alumni gave “Lessons Learned”presentations and new participants gave brief presentations on the course and topic they plan toimplement with active learning strategies. Page 15.936.4 As with previous years, upon completion, faculty participants were presented with acertificate; a letter and a copy of their certificate were sent to notify their chair of theirparticipation. Chairs were encouraged by the Dean of Engineering to acknowledge the FacultyDevelopment Workshop in the faulty and instructor annual reviews. In addition to therecognition, faculty and instructors who participated in the FDW were provided a stipend of$800. Several
committee, in cooperation with faculty andadministrators from Engineering, approved a plan to infuse first semester engineeringmathematics with collaborative, problem-solving workshops. The first set of materials waswritten by teams of engineers from across the college and by pure and applied mathematicians.In the Fall 2007 pilot implementation effort, applied problem-solving was integrated into the firstcourse in the required engineering math sequence by transforming one of the two weeklyteaching assistant-led recitation sections into a collaborative problem-solving workshop. Allsixteen sections of the course received the workshop innovation. As such, all 392 studentsenrolled in the course participated in the workshops. The problems for the
faculty 27 44.3%members attendIn courses taught by department faculty and targeted at freshmen 46 75.4%Other 12 19.7%Advising can be a very personal interaction between a student and a faculty membersince the student needs to communicate his or her personal goals and objectives. Thefaculty member will often share relevant personal anecdotes or recollections to aid thestudent in planning his or her career. Respondents indicated that students are advisedindividually in most cases (51 or 83.6%), though at some institutions advising is handledexclusively in groups (3 or 4.9%), in both groups and individually for all students (11 or18.0%) or
andresults to expect. It is also proposed in future offerings that an improved structure for the modelof the twin rotor system be employed. Other ways to make the project go more smoothly includeto break the assignments into smaller parts to encourage better planning and to give moreinstruction for the communication so that both sides better understand what to expect from theirinternational collaborators. This further instruction can also decrease the amount of workrequired by the students for writing their memos if they can better focus their communication.The students can also be encouraged to reuse or refer to figures from their specific assignment inorder to decrease the repetition of work. Finally, for the benefit of the UDM students it
Teaching and Learning. Number 47, Fall 1991. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.3. Bennett, J.B., (2001). Teaching With Hospitality. In “Teaching Excellence”. Center for Teaching,University of Southern Maine. 12, No 1, 2000-2001.4. Ladeji-Osias, J.O. “Planning and Teaching an Undergraduate Course,” Proceedings of the 2005 AmericanSociety of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, OR. (2005).5. Kim, D. “Successful Methods and Techniques for Effective Teaching and Class Management,” Proceedings ofthe 2007 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, HI. (2007).6. Miguel, A., and Larson, E. “Efficient and Effective Grading of Student Work,” Proceedings of the 2006American Society of
operation of the building would be available throughthe internet. Citizens who helped fund the building would have some access to observe itsoperation. With information available over the internet it would be readily available for use inelementary, middle and high school courses. Engineering & Design department faculty andstudents could have that information available and use it in outreach programs to communityschools. This type of use of the building is still in the planning stages.One desired but unfunded set of equipment was a weather station to be mounted on the roof ofthe building. By having access to current temperatures, wind speeds and directions the overallefficiency of the building could be assessed. Students could see how changes in
,Verification and software reviews and testing, user interface testing and 42Validation evaluation, problem analysis and reportingSoftware Evolution Evolution processes and activities 10Software Process Process concepts and implementation 13 Software quality concepts and culture, standards andSoftware Quality 16 processes, process and product assurance Management concepts, project planning and control,Software personnel and organization issues, software configuration 19Management
