2023 ASEE Midwest Section Conference The Forces of Stage Design: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Teaching Normal Force, Frictional Force, and Design Ethics for non-STEM Majors Kristine Q. Loh1 and Moumita Dasgupta2 1 Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 2 Department of Physics, Augsburg University, Minneapolis, MNAbstractThis paper presents an innovative lecture and lab for teaching the concepts of normal andfrictional force to non-STEM majors through a design activity centered on raked, or inclined,stages. This joint lecture and lab suited a three
Paper ID #43482A Targeted Approach to Improving Spatial Visualization Skills of First-YearEngineering StudentsDr. Qi Dunsworth, Pennsylvania State University Qi Dunsworth is the Director of the Center for Teaching Initiatives at Penn State Erie, The Behrend College. She holds a master’s degree in Communication Studies and a Ph.D. in Educational Technology. She supports faculty in their effort to improve pedagogy, course design, and interdisciplinary curricula.Mr. Dean Q. Lewis, Pennsylvania State University Dean Lewis has served as an assistant teaching professor in mechanical engineering in the School of Engineering at
Paper ID #41953Integration of Simulation-Based Learning in Undergraduate Engineering andTechnology CoursesFardeen Q. Mazumder, University of Michigan, Flint Graduate Research Assistant, Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Michigan-Flint, USAMohammad Rayhan Sheikh, University of MichiganMohammed Shoeb Hossain, University of Michigan ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Integration of Simulation-based Learning in Undergraduate Engineering and Technology CoursesAbstractThe undergraduate engineering and technology curriculum focuses on developing
’ class and course taking status. The next six questions were asked to understand thestudents’ perceptions and attitudes about the independent study/undergraduate research theyundertook during their undergraduate years. The last two questions were open-ended and askedto see what kind of transferable skills they gained, how the study will help them in their careerplans, and finally any comments/suggestions they might have. The independent study here reallymeans undergraduate research study as the participants involved in the survey wereundergraduate research students. Q.1. What was your student status (Junor or Senior) when you first took the independent study as undergraduate research (CE 4400)? a. Junior b
learning experience.We made a series of improvements to the structure of lecture delivery and instructional pathingin the classroom to reduce lecture presentations and increase Q&A sessions. A follow up studentsurvey was done three weeks after the lecture adjustment was made. The student survey datashows that after the adjustment of lecturing and pathing, the lecture delivery method wasimproved to 92% from 56% while the student’s understanding of the materials was increased to98% from 71%. The teaching strategies to improve the student’s learning experience wereconsidered effective. The adjusted lecture materials and instructional pathing have beendocumented and will be used for the next semester.KeywordsStudent survey, Classroom Dynamics
= F + m m + ext in out momentum d~ P ~ ˙ V~ − ~r × m ˙ V~ ~0 LO,sys P P Angular dt = MO + ~r × m + ext in out momentum dEsys Q˙ in,net + W˙ in,net
. 6. Therod has a length of L = 2 cm, a constant thermal conductivity k = 0.5 W/mK, an area ofA = 1 m2 , and uniform heat generation q = 1000 kW/m3 . Faces A and B are at temperaturesTA = 100 ◦ C and TB = 200 ◦ C, respectively. The governing equation is given by: d dT k +q =0 (27) dx dx (a) Solve this problem analytically and find the temperature distribution T (x) along the rod. (b) Utilize the finite volume method with 5 cells (N = 5) to calculate the steady-state temperature distribution in the rod.To solve this
will discuss in detail.1. Pedagogy Components: a. Cloud Computing i. Theory & Concepts ii. Lab Modules iii. Assessment iv. Q/A Sessions2. Platform Support: a. Primary: GCP (Google Gloud Platform) b. Secondary: AWS, Azure3. Degree Support Courses: a. Electives: AI/ML b. Required: Capstone Project4. Job Support Certifications: a. Primary: Cloud+ and GCP/AWS/Azure b. Secondary: Linux+We designed the CTaaS framework as a seamlessly integrated system where componentscomplement each other without requiring any extra effort beyond what is required by thecybersecurity degree. In the following, we go over CTaaS’s details. Cloud
