is to describe the experiences from the NSF-sponsoredDiscover Manufacturing Workshop conducted at the University of Missouri – Rolla.The summer 2004 workshop is the second Discover Manufacturing workshop to beheld under this NSF grant. A paper discussing the 2003 rapid prototyping workshopcontent has been reported 1, and this paper addresses the entire manufacturingworkshop experience, especially for year 2004. The emphasis of the workshop was toexpose the attending high school students and teachers to advanced manufacturingtechnologies with the goal of creating awareness to emerging career opportunities in Page 10.148.1manufacturing. “Proceedings
, American Society for Engineering Education Indeed, professors and students are expected to play non-conventional roles by engaging inthis instructional and learning approach. In a PBL environment, learners practice higher ordercognitive skills (analysis, synthesis and evaluation) and are constantly engaged in reflectivethinking asking questions that are based on “why and how” rather than “where when, and what”. PBL has been employed in a number of disciplines, particularly in the medical field[1 - 4]and in education-related professions.[5 - 9] Recent work, some with support from NSF, hastargeted the fields of engineering and applied sciences in both course reform and completecurriculum reform.[10 - 14] In these sources, PBL was
graduate also ought to demonstrate 1) ability to manage a project (including afamiliarity with business, market-related, and financial matters), 2) a multidisciplinary systemsperspective, 3) an understanding of and appreciation for the diversity of students, faculty, staff,colleagues, and customers, and 4) a strong work ethic. During Phase II of this project, weidentified several assessment instruments that might measure those outcomes and begansearching for instructional “best practices” thought to promote the 15 desired learningoutcomes. This paper, based on Phase III of the project, provides empirical evidence from andidentifies the gaps in higher education and engineering education journal articles that linkinstructional best practices with
could be missed without an effect ontheir grade.) I reviewed the quiz results prior to class and addressed common misconceptions.Note, however, that these reading quizzes were really summative in nature; students’ state ofunderstanding from the reading was graded for its correctness.In the Fall 2004 offering of the course, there were slightly fewer students (95) and two TAs, so Itransformed the quizzes into formative “Preparation Assessments” that were intended to beassessments for learning instead of assessments of learning. There were two open-endedquestions on each assessment, and an optional “Muddiest Point” question. Following is anexample of the assessment used for a class meeting on basic mechanical behavior: 1. Explain the difference
arriving at the target, spanningover a period of three years, provided unique experiences of mobilizing human and physicalresources akin to a large-scale project management. Out of this experience came severalstrategic initiatives that will position KAAU to be a leader in engineering education in theMiddle East. The two most important initiatives are: (1) the offering of a new mandatorycourse, Introduction to Engineering Design, and (2) the creation of the EngineeringConsulting and Professional Development Office (ECPDO). The goal of the new course is tointroduce students to the Engineering Method which can be accomplished by focusing on 1)Self Regulation, 2) Communication, 3) Working Cooperatively and Collaboratively, 4)Problem Solving, 5
above information, under the “ABET evaluator information” link,information is organized and presented as it relates to the TC2K criteria. For the newTC2K criteria, a program must meet the following criteria7: • Criterion 1. Program Educational Objectives • Criterion 2. Program Outcomes • Criterion 3. Assessment and Evaluation • Criterion 4. Program Characteristics • Criterion 5. Faculty • Criterion 6. Facilities • Criterion 7. Institutional and External Support • Criterion 8. Program Criteria Page 10.117.3Figure 1 shows the organization of the METS
instructor to give as "prizes" something that he did not want to keep • The students get a chance to laugh and have some fun while learning • It allows the instructor a chance to review a concept from the last class • It recaptures the student's attention after the question and review are overAn unintended consequence of this competition is increased student pride in theperformance of their team and encouragement of their "team members" to come to class.IntroductionFelder and Silverman1 have studied the subject of learning and teaching styles, andclassify a learner by the following categories: Page 10.1324.1 1. What type of information
Product and Process Design and Delivery: Invention Through to Innovation Gary E. Wnek1 and Stanton G. Cort2 1 Department of Chemical Engineering 2 Department of Marketing and Policy Studies The Institute for Management and Engineering (TiME) Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio 44106 AbstractMany product/process design courses, including ours, focus heavily on ideas like thestage-gate and quality function deployment as their conceptual foundation. It is clear thateffective realization
