Conference Session

Active & Cooperative Learning in ECE

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

C. Richard Compeau Jr, Texas State University; Austin Talley P.E., Texas State University; Phillip Q. Tran, Texas State University

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

engineering education journals and conference proceedings. He has worked to implement multiple National Science Foundation (NSF) grants focused on engineering education. He has been an instructor in more than ten week long summer K-12 teach Professional Development Institutes (PDI). He has received multiple teaching awards. He has developed design based curriculum for multiple K-12 teach PDIs and student summer camps.Mr. Phillip Q. Tran, Texas State University c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Active Learning in Electrical Engineering: Measuring the DifferenceAbstractEngineering Electromagnetics is a challenging junior-level course containing many concepts andformulae, and

Conference Session

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society Division Technical Session 9

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven; Judy Randi, University of New Haven; Jenna Pack Sheffield, University of New Haven

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

Paper ID #25301An Exploratory Study of Engineering Students’ Misconceptions about Tech-nical CommunicationDr. Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven Cheryl Qing Li joined University of New Haven in the fall of 2011, where she is a Senior Lecturer of the Industrial, System & Multidisciplinary Engineering Department. Li earned her first Ph.D. in me- chanical engineering from National University of Singapore in 1997. She served as Assistant Professor and subsequently Associate Professor in mechatronics engineering at University of Adelaide, Australia, and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, respectively. In 2006

Conference Session

Best Practices for Chemical Engineering Lab-Based Courses

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael David Mau Barankin, Colorado School of Mines; Tracy Q. Gardner, Colorado School of Mines; Jason C. Ganley, Colorado School of Mines

Tagged Divisions

Chemical Engineering

development responsibilities here include the Unit Operations Lab and Senior Design (including Aspen), among other undergraduate core courses. His research interests include digital & online methods in engineering education.Dr. Tracy Q. Gardner, Colorado School of Mines Tracy Q. Gardner graduated from the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) with B.S. degrees in chemical en- gineering and petroleum refining (CEPR) and in mathematical and computer sciences (MCS) in 1996 and with an M.S. degree in CEPR in 1998. She then got her Ph.D. in chemical engineering, studying transport in zeolite membranes, from CU, Boulder, in 2002. She did a postdoc at TUDelft in the Netherlands in 2002 and 2003, studying oxygen conducting mixed

Conference Session

M2A: Learning By Design 1

Collection

2019 FYEE Conference

Authors

Charlotte De Vries, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College; Qi Dunsworth, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College; Dean Q. Lewis, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College

Tagged Topics

FYEE Conference - Paper Submission

. M. Kim, "Student perceptions and learning of the engineering design process: an assessment at the freshmen level," Research in Engineering Design, vol. 23, (3), pp. 177-190, 2012.[18] E. F. Barkley, Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty. (1st ed.) San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass, 2009; 2010;.[19] R. Wentzel and J. E. Brophy, Motivating Students to Learn. (Fourth ed.) New York: Routledge, 2014.[20] A. Wigfield and J. S. Eccles, "Expectancy–Value Theory of Achievement Motivation," Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 25, (1), pp. 68-81, 2000.[21] C. De Vries and Q. Dunsworth. “Making it for real: Redesign of a First-Year Engineering Project.” 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference

Conference Session

Track: Collegiate - Technical Session 6

Collection

2019 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity

Authors

Julian Viera Jr., University of Texas, El Paso; Elsa Q. Villa, University of Texas, El Paso; Christina Convertino; Erika Mein, University of Texas, El Paso; Sarah Hug, University of Colorado, Boulder

Tagged Topics

Collegiate, Diversity

effectiveness of a cognitive learning computer system in improving mathematical skills” in 2014 The Texas forum of Teacher Education and ”Bilingual students benefit from using both language” in the proceeding of the 2016 World conference of soft computing.Dr. Elsa Q. Villa, University of Texas, El Paso Elsa Q. Villa, Ph.D., is a research assistant professor at The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) in the College of Education, and is Director of the Center for Education Research and Policy Studies (CERPS). Dr. Villa received her doctoral degree in curriculum and instruction from New Mexico State University; she received a Master of Science degree in Computer Science and a Master of Arts in Education from UTEP