Subtopics: ❖ Introductions and icebreakers. ❖ Overview of “Engineering Bright Futures” program. ❖ Statistics and rankings. ❖ Engineering buildings and facilities. ❖ Technical, affinity, and academic engineering organizations. ❖ “Why engineering?” Week 2: Week of Topic: Engineering Majors Part 1 11/1 Subtopics: ❖ Summary of common engineering majors. ❖ Computer Engineering and Q&A. ❖ Software Engineering and Q&A. ❖ Aerospace Engineering and Q&A. ❖ Mechanical
!-'8950!:&89!'#2.?85?75((5:!#;;%5#49'%2&8.!B#(&*#+!Z'%52;#4'!g!,'49*5(56.!4#-;)2&2&5*!57!3%57'225%!/#(#2)$%#-#*-'%!589'%!8'49*5(56&'2!2)49!#2!i'#;!Q58&5*!9#*0!8%#4D&*6!0'>&4'!#*0!9#2!#!;#22&5*!&*!4.$'%!2.28'-2'(5;-'*8!7%5-!/'(('>)'!H*&>'%2&8.&25%! #8! L5%*#0.j!Q#*)7#48)%&*6! :9&49! &2! #! :5%(0?('#0&*6! &**5>#85%! 57! $)(('8+! #--)*&8&5*+! %'(5#0&*6! 855(! #*0!#44'225%.!0'2&6*!#*0!-#*)7#48)%&*6'%2&8.! B#(&*#+! Z'%52;#4'! g! ,'49*5(56.! 4#-;)2939179@(!STU!R2%4#&(#$('!#8V!l988;2Vmm42%4m6(522#%.m8'%-m45--'%4(n577n89'n29'(7mo!SZ44'22'0!T\!Q#.!Y]YYU#&(#$('V!988;2Vmm:::#&(#$('V! 988;2Vmm;.;&<5%6m;%51'48m01&8'((5;.m
content and enhancing the learning experience forfuture cohorts.Qualitative surveys were conducted before (Spring 2022) and after the project'simplementation to supplement the quantitative analysis. These surveys, aimed at capturingstudents’ perceptions and satisfaction levels, were administered anonymously using GoogleForms. Students were asked to rate their agreement with various statements on a scale from1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), covering aspects such as their preparedness byprevious courses, the clarity and usability of the lab manual, and the adequacy of lab time,as enumerated below: ● Q.1 - Logic Circuit Design (ENGR 2332) prepared me for the concepts and work in the Digital Design Lab (ENGR 2323). ● Q.2 - The
engagementwith the instrument. An expert in the field was tasked with taking the assessment to establish abaseline for the amount of time reasonably required to complete the EERI thoughtfully. Thechange in score was calculated for each individual, and histograms, Q-Q Plots and theShapiro-Wilks test were used to evaluate the normality of this data [9]. A paired pre/post t-testwas employed to evaluate the differences in the EERI scores from the first to the fourth year.This test was chosen for its effectiveness in comparing two related samples.ResultsInitially, the P score, which measures postconventional thinking based on universal good, had amean pre-score of 60.62 (SD = 17.59). Over four years, it decreased to a mean post-score of57.24 (SD = 19.37
the project to assessEM and the skillsets gained because of the EML activities experience. The results of the studyare organized according to the following research question. Fourteen students participated in thepre- and post-survey.Research Question: What do the students gain in EM and Skillsets from the beginning to theend of the project?The mean and standard error were calculated for each skill or behavior assessment pre- and post-survey and the results are shown in Figure 1. The mean perception scores varied from 3 (Q 3) to3.5 (Q 1) and 3.8 (Q 6) to 4.3 (Q 4) on the pre- and post-survey, respectively. A statisticalanalysis was conducted on pre- and post-survey data to detect changes in students’ gains in EMskillsets over the semester. A
personality (Q6, Q7). These prompts used by the cooperative education office had a 5-point (Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, Always) and 7-point (Strongly Disagree to StronglyAgree) scale, depending on the prompt, to have students rank how often they had the opportunityto develop certain competencies.Q 1: Effectively collaborating with others to accomplish a goal (5-point).Q 2: Recognizing and appreciating differences within your team (5-point).Q 3: Identify your personal biases and ask questions to understand perspectives different from your own(5-point).Q 4: The degree to which your personal values align with the values of the organization (5-point).Q 5: Demonstrate a professional attitude (5-point).Q 6: Demonstrate self-confidence (5-point).Q7: My
the faculty offices, conferencefacility and the main administrative office of the building. Parameters collected were carbondioxide (CO2), relative humidity (RH %), Ttmperature (T oF) and ventilation rates.Table 2. IAQ data collection forms. RM1 RM2 RM3 CO2 RH T Q CO2 RH T Q CO2 RH T Q Group 1 (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) Days (%) (oF) (ft3min) (%) (oF) (ft3min) (%) (oF) (ft3min) Students