. James H. Block. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971.3. Keller, Fred Simmons, John Gilmour Sherman, and Carolina Martuscelli Bori. PSI, the Keller Plan Handbook: Essays on a personalized system of instruction. Menlo Park, Calif.: WA Benjamin, 1974.4. Onipede, O., and Warley, R., "Rethinking engineering exams to motivate students," 26th Annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Miami University, Oxford, OH, October 2007Appendix: Survey Questions1. I feel confident in taking future courses that require E MCH 211 as a pre-requisite.2. I think it is important to be able to solve problems correctly3. I feel that the grades I received in E MCH 211 with mastery exams was a fair evaluation of my understanding of that subject
. Retrieved from http://www.asee.org/resources/beyond/greenreport.cfm 4. National Academy of Engineering of the National Academies. (2004). The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Retrieved from http://www.nae.edu/Programs/Education/Activities10374/Engineerof2020.aspx 5. National Science Foundation, Investing in America’s Future: Strategic Plan, FY 2006–2011 (Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation). 6. Engineering Education and Practice in the United States: Foundations of our Techno-Economic Future. (1985). National Research Council: Washington, D.C. 7. Besterfield, M.E., Ragusa, G., Matherly, C., Phillips, S.R., Shuman, L.J., Howard, L. (2013). Assessing the
. Thousand Oaks: Sage.93. Koro-Ljungberg, M. & Douglas, E.P. (2008). State of Qualitative Research in Engineering Education: Meta- Analysis of JEE Articles, 2005-2006. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 163-175.94. Koro-Ljungberg, M. & Douglas, E.P. (2008). State of Qualitative Research in Engineering Education: Meta- Analysis of JEE Articles, 2005-2006. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 163-175.95. Anyon, J. (2009). Theory and Educational Research: Toward Critical Social Explanation. New York: Routledge.96. E.g., Creswell, J., W. (2007). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3rd Edition.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.97. Charmaz, K. (2006
firstly will beinhosted. hosted Broun Hall 352 and now in Broun Hall 314. Page 24.947.7Based on this test and feedback from the students, we will revisit and update the lab experiments in the summer.Some fundamental questions to be answered are, are these labs suitable for senior students? What are theprerequisites? Does our current curriculum cover the sufficient background? We also plan to find ways toincorporate our research outcomes on SDR and CR with the lab, to show students how to leverage and
. L. Waight, K. S. Zerda, and T. Sha. 2008. The relations of ethnicity to female engineering students’ educational experiences and college and career plans in an ethnically diverse learning environment. Journal of Engineering Education 97 (4): 449-465.14. Hoh, Y. K. 2008. Presenting female role models in civil engineering: An outreach activity to help teachers overcome their misperceptions of engineers. International Journal of Engineering Education 24 (4): 817- 824.15. Jain, R., B. Shanahan, and C. Roe. 2009. Broadening the appeal of engineering - Addressing factors contributing to low appeal and high attrition. International Journal of Engineering Education 25 (3): 405- 418.16. Bronzini, M. S., J. M
(1): p. 1-16.5. National Academy of Engineering, Grand Challenges for Engineering, G.C.f.E. Committee, Editor. 2008, National Academy of Sciences on behalf of the National Academy of Engineering. p. 54.6. Rittel, H. and M. Webber, Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 1973. 4(2): p. 155-169.7. Boyer, E., Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. 1990, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Princeton, NJ. p. 151.8. Yin, R., Case Study Research: Design and Methods 2009, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.9. Godin, B. and C. Doré, Measuring the impacts of science: Beyond the economic dimension. History and Sociology of S&T Statistics, 2004.10. United
the time. Each student is also able touse as many robots as he wishes without running into cost limits as would happen with thephysical robots.Integration into the classroom is planned in a few different ways to help complement thehands-on robots. Introducing new topics to students and demonstrating how to use therobots for the new topic can be completed more easily through the simulation on theteacher’s computer. As students are developing new code to run their robots, thesimulation provides the platform to quickly alter the code before running on the hardware.When students are at home without robots, the simulation is being used to have homeworkassignments which integrate the robot lessons.Initial data was collected from students who have
” experience. Choices that do not serve this purpose should be rejected in favor of projectsthat actually do enhance the realistic nature of the project. Some of the engineering sub-disciplines that need to be exercised include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following,shown in Figure 1 below: Page 24.1083.4 Product Planning Design Product Engineering (Analysis) Manufacturing (Production) Cost analysis Figure 1: Cross-functional approach required for student