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven; Nadiye O. Erdil, University of New Haven; Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven; Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven; Jean Nocito-Gobel, University of New Haven; Aadityasinh Rana, University of New Haven

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

. She received her Bachelors of Engineering from MIT. Her research focuses on the nontraditional engineering student – understanding their motivations, identity development, and impact of prior engineering-related experiences. Her work dwells into learning in informal settings such as summer camps, military experiences, and extra-curricular activities. Other research interests involve validation of CFD models for aerospace applications as well as optimizing efficiency of thermal-fluid systems.Dr. Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven Cheryl Qing Li joined University of New Haven in the fall of 2011, where she is a Senior Lecturer of the Industrial, System & Multidisciplinary Engineering Department. Li earned her

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kyle Alexander Toth, Purdue University Northwest; John Moreland, Purdue University Northwest; Chenn Q. Zhou, Purdue University Northwest; Anusree Balachandran, Center for Innovation through Visualization and Simulation, Purdue University; Fangzhou Zhang, Purdue University Northwest; John Claude Roudebush, Ivy Tech Community College

Tagged Topics

NSF Grantees Poster Session

systems, computer science, and applied mathematics.Mr. John Moreland, Purdue University Northwest John Moreland is Senior Research Scientist at the Center for Innovation through Visualization and Sim- ulation at Purdue University Northwest. He has over 50 technical publications in the areas of simulation and visualization for education and design.Prof. Chenn Q. Zhou, CIVS, Purdue University Northwest Dr. Chenn Zhou is the founding Director of the Steel Manufacturing Simulation (SMSVC) and Visualiza- tion Consortium and the Center for Innovation through Visualization and Simulation (CIVS), Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University Northwest, and Professor by Courtesy at Purdue University West

Conference Session

Track: Special Topic - Computing & Technology Technical Session 3

Collection

2019 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity

Authors

Elsa Q. Villa, University of Texas, El Paso; Sarah Hug, Colorado Evaluation & Research Consulting; Heather Thiry, Golden Evaluation ; David S. Knight, The University of Texas, El Paso; Elizabeth Fomby Hall, The University of Texas, El Paso; Andrea Tirres, University of Texas, El Paso

Tagged Topics

Diversity, Special Topic: Computing & Technology

Paper ID #24674Broadening Participation of Hispanics in Computing: The CAHSI IncludesAllianceDr. Elsa Q. Villa, University of Texas, El Paso Elsa Q. Villa, Ph.D., is a research assistant professor at The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) in the College of Education, and is Director of the Center for Education Research and Policy Studies (CERPS). Dr. Villa received her doctoral degree in curriculum and instruction from New Mexico State University; she received a Master of Science degree in Computer Science and a Master of Arts in Education from UTEP. She has led and co-led numerous grants from corporate

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven; Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven; Nadiye O. Erdil, University of New Haven; Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven; Jean Nocito-Gobel, University of New Haven

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

Paper ID #25289Assessing the Growth in Entrepreneurial Mind-set Acquired through Curric-ular and Extra-curricular ComponentsDr. Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven Cheryl Qing Li joined University of New Haven in the fall of 2011, where she is a Senior Lecturer of the Industrial, System & Multidisciplinary Engineering Department. Li earned her first Ph.D. in me- chanical engineering from National University of Singapore in 1997. She served as Assistant Professor and subsequently Associate Professor in mechatronics engineering at University of Adelaide, Australia, and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Conference Session

