discuss several refinements to our methodology that resulted frombroadening our audience. Assessment results from over 10 years, at two institutions, areevaluated and interpreted. IntroductionIn traditional engineering curricula, the subjects of solid and fluid mechanics are taughtseparately, in
relationships of thewords. Although there were connections established as seen in Figure 2, we could determinewhether there were accurate since the frequency of words doesn’t necessarily define theirassociations with other words. In addition, the concept map was missing some key elements in Page 24.1353.5the class (e.g., shear stress, ethics, and tension). However, it was apparent that the first level was 4accurate, as analysis, FBDs, equilibrium, and forces were the central concepts of a student’sapproach to the class
exploring the applications and limitationof techniques”; case methodology promotes the “development of philosophies, approaches andskills”.Case study methodology has been widely used in teaching and learning of engineering subjects.Advantages of case study methods have been presented by Sankar et al14 in “Importance ofEthical and Business Issues in Making Engineering Design Decision.” They concluded that theuse of the case study methodology to deal with real-world examples is highly motivating andincreases understanding of the importance of ethical issues in making engineering designdecisions. Page 11.27.4Jensen discussed the merits of case study
and solve systems of equations; problem solving and Excel and MATLAB for data processing and analysis. Outcome: Students whoGoal 5 - Objective 1: ME graduates complete the ME program Were informed and followedwill possess an understanding of at Rowan University will professional and ethical 4professional and ethical understand the need for protocols regarding medicalresponsibility (Obj. F
memorized). Therefore, the approach of maximizing partial credit based onmemorizing a few problems is counter to the goals of an engineering education. Furthermore, itcan be said that the current partial credit grading model rewards students for pretending that theyknow how to solve a problem, even when they don’t. This means our grading model ispromoting behavior that is explicitly unethical for professional engineers, according to theNational Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics for Engineers [7] (paragraphsII.5.a and III.1.a).A second practice affecting learning is the copying of homework solutions from onlineresources. Collaboration on homework has occurred at some level since graded homework wasintroduced, but the practice
forces on various devices3 Equilibrium Lab: Longboard -Trucks Apply equilibrium conditions to planar systems4 Free Body Diagrams Working with Physical Samples Draw FBDs based on (Small Group Problem Solving) physical systems5 Trusses Hyatt Ethics Case (Small Group Problem Solving)6 Trusses Lab: Bridge Design In a team, design, analyze, build and test a truss
integrity [3]. Such a system needs the buy-in ofthe whole academic community and specifically, the example and influence of the administrativeleaders. Such leadership must be prioritized at the institutional level. “…the importance of fundraising for today’s higher education administrators, we suspect that commitment to an ethical culture may take a back seat to other commitments and skills. That’s why it becomes so important to institutionalize integrity as much as possible into multiple cultural systems. Also, because most senior administrators are extraordinarily busy, we are convinced that development and/or maintenance of a culture of academic integrity must be a significant portion of some
inventories, detailed set-upinstructions, and lecture notes for each activity can be obtained the authors. Please contact themif you would like to try any of these exercises in your own classroom.REFERENCES1 Jakob C. Bruhl, Joseph P. Hanus, and James Ledlie Klosky, “Let’s Break Stuff! A Refit of the Mechanics Sequence of Courses to Inspire Student Inquiry” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (Columbus, OH: American Society for Engineering Education, 2017).2 Jon Alan Schmidt, “Changing the Paradigm for Engineering Ethics,” Science and Engineering Ethics 20, no. 4 (2014): 985–1010, doi:10.1007/s11948-013-9491-y.3 Michael Davis, “A Plea for Judgment,” Science and Engineering Ethics 18, no. 4 (2012): 789– 808, doi:10.1007/s11948-011
affect the lives of the villagers and any ethical considerations that may arise from installing the pump system, (3 pages max); Team process guidelines (2 pages max). Week 9: Complete list of marketing specifications (customer needs), engineering specifications, and initial conceptual approaches. Week 12: Progress report with updated specs, sketches of design concepts, final design selection with screening and/or decision matrices, and expected loading conditions. Week 14: Final design report containing the following items in a 3-ring binder with tabbed sections: o Revised (if necessary) background description, needs analysis, choice of regional location, ethical considerations, and