coherent theme and progression from simple imaging casestudies to more sophisticated, state-of-the-art techniques. Our plans for solar imagingmodules include the following topical descriptions of each module: 1. Microstructure of Polycrystalline Silicon Wafers. Images of solar cells directly show the microstructure, particularly grain boundaries. Unlike metals, silicon reveals its grain structure without the need for any sample preparation. Students can apply many of algorithms (including ASTM protocols) used to parameterize microstructure from images. ASTM procedures using lineal and areal analysis, and similar methods, to determine grain size distributions and grain symmetry (e.g., equi-axed or elongated) will be
financing with an NGO in India; the use of cell phones for creating a more efficient process in maintaining immunization records for developing countries; and developing a foot measurement system with jaipur foot. He is also working on a new methodology for easier learning of 3D modeling applications for design students. He divides his time between the United States and India.He obtained his BArch from the School of Planning and Architecture in New Delhi and his Master of Science in Design from Arizona State University. Professor Sharma is Chair of the IDSA Design for the Majority Professional Interest Section. He has been involved in doing research on Design for the Bottom of the Pyramid and leads the Industrial Design
already know how to do. Engineers andprofessionals of all fields routinely tackle problems to which they do not have ready solutions,yet the educational experience of most American students typically involves a smoothly paved,pre-planned route to the “correct answer.” Perhaps the most valuable aspect of this form oflearning is that it is something unknown that must be mastered. Making video is not terriblydifficult to learn to do at a basic level, but it requires practice and persistence. Persistence in theface of adversity is a valuable attribute, but one that may be lacking among today’s collegestudents depending on levels of maturity and intellectual development.Perhaps this is a factor that partially explains some of the observed differences
calls for alternative doctoralpedagogies for students planning to succeed in industry.It is difficult to directly compare the results of this study with numerical results shown in similarstudies. We are particularly interested with comparing our numerical findings through thissurvey with numerical findings about the most important skills for Ph.D.-holding engineeringgraduates in academia and industry. However, most studies look particularly at the experiencesand employer expectations of baccalaureate-level engineers entering the field. For example,Lang et al. (2009) conducted a survey of engineers in industry regarding the necessary attributesfor entry-level (baccalaureate) engineers using a survey instrument asking participants about
with opportunities for peer instruction, individual and group problem-solving exercises, and discussion and consideration of experimental demonstrations. During the exercises the instructor would circulate through the lecture hall with approximately 100 students. After a period of time for these exercises the instructor would review or present a solution to the problem in collaboration with the students using a tablet PC. The in-class time was also used to discuss additional applications and current areas of related research. Approximately one-third to one-half of the class was spent with the instructor speaking at the front, but the presentation was not based on pre-planned notes, but rather
used clickers in nearly every classfor the last 10 years. Three semesters ago there was the opportunity to move a class into acomputer lab. Coincidentally, this was the first semester that the instructor decided to relyprincipally on online homework after a trial run of online homework had been veryenthusiastically received the previous semester. Thus this class had quick feedback in class fromclickers. Students were able to see if their work matched the instructor’s for spreadsheets, andthen for homework, students received instant feedback, suggestions, links to text sections, andmultiple tries to get it right.The results were so good, that a talk on the “Best Teaching Experience of my 35-year Career”was planned. Two subsequent semesters have
misconceptions when applying the concept in practice.The research concluded with specific differences between several types of active learning:collaborative, cooperative, problem-based, project-based, and team-based learning.Future research is planned to measure the impact of team-based learning in the promotionof creative thinking in engineering education. The experiment will have a control group in a Page 24.1175.9traditional lecture-type setting and an experimental group in a team-based learning settingto identify if TBL has an impact on creative thinking, a desired skill in future engineers.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the