Issues in Mechanical Engineering Technology I

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jose M. Garcia, Purdue University; Brittany Newell, Purdue University; Erika Dawn Bonnett, Virginia Tech; Jorge Andres Leon-Quiroga, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

able to complete the activity on time and they were instructed tocomplete the short survey just after finishing this activity.ResultsA set of 12 Likert-type questions with a 5 point choice scale were used to assess the students’perception of impact of the activity on their professional career, and on their interest in learningthe material. The survey questions used for assessing their impression is presented in table 1below. Questions 1, 3, and 6 were focused on their perception of the activity on their career.Questions 11, 10, 9, and 7 were skill development questions, and questions 12, 8, 5, 4, and 2were topic engagement questions. Table 1 Survey questions Q.1. As of today, are you 18 years of

Conference Session

It's All About the Student: Integration, Problem Solving, Critical Thinking, and Self-Efficacy

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Maelle van Thienen, University of Auckland, New Zealand; Pablo Garcia, Xorro Solutions Ltd; Wyatt Banker-Hix P.E., California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo; Anahid Behrouzi, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; James Boon Piang Lim, University of Auckland

Tagged Divisions

Civil Engineering

Auckland, NZ, developer of the Xorro assessment authoring tool Xorro-Q. His entrepreneurial career spans education, health, energy and gaming sectors. Pablo is an enthusiastic advocate for solutions and practices which open new learning and collaboration horizons.Mr. Wyatt Banker-Hix P.E., California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Wyatt Banker-Hix is a licensed professional engineer in the state of California with over four years of industry experience in structural and transportation engineering. He also serves as a part-time lecturer at California Polytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) in the Civil Engineering department. He enjoys teaching a hands-on materials laboratory course sprinkled

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer H. Choi, University of California, Davis

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

Likert scale responses were converted to the followingquantitative values: I don’t understand (0), strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree(4), and strongly agree (5). Average scores for each theme identified in Table 1 and changes inself-reported scores from the pre-internship to post-internship survey were determined. A pairedt-test was performed to determine statistical significance from pre to post internship (p<0.05). Theme Question 1. Attitude towards Q. My career goal is to become a professional with an entrepreneurial entrepreneurship mindset. Q. I’d like to take some entrepreneurship courses in college. 2. Level

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Wednesday Cornucopia (Educational Research)

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yang Yang, Kansas State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

engineering students. The first objective of this study is to explore theengineering epistemological beliefs among students in introductory engineering courses, using aunique methodological approach, Q methodology. The second objective is to examine whethersuch epistemological beliefs are related to student academic outcomes among first yearengineering students.This study focuses on students in introductory engineering courses for two reasons. First,introductory STEM (including engineering) courses are often large, posing difficulties forinstructors and students to closely examine and discuss concepts and knowledge covered in thecourses. Students’ epistemological views in these courses can be potentially used to relate tostudents’ course performances

Conference Session

Student Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Katherine M Ehlert, Clemson University; Marisa K. Orr, Clemson University

Tagged Divisions

Student

expansion of the content itself. Many educators argue that authentic engineering unknown in the field of engineering education research: The Q-methodology. The Q-methodology tasks and prepare students for engineering in the 21st century. Co-operative education (co-op) can is a quantitative analysis approach that is intended to systematically measure and document provide such experiences. Studies have shown that students who have participated in co-op perspectives or viewpoints. Twenty-five students will first sort a set of subjective statements related programs

Conference Session

Mechanical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kamau Wright, University of Hartford; Paul E Slaboch, University of Hartford

Tagged Divisions

Mechanical Engineering

their writingabilities and previous experiences in ME 342W. Survey questions # 1 and #2 were open-ended questions. For survey question # 1, senior-level ME 440 students were asked: “Of all the engineering classes that you have taken at thisuniversity, which do you feel was best at helping you with your technical writing skills? Brieflydescribe why you selected this course.” Survey question # 2 followed up by asking students tothen specify their choice of second best course which fit this criteria. Table 1 summarizes theanswers to Question # 1 (Q#1) and Question # 2 (Q#2), by tallying all of the courses mentioned,whether by course code, explicit course title or some combination of each.Table 1: Student responses to 5 point Likert-scale

Conference Session

Minorities in Engineering Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Melissa Danforth, California State University, Bakersfield; Charles Lam, California State University, Bakersfield; Ronald Hughes, California State University, Bakersfield; Stephanie Salomon, California State University, Bakersfield

