offered to EE students.” 1 . Topics not related to nonmajors intended area ofstudy are swiftly forgotten 1 . Often, the course contains much difficult mathematical calculationand little in the way of practical examples to motivate theoretical study 15,2,16,17 . The specificcircuit arrangements solved may be random and arbitrary, rather than genuine diagrams of realmachines 2 . These previous efforts have focused on the laboratory portion of the course toincrease student motivation, using micro-controllers, instrumentation, and interdisciplinaryprojects to add authentic context. Less research has focused on homework problems that thestudents solve, and the exam questions they complete for the majority of their grades. Circuitstextbooks such as
programmodels is described in Table 2.Table 2 Program Model Faculty-to-faculty Single faculty Department-level College-level Network broker broker Description Faculty (PI) leads A single PI runs Faculty PI serves College-level PI Existing research in research as a “broker” serves as a professional collaboration with laboratories between different “broker” between network structures international domestically and domestic multiple domestic the collaboration partners internationally departments and
affairs from The University of Texas at Austin (BS Civil Engineering, Master of Public Affairs) and Virginia Tech (MS Industrial and Systems Engineering, PhD Engineering Education).Dr. Mark Weichold P.E., Texas A&M University Dr. Mark H. Weichold, Regents Professor and Halliburton Engineering Global Programs Professor, is an electrical engineer and has worked for General Dynamics Ft. Worth Division, Motorola in Austin, TX and the U.S. Army Electronic Technology and Devices Laboratory in Ft. Monmouth, NJ. He joined the Electrical Engineering faculty at Texas A&M University in 1982 and now holds the rank of Professor. In January 2007, he became Dean and CEO of Texas A&M University’s branch campus in Doha
duringclass and many steel design courses do not require a laboratory component. The following paperwill describe how the author uses trash bags with bolt holes to describe the concepts of yieldingand fracture, while also introducing a little bit of comedy into the classroom. Answers to themost common student questions are also provided.MotivationFor the first two or three times the author taught an introductory steel design course, he noticedthat many students were not able to clearly describe yielding in materials. From previous coursesin mechanics of materials and structural analysis, the students recognized that yielding, alongwith fracture, were both limit states to be checked, but they struggled to differentiate between thetwo failure modes and
programmingassignments during a fixed laboratory session. Traditionally, the student submission is graded bythe instructor at their convenience and the feedback and grades are returned back to students. Inthis method, the lab grading by the instructor is done by reviewing the student submission file bysitting together with the student and reviewing it together as soon as the student completes it. Theinstructor will ask the student to explain their source code by emphasizing various checkpoints.This will allow the instructor to understand the thought process of the students, and providepersonalized, efficient feedback to the student based on their submission. This will also allow theinstructor to ask other related questions to encourage critical thinking to
, without the detailed graphical solution learned inphysics lessons. A recent PNAS report concluded that while the studied honeybees acquired“implicit knowledge about the statistical properties of the visual environment” just like human,the advanced encoding scheme in human enables better probabilistic computational faculties[22]. Soon enough, a statistical learning AI system having improved encoding would be able toinclude diagrams/sketches and classify some tacit knowledge as explicit knowledge for straightforward pedagogy assessment without latent variable modeling. In terms of social learning, thelearning of a second language with implicit/tacit knowledge is well documented [23]. The storytelling of mishaps in engineering laboratories for
and howthey can advance to more sophisticated scenarios. Like a computer game, students become excitedto improve their level of knowledge and go beyond a simple laboratory. They develop the datamodel, implement a base, then improve to intermediate and advanced models. Like a game, severalstudents often go beyond and develop additional scenarios of their own interest.1. IntroductionSimulation in education is a well-known and an established field. Engineering education, defensetraining, and medical exercises are a few noticeable examples. As part of the degree requirements,engineering students often learn how to use modeling and simulations for their future workplaces.Whether designing and constructing bridges, buildings, auto vehicles
$25,000 to more than $2 million annually. He introduced Polytech- nic’s first computer-based instructional laboratory. In 1983 he became Associate Provost for Computing and Information Systems. During the early stages of the PC and Workstation explosion he worked closely with Aerospace and Architectural and Engineering Design companies to lead the University’s develop- ment of Interactive Computer Graphics and Computer Aided Design (CAD) laboratories and curricula. He won a $3.2 million IBM CAD/CAM grant which enabled introduction of CAD/CAM and VLSI in- struction at Polytechnic. He served as Dean Graduate Studies 1986 - 1992, a position in which he had responsibility for recruiting graduate students and establishing