algebraic equations, allowing for a nuanced understanding of the student'sproficiency levels across various skills within the subject area. A pivotal mathematical model within CDMs is the Deterministic Inputs, Noisy "and" Gate(DINA) model, which assesses mastery or non-mastery statuses across multiple cognitive skillsbased on raw question responses [21], [24]. The DINA model, a latent class model, classifiesstudents into skill mastery profiles based on their responses to exam questions, with each questionhaving a specific relation to one or more skills [21], [24]. The linkage between questions and theircorresponding intended skills are captured in a Q-matrix, a matrix of ones and zeros indicatingwhich questions require a particular skill in
showedan increase in student engagement. However, it was inconclusive whether the homeworkcompletion grade was affected by the pedagogy. The results also showed that the homework hada weak positive correlation with exam performance.The present paper further aims to assess the efficacy of the pedagogy by examining studentengagement and student performance across multiple cohorts of the course. Learningmanagement system tools, like chat and polling, were previously shown to be effectivequalitative methods for overcoming the passive learning behavior exhibited by EFL students.Thus, a comparison by cohort and in aggregate were performed for the following: studentparticipation at each synchronous Q&A session using the chat feature, student polling
𝑡−1 (11) 𝑟𝑡 = ∑ 𝑟 + 𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑐 . 𝑖=0We use the following two agent algorithms to the environment in our study. The first algorithm iscalled Deep Q-Networks (DQN). It is an extension of Q-learning that uses deep neural networks toapproximate the Q-value function. This works with discrete observation space and discrete actionspace. The key equation for DQN involves updating the weights of the neural network to minimizethe loss function, which is typically the mean squared error between the predicted Q-values and thetarget Q-values. The function for DQN can be expressed as [20] 𝑄(𝑠𝑡 , 𝑎𝑡
, E. Tõnisson, and M. Lepp, "Factors That Influence Students' Motivation and Perception of Studying Computer Science," in Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2019, pp. 873-878.[17] J. B. Main, T. Dang, B. Johnson, Q. Shi, C. Guariniello, and D. Delaurentis, "Why Students Choose STEM: A Study of High School Factors That Influence College STEM Major Choice," in 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2023.[18] S. L. Ferguson, K. P. Ieva, C. J. Winkler, K. Ash, and T. Cann, "How do you know if this is for you? Exploration and awareness of technical STEM careers," School Science and Mathematics, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 114-124, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111
reported no difference between the pre- and post-test survey, a0 was given for that question. If a student reported a negative difference between the pre- andpost-test survey, a -1 was given for that question. The tallies were added up and a positive sumcorresponded to a positive progression, a sum of 0 corresponded to no progression, a negativesum corresponded to a negative progression. More formally: s = student c = construct Q(c, s)ij = numerically scaled Likert response matrix for each student and construct n(c) = number of questions in a constructFor each student in a construct, a score is calculated through Eq. 1 as: n
equations are converted to a set of algebraic equations using a weighted integral statement (e.g., weak-form Galerkin and least-squares formulation). For example, a weak-form Galerkin formulation of the governing equations, Eq. 1–2, can be stated as: find the solution {u, p} ∈ S h such that for all {w, q} ∈ V h the following equation is satisfied: Z ∂u w· ρ + ρu · ∇u − ρg − (∇ · w)p dΩ Ω ∂t Z − ∇q · u dΩ + (suitable stability terms) ZΩ = {w · (−pI + τ ) · n
Engineering and Computing Diversity (CoNECD),[3] J. Miller, Engineering Manhood: Race and the Antebellum Virginia Military Institute. Lever Press, 2020.[4] D. A. Chen, J. A. Mejia, and S. Breslin, “Navigating equity work in engineering: contradicting messages encountered by minority faculty,” Digital Creativity, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 329–344, Oct. 2019.[5] D. R. Simmons and S. M. Lord, “Removing invisible barriers and changing mindsets to improve and diversify pathways in engineering,” Adv. Eng. Educ., 2019, Available: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1220293.pdf. [Accessed: Jul. 01, 2021][6] P. Freire, Pedagogy of the oppressed. Routledge, 1973.[7] R. Q. Shin et al., “The development and validation of the Contemporary