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering

questions about what they learned from the program, if the programchanged their goals/plans, and their satisfaction with the program. The pre-survey also gathereddemographic information and background academic information.Table 2: Questions from the pre-survey administered at the start of each summer program. Pre-Survey Question Question Type Participant identification (Student ID Number, Year, Faculty Text boxes and Lists Mentor) Participant background academic information (Major, GPA, etc.) Text boxes and Lists Participant demographic information (Gender, Race and Ethnicity) Select from lists Q: What interested you about this summer program? Open-ended comment Q

Conference Session

Issues in Mechanical Engineering Technology I

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Fredrick A. Nitterright, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College; David Clippinger, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

from the previous semester completed the survey. While the assignment has been run foryears, the data was from the last year that the assignment was performed. The following showsthe survey questions and the students’ responses: 1. Q: The project was interesting? Student Response: Likert Scale 6.3/7.0 2. Q: The level of complexity of the assignment was adequate for this course? Student Response: Likert Scale 6.1/7.0 3. Q: You feel that this assignment should be included in this course for future students? Student Response: Likert Scale 6.3/7.0 4. Q: What changes would you make to the assignment? Summary of student responses: Most often stated was that there should not be any changes. Other suggestions

Conference Session

Technical Session 6: Modulus Topics Part 2

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Paras Sud, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Matthew West, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Craig Zilles, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

: function MEAN EXAM SCORE BY QUINTILE(exam, quintile) 2: points = 0 3: max points = 0 4: for q in get questions(exam) do 5: mean = question score by quintile(q, quintile) 6: points = points + mean 7: max points = max points + get max points(q) 8: end for 9: return points/max points10: end functionWe then define the unfairness of a collection of exams for a given quintile as the standarddeviation of the expected scores for that quintile across all of the exams.To be clear, a collection of exams is not necessarily unfair if there is high variance in the studentscores when students are given different exams from this collection. We expect such a variance inscore resulting from a variance in student abilities. We

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nicholas Rees Sattele, Ohio State University; Krista M. Kecskemety, Ohio State University; Kadri Akinola Akanni Parris, Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

included theselabs and design project. Each lab was then granted a score (0-3 or 0-4) in each evaluativecategory depending on the lab’s level of adoption of that category. The two researchers thendiscussed and reconciled their results into one final result set, which is what is presented in theresults that follows.Results and DiscussionAfter the final agreement was met on the scores, a summary of the overall scores wasgenerated, as seen in Table 1. Table 1: Summary Statistics from Final Data SetIt can be seen that every lab failed to attain a majority of total points with the exception ofthe Software Design Project (SDP), which ranked first in most categories. The Quality andProductivity (Q&P) lab was also much higher

Conference Session

Technological and Engineering Literacy/Philosophy of Engineering Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Soheil Fatehiboroujeni, Indiana-Purdue University; Donna M. Riley, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering)

Tagged Divisions

Technological and Engineering Literacy/Philosophy of Engineering

processin which proponents of a thesis (T ) seek to specify grounds (Gi ) that respond to refutations ofopponents (Rij ). The inquiry is contingent on a set of shared presumptions (a cognitive status quo)as the foundation, as well as a set of criteria for plausibility and adequacy. The third actor in theprocess is determiner (individual or collective) concerned with termination or adjudication of therational debate.Figure 3 shows possible moves or types of arguments that each party can employ as the dialecticprocess evolves. Disputation begins with proponent claiming one of the fundamental moves. Thiscould be either a categorical assertion (!P ) for “P is the case” or a provisoed assertion (P/Q&!Q)for “P generally (or ordinarily) holds provided

Conference Session

Minorities in Engineering Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

José Carlos Villalobos, University of Central Florida; Uday K. Nair, University of Central Florida; Lisa Massi, University of Central Florida; Rachel Straney, University of Central Florida

