Page 26.483.5Given/Find, Strategy, Governing Equations, Numerical Solutions, and Reflection, commonly usedin advanced mechanics courses and upper-division engineering courses at ERAU. In Given/Find,students are required to use appropriate variables and notations to represent what is given and whatis to be found. By relating given information to relevant principles, tentative strategies along withthe associated rationale are presented in Strategy, followed by governing equations. When a systemof independent equations for the equal number of unknowns is obtained, Matlab is used to findnumerical solutions. Finally, the problem solving is concluded by students’ reflection on theproblem by verifying the correctness of the solution and discussing
hinge and a cable, withan external load applied. Set 2 is focused on the analysis of a truss with simple supports and givenexternal loads. Within each set, the questions progress in procedural order and/or level ofabstraction and complexity. After answering each question, and before proceeding to the nextquestion, participants are shown a standard accepted answer. This process (1) enables participantsto proceed to the next question even if they make a crucial error that would otherwise impede theirprogress, and (2) provides an opportunity for participants to offer a reflection on how their answerscompared to the accepted answer.The questions are divided into two types. Questions 1a, 1b, 1d, 2a, 2b, and 2c test basic mechanicsskills (henceforth
equations and calculations. The curricularmaterials developed in our workshop specifically target research-identified misconceptions, andare intended to help students distinguish between similar concepts.Lessons LearnedWe will present three general lessons we’ve learned through our collaboration and reflection. Inpresenting these findings we distinguish between researchers and instructors, but note that mostengineering educators perform some combination of the two roles. Additionally, we note thatmany of these lessons refer to commonly held intuitions about the interactions of research andpractice in education. We seek here to surface and further develop these intuitions intoproductive public discourse.1. We need to attend to the differences in
classroom (1 in Section 1 and 4 inSection 2) and students that perceived the flipped classroom took more of their time than atraditional approach (1 in Section 1 and 3 in Section 2).The rate of negative feedback was higher in Section 2 with the graduate student instructor. Asdiscussed above, Section 2 contained more high performers, which could indicate that Section 2was composed of more students that had achieved success under traditional learning techniques,and thus were resistant to the flipped classroom. Upon reflection, we believe that students in bothsections were similarly educated about the benefit of the flipped classroom at the beginning ofthe semester. However, a few students in Section 2 vocally expressed dislike of the approachafter
on these characteristics.Visualization characteristics of CSA modules can be associated with cognitive science aspectssuch as schemata; mental and graphic visualization, reflection and debriefing, situated learningor cognition, and cognitive apprenticeship23, 40. Brown40 noted the infrequency of visualizationsintegrated into classroom instruction. He attributed this infrequency to the lack of sufficientteaching tools. Without exposure to them, students could not experience the benefits of usefulCSA tools. In addition, new modules have included more web-based interactive tutoring23, 35, 38.For example, the tutorial package developed by Ong38 could support students with an interactivefeature with the capability of modifying parameters so that
other, the Mechanix system has very important contributions to make to learning, some ofwhich are already being realized. Student comments confirmed that Mechanix reinforced theproblem solving process, and offered incremental help throughout that process that studentsvalued (although students did suggest help messages could be more clear.) The software’sindication that a problem was correct up to a certain point helped students focus their learning;they did not have to backtrack to check that an earlier error was propagating to the final answer.Students expressed that this was especially helpful for complicated problems, but for simpleproblems Mechanix was no better than paper and pencil. Students also reflected that while theyfound sketching
have developed case studies that reflect the role of national “technologicalculture” in the diverse American and Dutch responses to the risk of flooding (which involvesstudents performing calculations as well as reading and discussion relevant fiction, and builds toan in-class design experience); that consider the capabilities and the complexities of improvedprosthetic designs for competitive athletes; and that describe the interdependence of the historyof aviation, and airplane design evolution, with engineering beam theory. Our approach to theinclusion of professional ethics in technical coursework appreciates the reasoning of Lynch andKline18-19, and focuses on “culturally embedded engineering practice.” Several of the case studiesalso