requirements. The shortfalls are illuminating in assessing thereasonableness of the proposed criteria as well as identifying where the West Point curriculummay need to change. Page 10.1472.2II. Body of Knowledge Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering EducationThe BOK is presented in the form of the 15 outcomes shown in Table 1 that prescribe thenecessary breadth and depth of knowledge required for a practicing civil engineer. The BOKoutcomes 1 – 11 are deliberately identical to ABET outcomes 3a-k listed in the
or Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Educationpre-work socialization. Further, design is now a researchable and dynamic body of knowledgewith numerous dedicated research journals.7 And, fortunately, there are some fairly widely heldviews about what is true about the design process that will allow us to proceed without dissectingthe different models of the process and the reasons for them. (Figure 1) Figure 1: Graphical Communication and the Design Process (Adapted from Eris8, p138)Initially, design is a question-driven process.8 These questions create
offeredpioneering, innovative courses in Engineering Entrepreneurship, Technical Marketing, HighTech Product Strategy, and Technology Commercialization strategies. In these case studycourses, students develop real world marketing and business plans for commercializinginnovative new products and technologies.1 Some of the innovative product development andtechnology commercialization ideas have won accolades at regional business idea pitchingcompetitions.While meeting the increasing demand for holistic, interdisciplinary education, these innovativecourses have greatly enriched the students’ educational experience, broadened their perspectives,significantly enhanced their career prospects, served as community outreach/networking forumsand integrated
manufacturing-related programs by providinginstitutions, companies, and students a way to work together both onsite and online in a cost-effective, practical way. The distributed-hybrid instructional delivery method uses face-to-facemodular activity-based instructional materials, developed under previous NSF-ATE grantsincluding most recently the Completing the Curriculum: Modular Manufacturing EducationModel for Advanced Manufacturing Education DUE 0071079. The Completing theCurriculum grant focused on the development and testing of the curriculum for an AAS degreein Manufacturing Engineering Technology in nine subject matter clusters[1]. What is the urgentneed for this new approach to delivery? The Society of Manufacturing Engineers has
science skills have been declining. In fact, a recent survey (1)indicated that American eighth grade students ranked 19th in math and 18th in science among 38countries tested. While these statistics sound grim, strides have been made to improve studentperformance in these areas by giving educators important linkages to business practices that canultimately bring reality-based learning to the classroom.In order to build a strong foundation for a qualified workforce, educators need to be made awareof emerging technologies used in business today. In 2002, CBIA and Connecticut’s CommunityColleges’ College of Technology received a three year, Advanced Technology Education grantfrom the National Science Foundation. The grant focused specifically on
for lifelong learning. Currentlylarge numbers of students, 350 per year, travel internationally to complete projects that link Page 10.964.2technology and society. The off-campus portion of this activity is the equivalent of 3 courseProceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright2005, American Society for Engineering Education.equivalents worth of work. Prior to sojourn, all students must complete 1 ½ courses worth of siteand project-specific preparation work (4.5 credit hours). The preparation phase is two monthson-campus and the project phase is two months off-campus
. Page 10.51.3Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright© 2005, American Society for Engineering EducationThe third section measured aspects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to attend college through28 items consisting of possible answers to the question “Why did you go to college” provided viaa five-point rating scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree.The fourth section included the 56 items comprising the six personality construct measuresmentioned previously: Organization (10 items), Activity Level (10 items), Need for Cognition(10 items), Social Assurance (8 items), Social Connectedness (8 items), and Generalized Self-Efficacy (10 items). These