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering

,​Introjected​, and ​Identified w ​ ere obtained from further categorization of Extrinsic Motivation.Each subscale is measured by 4 items. Further separation of Amotivation was not done in theoriginal study and so it remains its own subscale with 4 corresponding items. Motivation ismeasured by the Academic Motivation Scale which is created from the aggregation of the sevensubscales. (see Appendix A; Q2: 1-10, Q3: 1-10, Q4: 1-8). Table 1 Academic Motivation (AMS) and Corresponding Items Academic Motivation Scale Intrinsic Motivation Extrinsic Motivation Amotivation Know Q2​: 2, 9, ​Q3​: 6, Q

Conference Session

Academe/Industry Collaboration

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nancy K. Sundheim, Saint Cloud State University; Aaron J. Barker, St. Cloud Technical and Community College

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

g r a m s .T w o - a n d f o u r - y e a r s c h o o ls h a v e e x p lo r e d v a r io u s c o n n e c tio n s . In S a m u e l, e t. a l. [ 9 ] th eu n iv e rs ity g a v e th e tw o - y e a r s tu d e n ts a c c e s s to th e ir e q u ip m e n t. T h is c o lla b o r a tio n a ls o h a din s tr u c to r s jo in tly c r e a te a m o d u le to b e u s e d in b o th c u r r ic u lu m s . H o w e v e r , th e s tu d e n ts o n lyw o rk e d w ith o th e r s tu d e n ts in th e ir p r o g r a m . T h e s tu d e n ts d id n o t w o r k to g e th e r a c ro s s s c h o o ls .A C a lifo rn ia c o lla b o ra tio n [1 0 ] re v is e d s e v e ra l c o u rs e s a t b o th th e c o m m u n ity c o lle g e a n d th eu n iv e rs ity to in c o r p o r a

Conference Session

A Technology Potpourri II

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Maher Shehadi, Purdue Polytechnic Institute

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

 manometer, pitot‐static tube, and an anemometer. Figure 1 ‐ Testing venturi duct layout C. Procedures Method # 1: Using a digital Anemometer: 1) Turn the fan on 2) Keep the duct in a horizontal position on the testing bench 3) Measure the width and height at section 1 (in meters) Section 1: W =     H= 4) Using an anemometer, measure the airflow speed “V1” at section 1 in (m/s) (Take three measurements and find the average) a. Trial 1= b. Trial 2= c. Trial 3 = Average of the three trials is:  V1=  5) Calculate the volumetric flowrate in m3/s at section 1 (assume flowrate at 1 & 2 is the same) (Q = V.A) Q1

Conference Session

ERM Technical Session 1: Methods Refresh: Approaches to Data Analysis in Engineering Education Research

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Manoj Malviya, Pennsylvania State University; Catherine G.P. Berdanier, Pennsylvania State University; Natascha Trellinger Buswell, University of California, Irvine

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

𝑞 (𝜋𝑎𝑘 + 𝜋𝑏𝑘 )2 𝑎1 𝑏1 𝑎2 𝑏2 𝑝𝑒 = ∑ = ( + )2 + ( + )2 (3) 4 2𝑛 2𝑛 2𝑛 2𝑛 𝑘=1Where q is the number of categories, a corresponds to Rater A and b to Rater B, the subscripts 1and 2 correspond to categories and 𝜋𝑥𝑘 is the probability of Rater x categorizing a subject to thekth category defined as the ratio of number of subjects in category k and total number of subjects.However, this method assumes that the chances of raters randomly assigning an item to samecategory is based on rater’s average distribution for each category which is not

Conference Session

Aerospace Engineering Education

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

M. Javed Khan, Tuskegee University; Chadia A. Aji, Tuskegee University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Aerospace

-agree (or True) or D-disagree (or False) is given in front of each question.Q#4: I would rather bet 1 to 6 on a long shot than 3 to 1 on a probable winner. (A)33% of Freshmen and Sophomores agreed to the statement while 77% of Juniors and Seniorsagreed with this statement (p < 0.0002)Q#5: The way to understand complex problems is to be concerned with their larger aspects insteadof breaking them into smaller pieces. (A)32% of Freshmen and Sophomores agreed to the statement while 77% of Juniors and Seniorsagreed with this statement (p < 0.0002)Q#6: I get pretty anxious when I am in a social situation over which I have no control. (D)58% of Freshmen and Sophomores disagreed to the statement while 27% of Juniors and Seniorsdisagreed with this

