videos, example problems, quizzes, hands-on laboratories, demonstrations, and group work. Dr. Kerzmann is enthusiastic in the continued pursuit of his educational goals, research endeavors, and engagement of mechanical engineering students.Mr. Lee Allen Dosse, University of Pittsburgh Lee A. Dosse is a PhD student working with the Engineering Education Research Center at the University of Pittsburgh. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Development of an Interactive Top Hat Text for Engaged LearningAbstractCollegiate education requires a multi-faceted instructional approach both within and outside theclassroom to effectively build student comprehension and competency. There are
instructional anatomy videos: Student usage, self‐ efficacy, and performance in upper limb regional anatomy assessment,” American Association of Anatomists, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 461-470, December 2017. [Online]. Available doi: 10.1002/ase.1756.[5] V. Saxena, P. Natrarajan, P. O’Suillivan, and S. Jain, “Effect of the use of instructional anatomy videos on student performance,” Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 159-165, July 2008. [Online]. Available doi: 10.1002/ase.38.[6] M.C. Box et al., “Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of three types of student- generated videos as instructional support in organic chemistry laboratories,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 164-170, January
boundary conditions for slip flows must be reviewed. Streamlines and equipotentiallines lead to development of curvilinear grid systems which are commonly used later in CFDsoftware. At the undergraduate level, creating some models of wind tunnel applications on thecomputer is very interesting for students. Our current laboratory exposure also offers application-oriented demonstrations for wave equations, shock-tubes, etc. Overall clarity in understandingmathematical depth acts as a big motivator for students at upper undergraduate levels (seestudent comments in Appendix C).Appendix BThe opportunity to relearn missed concepts for a better grade is a very powerful motivator. Thefollowing instructional style was adopted a few days from the beginning
classroom sessions.The following elements of the re-designed course were consistent with previous semesters. Theinteractive response system was used during lectures. However, the questions in the re-designedcourse were largely conceptual and less calculation-based questions were incorporated. The sametextbook has been used since Fall 2013; individual homework assignments were dueapproximately semi-weekly and incorporated online exercises for concept mastery and problemsrequiring multi-step solutions with detailed calculations. The exam style (discussed previously)and difficulty was consistent with previous semesters, to the extent possible. Since Fall 2013, thecourse has incorporated laboratory demonstrations and required student lab reports with
facilitation tool, AM can be thought of as another piece of laboratory equipment that allowsstudents to explore engineering topics without the constraints that may be imposed by the use ofother manufacturing processes. In these cases the AM capability is simply a tool that can savestudents time and effort and allow more focus on other course content; however, in the processof making the part, the students may learn little or nothing about the AM process. Often all thestudents may know or care about is that they can send a CAD file of a desired part to the AMmachine and within a day or so, they are holding the part in their hands. Examples of utilizingAM as a facilitation tool include the fabrication of wind tunnel test models,3,4 parts for
Aidan O Dwyer, “Learning Styles of First Year Level 7 Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Students at DIT,” in International Symposium for Engineering Education ISEE- 08 (Dublin City University, 2008), 69–74.13 Mary Baker, Michael O’Boyle, and Rachna Mutreja, “Learning Styles and Retention Rates in Engineering Students,” in On Being an Engineer: Cognitive Underpinnings of Engineering Education (Lubbock, TX, 2008).14 James Bluman and J. Ledlie Klosky, “Jump-Starting a Senior-Level Capstone Project through Hands-on Laboratory Exercises,” in 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (Rapid City, SD, 2011), 1–6, doi:10.1109/FIE.2011.6142810.15 Robert P Hesketh, Stephanie Farrell, and C S Slater, “The Role of
important topics and example problems in class, and to assign readings and additionalpractice problems for out of class work. It is notable that the measured improvements inperformance occurred despite the significant reduction in lecture time compared to the controlgroup.To create additional lecture time as well as a common exam time for multiple sections of thecourse, a new course model is currently being implemented. Instead of two 80-minute or three50-minute lecture times per week, with one of these often used for examinations, we are movingtoward a model of two 50-minute lecture sessions per week plus one common 110-minutelaboratory time per week. The laboratory time will be used for examinations during most weeks,and for extended problem
mechanics course that incorporates traditionallectures with interactive hands-on learning, as well as web-based instruction and homework. Theweb-based activities vary in level of interaction with the student. High interaction activitiesfeature active learning with instant feedback; low interaction activities feature readings andlectures with demonstrations. Exercises focused on creating and using free body diagrams havebeen developed, and initial data on self-efficacy has been obtained. Additional studies will beconducted throughout the academic year.The introductory mechanics course for which these web-based exercises are being created istaught to 80-90 students per term and involves hands-on laboratory exercises weekly within theclass meeting
drag; turbomachines.The three courses are taken sequentially beginning with the first semester (Fall) of thesophomore year. Average section size is about 25 students, with a maximum of 35. All threecourses are team-taught by a pair of faculty members and utilize a four meeting per week format,in which there are three 50-minute periods (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) used primarily forlectures. The fourth period is a 165-minute “flex” period that meets on Thursdays, and can beused for lectures, laboratory exercises, exams, or for overarching problem solution periods.Aside from the integration of concepts described previously and the use of overarching problemsas described herein, Mechanics I and II are taught in a fairly traditional manner
Page 15.1331.3ball [31. A frame-by-frame study of the pictures of bouncing tennis balls obtained using high-speedcameras (2000 frames per second) in our laboratory demonstrated that this process consists of fourseparate and distinct phases: initial contact, deformation of the original shape, restitution andrecovery of the shape of the ball, and separation and takeoff.Phase 1: Contact. Initial contact between the ball and the surface occurs at one point.Phase 2: Deformation. Although the lowest point on the ball has been forced to stop movingduring initial contact, other parts of the ball continue to move downward. Consequently, a periodof continued contact is observed during which the ball is in contact with the surface over an areathat
. The passing rate of each concept could be a valuable indicator for assessment of ABETstudent outcomes. For instance, the fact that 80% of students can solve 2D rigid bodyequilibrium problems helps the instructor to evaluate a specific course outcome, which is on-going work leading to a future publication. Also, based on the passing rate from previoussemesters we can predict the concepts that are difficult for most of the students and better planfor instruction in future offerings of the course.References1. Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, J. Thomas Hastings, and George F. Madaus. Learning for mastery. National Laboratory for Higher Education, 1973.2. Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, and John Bissell Carroll. Mastery learning: Theory and practice. Ed
Professor in the School of Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University and serves as the Director of the Ray W. Herrick Laboratories and the Director of Practice for MEERCat Purdue: The Mechanical Engineering Education Research Center at the same institution. He previously served as the Associate Director of PERC: The Purdue Energetics Research Center. Dr. Rhoads received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees, each in mechanical engineering, from Michigan State University in 2002, 2004, and 2007, respectively. Dr. Rhoads’ current research interests include the predictive design, analysis, and implementation of resonant micro/nanoelectromechanical systems (MEMS/NEMS) for use in chemical and biological sensing