foreground colour element ratio computation in order to eliminate thefalse alarms in several cases. Two additional features: foreground bounding box andthree-level alarm trigger aim to improve the efficiency and sensitivity of the system.Several experiments were conducted to verify the performance of the enhanced system.At the end of the paper, conclusions and possible further improvements are discussed. Page 10.161.1“Proceedings of the 2005 AMERICAN society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education”1. IntroductionVideo analysis has improved
Session 3255 Designing and Implementing Graduate Programs in Engineering Education O. Hayden Griffin, Jr.1, Alex Aning1, Vinod K. Lohani1, Jean Kampe1, Richard Goff1, Marie Paretti1, Michael Alley1, Jenny Lo1, Janis Terpenny1, Thomas Walker1, Hassan Aref 2, Susan Magliaro3, and Mark Sanders41 Department of Engineering Education/ 2 Dean, College of Engineering/ 3 Director, School of Education/ 4 Professor and Program Leader, Technology Education Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityIntroductionRecent years have seen an increasing awareness of the lack of training of the majority ofengineering faculty in topics involving
the average of the control [conventional] class (the average tutored student was above 98% of the students in the control class).’Learning and development is also strongly supported by one-to-one supervision as it requiresstudents to talk about their current understanding, with the result as described by Di Bello andOrlich5, that, ‘… the very act of speaking about one’s current understanding makes one’s understanding implicit. Often an individual may have a sketchy or partial understanding of aspects of formal theory but be unaware of exactly what is understood or not understood.’On the other hand one-to-one supervision is very expensive, and as staff student ratios havechanged from about 1:8 in 1990 to
Freshman Interest Groups: Creating Seamless Learning Communities to Enhance Student Success Andrew Beckett, Dr. Tom Marrero University of Missouri-ColumbiaIn 1983 the National Commission on Excellence in Education’s A Nation at Risk began a call forreform in secondary and higher education. This report claimed that America’s education was“being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and apeople.”1 Several related reports followed. Namely, the Wingspread Group2 and the KelloggCommission3 both charged higher education to redesign the undergraduate experience to betterprepare America’s citizens for the 21st
Successfully Building Bridges Between Education and Engineering Programs at a 4-year Comprehensive University Jason Thrun and Philip Parker University of Wisconsin-PlattevilleAbstractSix faculty members (three from engineering, one from mathematics, and two from education)teamed up to plan and implement an innovative project. During the fall semester of 2004, ninepre-service teachers in secondary- and middle-level mathematics education enrolled in anexperimental section of GE 1030 – Introduction to Engineering Projects, an existing 1-credithour class that is required for all engineering majors, and is typically taken in the freshman year.The project
and the second two goals are for the faculty involved: provide pre-service teachers with a basic understanding of the field of engineering so they are better able to describe the excitement of an engineering career to their future students; provide pre-service teachers with engineering applications that can enhance the learning of mathematics; introduce fundamental issues relating to engineering and engineering education to faculty members outside the field of engineering; improve pedagogy and teaching effectiveness of engineering faculty.To meet these goals, we planned and implemented a model for an engineering experience forpre-service teachers. This experience pairs an existing 1-credit-hour
Session 2147 Increasing Student Interest Through Hardware Ownership Samuel Colwell and Rich Warren Vermont Technical College, Randolph Center, VermontAbstractWith the significant drop in cost of embedded microcontrollers,1, 3 there now exists anopportunity to give every student a trainer that they can take home to work on and can keep at theend of the semester. At Vermont Technical College, one of the courses has been modified toinclude a Microchip PIC16F877 based trainer board. The trainer board comes in kit form (a PCBand components) and the students assemble the board and then use it in
steps in the design process are: • Identify Need, • Define Problem, • Generate Alternative Solutions, • Analysis and Feedback, • Winnow, • Detailed Design, • Test and Refine, and • Implement.Identify Need Previous experimental courses in the department have integrated active learning componentsinto lecture courses. Department-level initiatives include industry-sponsored capstone designprojects, the hands-on Integrated Design, Engineering, and Life Skills (IDEALS)1 courseincorporating team design and building projects, the Case Study Web Site2 that incorporatesexperimental data analysis into core lecture courses, and the Energy Systems Laboratory3 used inseveral required junior courses to demonstrate the integration of