Site 1A Site 1B Site 2 Faculty 1 of 1 (Engineering) 1 of 1 (Physics) 1 of 2 (Engineering) Students 2 of 2 undergraduate engineering, 2 of 3 undergraduate engineering 1 of 3 graduate engineering 0 of 1 graduate engineering Other 1 graphic artist -Data CollectionThe collection of data about these projects is considered to be program evaluation by theresearch ethics boards at both the University of British Columbia and the University ofSaskatchewan, and therefore was exempt from requirements for formal ethics
variety of instructional methods can helpstudents to succeed in more modes of learning in the classroom and beyond.In engineering education, there’s also an emphasis on non-technical aspects of engineering.ABET outcomes [6] focus not just on applying principals of engineering, science, and math, butalso addressing social concerns, communicating effectively, recognizing ethical responsibilities,etc. A growing number of engineering institutions are joining the KEEN network [7] andembracing KEEN’s three pillars of fostering curiosity, making connections, and creating value.This non-technical content is even less suited to passive forms of instruction.In light of these developments, the primary investigator’s teaching of statics, mechanics,dynamics
AC 2008-2537: ASSESSING COGNITIVE REASONING AND LEARNING INMECHANICSChris Papadopoulos, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Chris Papadopoulos earned BS degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University, and a PhD in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Cornell University. He previously served on the faculty of Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where he is currently a research associate, grant writer, lecturer, and director of educational programs. His research interests include biomechanics, nonlinear structural mechanics, computational mechanics, engineering education, and engineering ethics. He is an active member of American Society for
mechanics, including nonlinear structural analysis, computational mechanics, and biomechanics. He is also active in engineering education and engineering ethics, particularly in mechanics education and appropriate technology. At UPRM Papadopoulos serves as the coordinator of the Engineering Mechanics Committee, which man- ages the mechanics courses taken by all engineering majors. He also co-coordinates the Social, Ethical, and Global Issues (SEGI) in Engineering Program and Forums on Philosophy, Engineering, and Technol- ogy.Vincent C. Prantil, Milwaukee School of Engineering VINCENT C. PRANTIL Vince Prantil is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at the Mil- waukee School of Engineering. Dr. Prantil
, “Does homework matter? Acomparison of homework with established predictors of exam performance in large college[23] J. R. Young, “High-Tech Cheating Abounds, and Professors Bear Some Blame,” TheChronicle of Higher Education, March 28, 2010.[24] D. L. McCabe, L. K. Trevino, K. D., Butterfield, “Cheating in Academic Institutions: ADecade of Research”, Ethics & Behavior, Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp.219-232, January 08, 2010.[25] D. D. Carpenter, T. S. Harding, C.J. Finelli, S. M. Montgomery, H. J. Passow, “EngineeringStudents’ Attitudes Towards Cheating” Journal of Engineering Education, The ResearchJournal for Engineering Education, January 02,2013.[26] C. M. Cartledge, J.E. Sasser, “The effect of homework assignments on the mathematicsachievement
– 30th September, Sydney, Australia.20. http://ethics.tamu.edu/ethics/hyatt/hyatt2.htm, last visited on January 16, 2008.21. Darmofal, D.L., Soderholm, D.H. and Brodeur, D.R., 2002, “Using concept maps and concept questions toenhance conceptual understanding,” Proceedings of 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Page 13.845.13
prevalence of spatially-related tasks within thecurriculum. Breadth classes include History, Philosophy, Folklore, Ethics, Communication, andLiterature courses which are considered to be limited in spatial impact. Creative arts, anotherclass in the general breadth area, may have a higher spatial impact; however, treating the entireset of breadth courses as a single unit decreases the likelihood of spatial ability impact.Table 2: Expected concurrent courses, percentage of Statics students in each course, andassociated impact factor Class Percentage of Statics Expected Impact Factor for Students Spatial Ability Intro to Computer Programming
associate professor of electrical engineering at Kettering University. Dr. Finelli’s current research interests include student resistance to active learning, faculty adoption of evidence-based teaching practices, the use of technology and innovative pedagogies on student learning and success, and the impact of a flexible classroom space on faculty teaching and student learning. She also led a project to develop a taxonomy for the field of engineering education research, and she was part of a team that studied ethical decision-making in engineering students. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Incorporating IMU Technology to Demonstrate Concepts in