several subsystems on a team with four or five other peopleusing suite of tools is too great,” 21 and provides the following advice, “to become competent ineach one of these areas—application and integration, team work, and tool use—students needtime, repeated experiences, and a lot of reflection on the learning.” 21 The goal of this researchproject is to create active-learning activities that create meaningful connections betweenengineering science and engineering design that teach students to apply and integrate when‘doing design’. This goal is well summarized by Dym as there must be, “a change in attitudetoward a more explicit and visible role for design as being ‘what engineering is all about.’Analysis unquestionably retains its centrality
and theirperformance was about the same on each area. A high mismatch indicates that a student foundsome material more challenging than other material, and their performance on gradedassignments reflects that. As a practical matter, the minimum value for 𝑆!,! is zero (the studentperforms exactly the same on each topic area) and the maximum mismatch could be as large as800 or 900 (for a student whose performance is wildly erratic across topical areas). In this study,the minimum mismatch score was 52.5, the mean was 248, and the maximum was over 700. Theclass average mismatch 𝑆!,!"#$$ , calculated via equation (1) using class averages on each topicarea in the j and k summations, was about 130, corresponding to just less than ½ letter
reflecting in her own experiences as an undergraduate and her preference for activelearning techniques. She also notes that she would like to do more but has not had any formaltraining: Page 26.890.7“Ultimately, I do the best I can but feel that I don’t have a lot of formal training. I’d like to get it,but haven’t found the time, or taken the time, to do it … I have taken a lot of what I observed as astudent and focused on things that I liked and didn’t like. I have aspirations of using moreresearch to help develop my teaching in the future.”The faculty member who scored the highest on the RTOP also had the most formal training ineffectively
response is legitimatelyviewed as exercising multiple skills. This is consistent with our wanting students to integratetheir knowledge to respond to some problems. So, the same simple skill might be exercised inisolation and then as part of a question that requires other skills as well. While the statisticalmodeling associated with Learning Curve Analysis allows for multiple skills to be reflected inthe response to a question, the desirable decreasing error rate seems to be particularly rare in thecase of skills that are sometimes exercised in conjunction with other skills. Second, because the Page 26.724.8materials cover an entire semester-long
choices?□ Could radial and tangential forces on shafts carrying gears be measured? That would con- nect the lab to the analyses in class and the book. It would also connect this lab to the bear- ing lab.□ Learning about gears has encouraged me to think about other mechanical components and how they are made. I would like to learn how real gears are machined. Seems like it would be very specialized manufacturing. Could students be asked to make real components, such as gears and bearings. These ideas and suggestions are a source of new lab activities. Although some are easier thanothers to implement, many are worthwhile and reflect a deep understanding of gear concepts. The experiments have been well received and based on student
these activitieswas not only to allow students to express their reasoning, reflect on their thinking, andobtain feedback on their understanding; but also to “catch” unengaged and uncoveredpreconceptions. Several examples of in-class activities are shown in Figure 1 below. Page 26.1672.4 Free-Body Free-Body Shear Force and Bending Diagram Activity Diagram Activity Moment Diagram Activity
poorlyin subsequent courses.Traditionally, Statics has been taught in face-to-face lectures. The traditional lecture formatprevents the students from pausing to reflect and understand what is being explained and theymay often miss important points. A goal of Statics is to have students learn to solve problemsindependently, which is a practice-intensive and time-consuming effort for which the lecture canprovide guidance yet relatively little direct assistance. The traditional lecture is an instructor- Page 26.189.2centered, relatively passive method of learning. While lecturing still remains an effective andimportant way of conveying knowledge, it
numerical parameters used by students in the analysis were chosen by theinstructors to provide specific results that maximize educational benefits. Material failurestresses are established to be different values for tension and compression members, though theyare not varied as a function of member length for compression members. This simple approachallows for a brief qualitative discussion about the differences between tension- and compression-related member behavior, since students have not yet learned about Euler buckling.Furthermore, a higher factory of safety is used for compression members than for tensionmembers to reflect the higher potential variability associated with stability calculations ascompared to tensile material strength. The