on project management. Orientation Service-learning. Capstone Business, Several. Some Human services, Engineering products and are specifically access and Design focus services. “work for business abilities, including business like companies.” (business education and and industrial planning and outreach, the design issues. venture analysis), environment. Focus on some focus on
mistakes or fill in any gaps fromthe review.Quality control is a critical for the success of this assignment. Many teams were found toprocrastinate to the detriment of their review when they did not leave time for adequateinstructor feedback. Procrastination also led to some teams spending lots of time just beforepresenting to develop a problem, only to learn that their problem was incorrect. In the future it issuggested that the team meet with the instructor two weeks prior to the review and be required toturn in a short report stating what they are planning to do, who will be doing what, and when thegroup will be meeting. It would also be useful for the instructor to meet with the team in the lastminutes of class roughly a week before the
questions included: [1.] Which instructional scaffolds andtechnological affordances do students perceive as helpful when collaborating through onlinetools? [2.] How do student perceptions differ from the instructor’s perceptions? The plan is to tell a story in its natural setting; to explore what transpired over twosemesters of research involving a single engineering materials course in which multiple onlinecollaborative tools were employed, and one in which the engineering professor welcomed theresearch team into the learning environment.Context, Participants and Collaborative Tools This study took place at a large university in the American Midwest and involved a totalof 144 student participants from an undergraduate mechanical
and research opportunities. The plans for Page 24.1222.2the final year of the project will be discussed.The National Science Foundation is supporting the project (NSF CCLI/TUES #0941012).IntroductionThe iCollaborate Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) project is a multiyear,multifaceted research project designed to understand how student learning outcomes,student engagement, and successful course completion rates in introductory MSEcourses are affected by a variety of programs and activities that are based upon bestpractices from STEM education research. A number of interventions and activetechniques were used in the classroom, at first
to directly assess theimpact of the advising relationship on various measures of student success. Our future plansinclude the analysis of the larger survey to better understand returners’ decisions to pursue aPhD, the unique challenges they face, and coping strategies they utilize and how these compareto those of direct pathway students. We also conducted in-depth interviews with 53 returning anddirect pathway students from across the country and plan to analyze that data for a betterunderstanding of the development of students’ research and how their past experiences influencetheir PhD work. Finally, we will conduct focus groups with various stakeholders in industry,government, and academia, including faculty advisors, to better understand
Page 24.1262.2and typically assist with labs for 5 to 7 courses each. Some of the courses required more labwork than others. On average the lab managers were travelling three days per week and on eachtrip they could cover anywhere from 100 to 500 miles. For entry-level courses, such as CircuitModeling I, traveling support staff can be used to assess proper usage of lab equipment and toevaluate the construction and performance of simple circuits. Since they cover locationsthroughout the state, the two lab managers usually create a biweekly site schedule which bothstudents and faculty can plan around. They work with engineering faculty to ensure that theremote students have a lab experience equivalent to those on main campus. For upper
C26. Make sure teammatesO7. Help to plan, set goals, R17. Show respect for other understand importantand organize work teammates information and instructionsO8. Track team progress vs. R18. Demonstrate C27. Help the team buildyour timeline accountability consensusO9. Encourage progress to R19. Collaborate effectivelymeet goals and deadlinesO10. Display dedication anddetermination4.2. Study DesignAt the beginning of the course, teaching assistants participated in a 1.5 hour training session onteamwork and
Plan Miller Indices.Figure 5. Analytics for Arizona of views and minutes versus date for the Miller Indices video.While the previous YouTube video tutorial had little if any impact on student achievement, theEutectic Phase Diagram Calculation (Figure 6) and Microstructure Muddiest Point Tutorial Page 23.916.12videos had a dramatic effect on scores on Test #2 which was focused on phase diagramcalculations and microstructures. We will discuss only the video usage for the Calculations videosince the Microstructure video showed very similar features and trends. As can be seen belowthere is a significant spike on October 10, 2012 with 216 minutes and