Conference Session

Technological Literacy and the Educated Person

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

. Oliver, David W., Timothy P. Kelliher, James G. Keegan, Jr. Engineering Complex Systems with Models and Objects, McGraw-Hill, New York (1997).33. Shigley, Joesph E., Charles R. Mischke, Standard Handbook of Machine Design, 2nd Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York, (1996).34. Merritt, Frederick S., M. Kent Loftin, Jonathan T. Ricketts, Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, 4th Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York (1996).35. McCabe, Warren L., Julian C. Smith, Peter Harriott, Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill (2005).36. Ullman, D. The Mechanical Design Process, First Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York (1992).37. Stoll, H.W., Product Design Methods and Practices. Marcel Dekker, New York (1999).38. Ogot, M., and G

Conference Session

Technological Literacy and the Educated Person

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

R. William Graff, LeTourneau University; Paul Leiffer, LeTouneau University; Martin Batts, Le Tourneau University; Maria J. Leiffer, LeTouneau University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

long string ofenergy transfers, like the “Mousetrap Game”. The main purpose is to show them that inreal life, something will probably go wrong, since real components follow Murphy’sLaw. Simply explained, Murphy’s Law says that” if anything can go wrong, it probablywill.” Page 15.1367.33. Mathematics and EconomicsThere are some misleading concepts that fuzzies may hold regarding mathematicalprinciples. One example is “Fibber McGee’s law of probability”, which is, “the less youwin, the more you gotta.” The radio show, “Fibber McGee and Molly” was popular inthe 1940’s. This misconception, that the more often you lose in a game of chance, thehigher the

Conference Session

Technology Literacy for Non-Engineers

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lawrence Whitman, Wichita State University; James Steck, Wichita State University; David Koert, Wichita State University; Larry Paarmann, Wichita State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

., 2000, A multidisciplinary team project for electrical engineering, computer engineering, and computer science majors.8) Brockman, J., Batill, S., Renaud, J., Kantor, J., Kirkner, D., Kogge, P., and Stevenson, R., 1996, "Development of a multidisciplinary engineering design laboratory at the University of Notre Dame." Proc. of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.9) Otto, K., Bezdek, J., Wood, K., Jensen, D., and Murphy, M., 1998, "Building better mousetrap builders: Courses to incrementally and systematically teach design," Proc. of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.10) Garcia, M.A., and Patterson-McNeill, H., 2002, "Learn how to develop software using the toy Lego

Conference Session

Engineering Courses for Non-engineers

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William Loendorf, Eastern Washington University; Terence Geyer, Eastern Washington University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

past. One thing iscertain; this hands-on laboratory approach to a traditional lecture based class works well and willbe continued.Bibliography1. Allen, R. H. (2002). Impact teaching: Ideas and strategies for teachers to maximize student learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.2. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: George Washington University.3. Crabtree, D. E. (1972). An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers No. 28. Pocatello, Idaho: Idaho State University Museum.4. Crawford, A. E., Saul, E. W., Mathews, S., & Makinster, J. (2005). Teaching and learning strategies for the thinking classroom

Conference Session

Installing & Assessing Technology Literacy Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Matthew Ohland, Clemson University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Society for Engineering Education AnnualConference & Exposition. Page 11.644.827 Ohland, M.W. and M.I. Hoit, “Teaching Teachers to Teach Engineering: The 19th Annual SECME SummerInstitute.” Proceedings of the 1996 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition,session 0230.28 Rabb, Robert J., and John S. Klegka, “Designing an Engineering Experience for Non-Engineers,” Proceedings ofthe 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Session 3425.29 Messervey, Thomas B., David T. Borowicz, Keith A. Landry, and Ronald W. Welch, “Showing Non-Engineersthe Ropes

Conference Session

Defining Technological Literacy

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Greg Pearson, National Academy of Engineering; David Ollis, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Press.10. NAE and NRC. In Press. Assessing Technological Literacy in the United States: Framework forAction. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.11. CTTE (Council on Technology Teacher Education). Technological Literacy. Council on TechnologyTeacher Education 40th Yearbook. Peoria, Ill.: Glencoe Division, Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.12. Meade, S. D., and Dugger, W.E., Jr. 2004. Reporting on the status of technology education in theU.S.. The Technology Teacher (63):29-35.ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education). Connecting Curriculum and Technology.Available online at http://cnets.iste.org/students/s_book.html. (January 11, 2006)13. Krupczak, J.J., Jr., D. Ollis, R. Pimmel, R. Seals, G. Pearson, and N. Fortenberry. Panel

Conference Session

Technology Literacy for Engineering Students

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

-functions in design and creating a sense of practical empowermentin novice or even tentative engineers.Bibliography 1. National Science Foundation, “Shaping The Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology”, NSF 96-139, October 1996. 2. Pearson, G., and A.T.Young, (editors) Technically Speaking: Why all Americans Need to Know More About Technology. Washington, D.C. National Academy Press, (2002). 3. National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century, National Academy Press, (2005). 4. Nocito-Gobel J., S. Daniels, M. Collura, B. Aliane, “Project-Based Introduction to Engineering – A

Conference Session

Teaching Technological Literacy - Engaging Students

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William Loendorf, Eastern Washington University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Society: A Bridge to the 21st Century, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 2003.4. Johnson, S., Gostelow, J. P., and King, W.J. Engineering and Society, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 2000.5. Loendorf, W. R. (2004). A Course Investigating Technology in World Civilization. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, June 20-23, 2004.6. Pacey, Arnold. Technology in World Civilization, 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.7. Stross, Randall. Technology and Society in Twentieth Century America, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Page

Conference Session

Teaching Technological Literacy - College Courses and Minors

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kelli Huser, Iowa State University; Thomas Kelly, Iowa State University; Mani Mina, Iowa State University; Seth Ballou, Iowa State University; Joseph Crispin, Iowa State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

identify the technological impactsover time. The students in this class chose to pursue medicine, agriculture, currency, and waterresources, and either these or other topics may be utilized to teach this concept. Student directionand input made this course more approachable to non-engineering students and allowed them toidentify more easily with technological concepts. We have found that this design for impacts oftechnology to enhance technological literacy was effective, and that a similar design could beeffective at other institutions.Bibliography 1. Petrina, S. (1992). Curriculum Change in Technology Education: A Theoretical Perspective on Personal Relevance Curriculum Designs. Journal of Technology Education , 37-47. 2. Medicine

Conference Session

Potpourri

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

College, Defense Acquisition University Press, January (2001).29. Shishko, Robert., et al., NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, SP-6105, (1995).30. Oliver, David W., Timothy P. Kelliher, James G. Keegan, Jr. Engineering Complex Systems with Models and Objects, McGraw-Hill, New York (1997).31. Shigley, Joesph E., Charles R. Mischke, Standard Handbook of Machine Design, 2nd Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York, (1996).32. McCabe, Warren L., Julian C. Smith, Peter Harriott, Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill (2005).33. Merritt, Frederick S., M. Kent Loftin, Jonathan T. Ricketts, Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, 4th Edition, Mc-Graw Hill, New York (1996