Conference Session

Mechanics Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Eric Constans, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Karl Dyer, Rowan University; Shraddha Sangelkar, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Mechanics

(θ2) f2 = xB*xB + yB*yB s = a*sin(θ2) for θ2 = 0 to 360 f = sqrt(f2) f2 = r*r + s*s Q = cos(θ2) γ = atan2(yB, -xB) δ = acos((A - f2)/B) A = K3 - K1 - (K2 - 1)*Q β = acos((f2+C)/(2*f*c)) g = b – c*cos(δ) B = -2*sin(θ2); θ4 = π – (γ + β); h = c * sin(δ) C = K3 + K1 - (K2 + 1)*Q xC = c*cos(θ4); θ3 = atan2(h*r - g*s,g*r + h*s) D = K5 - K1 + (K4 + 1)*Q yC = c*sin(θ4); θ4 = θ3 + δ

Conference Session

Active & Cooperative Learning in ECE

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stewart Thomas, Bucknell University

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

be created in a plain text format using AMC’s custommarkup formatting, or using the LATEX language. A ‘build’ is then created which lists/selects thequestions to use or describes how to randomly draw the questions. The AMC system then createsa unique form for each student. These are printed and handed out. Students bubble in answers to draft form test/exam compile test/exams questions structure for all students Q Print and Q T administer Q Q

Conference Session

Working at the Intersection of Industry and Academia

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Thomas M. Freeman, Michigan Technological University; Michelle E. Jarvie-Eggart, Michigan Technological University

Tagged Divisions

Continuing Professional Development

check your university’s policy on student communications. Turn around time forcommunication via email should be clearly stated to your students. Can they expect responseswithin 24 hours or 48? Check your faculty handbook as it may have guidelines about this. Thomdirects student questions about the course to a general course Q & A discussion board and/orvirtual office hours. Frequently encouraging the use of a general course Q & A discussion boardin your short videos and module introductions can save instructors time. All students enrolled ina class are able to view instructor answers to common course questions, which can reduce thenumber of emails, text or calls an instructor receives about general course questions. At the startof a

Conference Session

Pre-College Engineering Education Focused on Female Students

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer M. Bastiaan, Kettering University; Roger Bastiaan, ENWIN Utilities

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Pre-College Engineering Education

assembled as a group. Questions for the students arelisted with a “Q” symbol. Comments are marked with bullets. The instructor leads the activitythroughout, announcing each step and making sure that all student groups have completed thestep before proceeding with the next step.INTRODUCTIONQ: Have you ever changed a light bulb?Q: Why did you change the light bulb?Q: What happened when the new light bulb was put in the lamp? • When a light bulb is burned out, it does not light because the lamp’s circuit is open (draw an open circle on the board, one that does not connect the end to the beginning). • When a new light bulb is placed in the lamp, the lamp’s circuit is closed and electrons can move around the circuit (draw a closed circle on

Conference Session

Technical Session 4: Modulus Topics 1

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yamuna Rajasekhar, zyBooks; Alex Daniel Edgcomb, Zybooks; Frank Vahid, University of California, Riverside

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

and rThis topic introduces students to sequential circuits, typically covered during the first half of thesemester. An SR latch is the simplest circuit that stores 1-bit. A timing diagram is a commonway to analyze the inputs and outputs of such a circuit. The objective of this activity is tofamiliarize the students with the workings of an SR latch. This is done with a timing diagram asin Figure 2. This activity has two levels of progression with equal difficulty. Each level presentsa randomly-generated combinations of s and r, and the student needs to input the corresponding qfor each combination of s and r, as in Figure 2(a). Clicking a square in q toggles between 1 and 0values. When a student submits, the activity compares the student's q