exampleserves as a valuable teaching tool, suitable for both classroom lectures (second discussion point)and self-study assignments.Problem statement: A multi-station system with mixed partsThe system under consideration receives parts of two types: GK and Q. Parts GK arrive with aninter-arrival time uniformly distributed between 5 and 7 minutes. Upon arrival, 20% aredesignated as part G and directed to Station L. The remaining 80% are designated as part K andproceed to Station M. • Station L: This station has a single Machine that processes each part G with a triangularly distributed processing time (Tria(6, 9, 15)). After processing, all part Gs are sent to Station M. • Station M: This station has a single Operator. It processes
] HQPBL Organization, “A framework for high quality project-based learning”, url:https://hqpbl.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FrameworkforHQPBL.pdf, 2024[7] Lyngdorf, N. E. R., Du, X. and Lundberg, A., “First-year engineering students’ learneragency sources in a systemic PBL environment: a Q study”, European Journal of EngineeringEducation, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1130–1147. doi:10.1080/03043797.2023.2233427, 2023[8] Q Methodology, “Scientific Study of Human Subjectivity”, url: https://qmethod.org/, 2024[9] Mohammadi-Aragh M. J. and Kajfez R. L., “Ten years of first-year engineering literature(2005–2014), a systematic literature review of four engineering education journals”, TheInternational journal of engineering education, ISSN-e 0949-149X, vol
faculty and • Four participants requested more time for graduate student facilitators for facilitator-led times to work through examples as a Q&A on complex topics cohort during the exit interview. • “Unexpected personal development learning by interaction with individuals and groups in this type of setting are what I look forward to in this type of “Peer-to-Peer Support” professional development environment.” (Week 3) Participants will benefit from • “Have one day a week where the class eats lunch additional time for socializing together provided by the program
Technology”, researchers have developed an AI-powered socio-technical system for making online learning in higher education more affordable, accessible, andachievable. In particular, they have developed original and interweaved AI technologies such asVERA, a “Virtual experimentation research Assistant” for supporting inquiry-based learning ofscientific knowledge, and Jill Watson Q&A, a virtual teaching assistant for answering questionsbased on educational documents including VERA’s user reference guide.“VERA” helps learners build conceptual models of complex phenomena, evaluate them throughsimulation, and revise the models as needed. VERA’s capability of evaluating a model bysimulation provides a formative assessment of the model; its support
save time in defining the accurate model for the data chosen. Theexperiment was run on a Michigan State University cluster having one NVIDIA A100GPU, Intel XEON CPU with 36GB of allocated memory. Amino acid Accuracy Time duration A 0.706 00h 47m 06s R 0.564 01h 53m 16s N 0.654 03h 07m 00s D 0.651 01h 31m 36s C 0.939 01h 28m 31s Q
strategy to enhance students’ critical thinking,” Educ. Res. Q., vol. 36, no.4, pp. 3-24, 2013.
“right answer”. This is essential inallowing participants to sit with where they are and think of strategies for how they can grow orchallenge themselves to do something differently.Outline:Activity 1: Welcome & Background (15 minutes)Activity 2: Social Identity (20 minutes)Activity 3: Comfort Zones (20 minutes)Activity 4: Guided Small Group Discussion (20 minutes)Activity 5: Q&A and Conclusion (15 minutes)
. iii) incorporating necessary equations and calculus while minimizingcomplexity.In this light, the utilization of end-of-semester case study presentations in fluid-thermo coursesoffers several benefits. Throughout the semester, instructors prioritize applied fluid-thermoconcepts. In addition, it allows students to study deeper into topics of interest, includingconcepts, equations, applications, and emerging technologies. Moreover, students gain valuableinsights from peers’ presentations while receiving feedback and detailed explanations frominstructors during Q&A sessions. Additionally, these presentations inspire the development ofnew labs for continuous course improvement in subsequent semesters. The survey and courseevaluations results