, and even the measurementscale.2,4 Preliminary work on this project, completed with Yokomoto, examined students’ abilityto assess their performance in Statics and Engineering Ethics.5 In the case of the preliminarystudy, however, students were asked to rate their performance in Statics prior to taking the finalexam and no other factors were considered. This study indicated that there were mild correla-tions between performance and self-assessment (enough to warrant further study).The present study looks to see if comparing students’ self-assessments to performance acrossmultiple problems shows any more correlation than was found in the one question to oneproblem work of Sarin and Headley.1 The analysis is based upon data collected in the
AC 2010-1868: IMPLEMENTING AN INVERTED CLASSROOM MODEL INENGINEERING STATICS: INITIAL RESULTSChristopher Papadopoulos, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Christopher Papadopoulos is a faculty member in the Department of General Engineerng at the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez, where he coordinates the Engineering Mechanics Committee. His research interests include nonlinear structural mechanics, biomechanics, engineering education, and engineering ethics, and he serves as secretary of the ASEE Mechanics Division. He holds BS degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University, and a PhD in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Cornell University. He was
. Papadopoulos has diverse research and teaching interests in structural mechanics and bioconstruction (with emphasis in bamboo); appropriate technology; engineering ethics; and mechanics education. He has served as PI of several NSF-sponsored research projects and is co-author of Lying by Approximation: The Truth about Finite Element Analysis. He is active in the Mechanics Division.Eric Davishahl, Whatcom Community College Eric Davishahl holds an MS degree in mechanical engineering and serves as associate professor and engineering program coordinator at Whatcom Community College. His teaching and research interests include developing, implementing and assessing active learning instructional strategies and auto-graded online
Military Academy, West Point, New York. Dr. Barry holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rochester Institute of Technology, a Master of Science degree from University of Colorado at Boulder, and a PhD from Purdue University. Prior to pursuing a career in academics, Dr. Barry spent 10-years as a senior geotechnical engineer and project manager on projects throughout the United States. He is a licensed professional engineer in multiple states. Dr. Barry’s areas of research include assessment of professional ethics, teaching and learning in engineering education, and learning through historical engineering accomplishments. He has authored and co-authored a significant number of journal articles and book chapters on these
learning process. One benefit is the possibility of including less routine activities, e.g., problem based learning, design projects or study of real engineering applications, case studies, ethics, and more advanced critical thinking and problem solving. And, to take greatest advantage of the feedback from OLI, more engaging in-class activities that target identifiable concepts and skills need to be developed.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSSupport by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation through the Open Learning Initiative atCarnegie Mellon University, by the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Carnegie MellonUniversity, and by the Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Department at MiamiUniversity is gratefully
), which are two of the largest governing institutions ofengineering accreditation and funding, respectively. In the latest revision of student outcomes foraccreditation (2019-2020), ABET changed Outcome F from “an understanding of professionaland ethical responsibility” to Outcome 4, which specifically adds on that these responsibilitiesmust “consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, andsocietal context.” [9]. This change in accreditation criteria has been a strong motivator for allengineering programs to include broader contextualization in their curricula. Furthermore, NSF’sprogram for Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (IUSE/Professional Formation ofEngineers: RED) has created an avenue through which