Engineering Implementation in Grades 6-12: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Workshop Model Bonniejean Boettcher, Bree Carlson, Martha Cyr, Sudeepta Shanbhag Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester MA / University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst MAAbstractIn order to assist math, science, and technology education teachers learn engineering designbased content they can use in their classrooms, the Pre-College Engineering for Teachers (PCET)program [1] was developed to provide teachers with professional development training. Throughthis program, teachers can participate as Mentor teachers who attend a two week workshopcalled Tufts Engineering Mentor
alsodiscuss the tools and advice that have been extremely helpful to us as we work to maintain ahealthy balance between our work and personal lives. Tips for couples from graduate students tofaculty will be provided.IntroductionHaving one faculty member in the family is very challenging. However, having two facultymembers in the family makes life even more interesting. Today’s work environment involvesmore and more dual career couples where both partners work full-time. Additionally manyfaculty meet their significant others during school creating an environment with more dual careercouples than in the past. Dual career couples have a different set of challenges than couples thatare single-income or one-income dominant. References [1-12] address some
. Collaborativelearning, often referred to as small group learning, is an established and successful technique toenhance student interactions while learning. Collaborative learning teams are typically puttogether without following a set of guidelines and roles on the team (leader, facilitator, scribe,etc.) may be assigned arbitrarily. In general, CL is a process in which students rather than theinstructor guide the activities to be completed to meet a specific goal. Cooper (2004)1 reports“CL creates an environment "that involves students in doing things and thinking about the thingsthey are doing",1 and reaches students who otherwise might not be engaged.” The keycharacteristics of CL are socially constructed learning via direct discussions between students
Capstone project management as an example of howsuch a plan may be implemented. The following two questions are addressed: 1) How canfaculty members develop their own continuous improvement plan to enhance their Capstoneproject management skills? and 2) How can faculty teach students to develop and utilizecontinuous improvement plans throughout a Capstone design project?IntroductionPrior to the adoption of ABET’s EC 2000 accreditation criteria, engineering programs wererequired to show that they were providing the proper curricula to their students. That is, tomaintain status as an ABET accredited program, the program had to simply demonstrate thatthey were delivering the courses needed to provide the proper subject matter to the students. Aslong
progresses, academia is faced with keeping pace.The benefits of utilizing technology in the classroom have been well-documented and supported.Alexander1 provides an excellent summary of previously documented e-learning experiences andreferences Bates’2 four reasons for including technology in higher education: (1) improving thequality of learning, (2) improving access to education and training, (3) reducing the costs ofeducation, and (4) improving the cost effectiveness of education. Alexander concluded that fore-learning to be successful in higher education, there must be an excellent university supportsystem for teachers, and teachers must plan and strategize to effectively use technology in theclassroom.At the other end of the spectrum are those
whose effects should havebeen obvious without doing the experiment. They have difficulty interpreting the meaning ofreal data that is messier than they expect. They lack confidence in learning new equipment andtroubleshooting their experimental setup. Unfortunately (or fortunately), encountering obstaclesall the time is part of the process. The unexpected makes experimental work difficult…andexciting. Problem solving in the lab involves debugging to find the reason for the problem and,when faced with limitations in equipment or time, coming up with alternative approaches toachieving goals.The differences between novice and expert troubleshooting technicians have been characterizedas shown in Table 1. With much practice in the lab many, but not
Page 10.1099.2Professor who accidentally discovers a material that …the author now understands…violates the First lawof Thermodynamics; even though the professor does remember the correct sign for the enthalpy equationimmediately after the explosion!Proceedings of the 2005 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005 American Society of Engineering Educationaction scene. Thus, one of the Instructor’s most important tasks: getting the interest ofthe student, has already been accomplished…thank you MGM, Disney, ABC, NBC andCBS.Examples of Some Sources of Inspiration of ‘real-world’ engineering examples fromthe Entertainment MediaFrom the movies No. 1: Indiana Jones and the Temple of DoomThe