accomplishthis, however, it must be able to estimate each problem’s difficulty level to determine thestudent’s next problem to solve. The results of the current study provide quantitative data whichcould be used to help develop algorithms to determine a problem’s difficulty level for frame typeproblems.AcknowledgmentsThis work was carried out under the approval of the Research Ethics Board at the authors’University under the project number 100143.References[1] J. Meriam, L. Kraige, and J. Bolton, “Engineering Mechanics: Statics,” 8th ed, Wiley, New Jersey, USA, 2015.[2] R. Hibbeler, “Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics,” 14th ed, Pearson, Toronto, Canada, 2016.[3] N. Ayesh, N. Qamhieh, F. Tit, and F. Abdelfattah, “The effect of
Engineering & Mechanics at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM). Papadopoulos has diverse research and teaching interests in structural mechanics, biomechanics, appro- priate technology, engineering ethics, and engineering education. He serves as Secretary of the ASEE Mechanics Division and serves on numerous committees at UPRM that relate to undergraduate and grad- uate education.Aidsa Ivette Santiago Roman, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus Aidsa I. Santiago-Rom´an is a Tenured Assistant Professor in the General Engineering Department at the University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus (UPRM). Dr. Santiago earned a BA and MS in Industrial Engineering from UPRM and Ph.D in Engineering Education from
the course or finding excellent supplemental materialwhich gets added to the course. Encouragement badges were awarded for accessing the flashcards or attending office hours; repeating these behaviors earned higher levels of the badges.Three times over the semester students are required to write something: an ethics response onday 01, written instructions for using the right-hand-rule for three-dimensional moments on day15, and a project report on day 40. Some students believe that becoming an engineer means theynever have to write anything again; while assigning writing assignments can disabuse them ofthis notion, we hoped that assigning badges would highlight some of the places where engineersuse writing skills. The writing badges also have
objectives of any engineeringlaboratory experience must be understood. Once these fundamental objectives are wellunderstood, then there is a much greater potential for developing new kinds of laboratoryexercises that are appropriate for distance learning.As presented by Feisel and Rosa [7], a set of fundamental objectives of engineering instructionallaboratories developed by a colloquy run by the Sloan Foundation in 2002 involve studentoutcomes regarding: Instrumentation Theoretical models Experimental approaches Data analysis Design Learning from failure Creativity Use of engineering tools and resources (psychomotor) Safety Communication Teamwork Ethics Sensory awarenessThe above
debate over which type of lab is better occurred in 2002 when a colloquy ofexperts from a wide range of disciplines and institutions convened to determine the fundamentalobjectives of laboratories, regardless of the method of delivery. They converged on 13 learningobjectives [10]: working with instruments, building a model, devising an experiment, dataanalysis, design, learning from failure, creativity, psychomotor, safety, communication, teamwork,communications, ethics, and sensory awareness. The proposed effort will determine the extent towhich these objectives should be met for mobile hands-on labs. In contrast, remote laboratoriesand virtual laboratories are unable at this point to address objectives 8 and 13 (psychomotor andsensory
Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Papadopoulos has diverse research and teaching interests in structural mechanics, biomechanics, appropri- ate technology, engineering ethics, and engineering education. He is PI of two NSF-sponsored research projects and is co-author of Lying by Approximation: The Truth about Finite Element Analysis. Pa- padopoulos is currently Chair of the ASEE Mechanics Division and serves on numerous committees at UPRM that relate to undergraduate and graduate education.Dr. Aidsa I. Santiago Roman, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus Aidsa I. Santiago-Rom´an is an Associated Professor in the General Engineering Department at the Uni- versity of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Campus (UPRM). Dr. Santiago earned a BA
ethics, engineering philosophy, and the intersecting concerns of engineering industry and higher academia.Mariana Tafur, Purdue University, West Lafayette Mariana Tafur is an assistant professor at University of Los Andes in Bogot´a - Colombia. She has a Ph.D. in Engineering Education at Purdue University, West Lafayette-IN; a M.S., in Education at Los Andes University, Bogot´a-Colombia; and a B.S., in Electronics Engineering at Los Andes University, Bogot´a-Colombia. She is a 2010 Fulbright Fellow. Her research interests include engineering skills development, STEM for non-engineers adults, motivation in STEM to close the technology literacy gap, STEM formative assessment, and Mixed-Methods design.Prof. Charles