architecture, intermediate digital design, andassembly language programming4. The course requires students to model the RATmicrocontroller (MCU) using VHDL and then use it to help them learn assembly languageprogramming. The RAT MCU is an 8-bit MCU with an assembly language containing 50instructions. CPE 233 is taught as a studio course in a laboratory setting with a format thatclosely resembles a flipped classroom. The sections met for two hours, three times per week, forten weeks. Class meetings comprised of short lectures to answer questions, outline the currenttopics, and introduce experiments. Although we provided few video lectures, the lab experimentsand assigned programming problems required a significant amount of time outside of class
Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and the director of the Dynamic and Smart Systems Laboratory at Tennessee Technological University. Dr. Anton received the B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Michigan Technological University (2006), and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (2008 and 2011, respectively). Following his graduate work, Dr. Anton held a two year postdoctoral position at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The central theme of his research involves characterizing the dynamic response of smart material systems for energy harvesting, structural health monitoring, sensing, and actuation. By combining expertise
thebackground to and basic knowledge about each mode of transportation. Lectures were followedby a hands-on laboratory class or a computer-based activity where students could apply the basicprinciples of transportation engineering to solve a problem related to each mode oftransportation. Finally, field trips were arranged to help students connect the theory and hands-onactivities to real-world engineering and aviation applications. A Likert scale questionnaire wasused to inquire about participants’ opinions of STEM and to assess the effectiveness of theprogram in introducing students to STEM. This paper reflects on opportunities and challenges indeveloping and implementing the curriculum and suggests improvements to it.IntroductionHigh school students
year but the same trend was observed in the previous years. Figure 2. Demographic information of participating students in 2019 programHands-on activities in Civil and Architectural Engineering:At the camp, students will learn how math and science relate to the field of engineering. Byseeing first-hand what engineers actually do, campers can better decide on a career or disciplinethey want to pursue. Whether a student is interested in clean energy, cars and motorcycles,explosives, or building bridges or towers, the camp will educate them through hands-onactivities, computer laboratory visits and practical demonstrations. The civil and architecturalengineering program is no exception to this exercise. Both programs offer a tour through
material properties of concrete.The first week of the semester in the reinforced concrete course is used to review both the materialproperties of unreinforced concrete and relevant laboratory tests, including compression, splittension, and flexure. The second week of the course is used to introduce the students to themechanical response of reinforced concrete beams, which includes a discussion of the differenttypes of failure modes and an overview of the internal couple method. During the third week ofthe course, the students learn how to calculate the flexural strength of reinforced concrete beamsthrough application of the internal couple method. The lecture titled “Is The Whole Greater Thanthe Sum of Its Parts? – Aristotle’s Insight into the
2016-2019 at the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Stuttgart, Germany.Prof. Musa K Jouaneh, University of Rhode Island Musa Jouaneh is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering in the Department of Mechanical, Industrial, and Systems Engineering at the University of Rhode Island where he has been working since 1990. His research interests include mechatronics, robotics, and engineering education. Dr. Jouaneh founded the Mechatronics Laboratory at the University of Rhode Island, is the author of two text books on mechatron- ics, is the developer of mechatronics-based tools for engineering education, and is the recipient of several c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020
, respectively. He worked for AT&T Bell Laboratories in New Jersey as a Member of the Technical Staff and was a National Research Council (NRC) Postdoctoral Fellow at the NASA Langley Research Center. In 1994, he joined Clark Atlanta University’s Department of Engineering, and was the Director of the Mechanical Testing Labora- tories (MTL) and Associate Director of the NASA funded High Performance Polymers and Composites (HiPPAC) Center. Presently, he is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and the Director of the Center for Advanced Materials Research and Education (CAMRE) at the Southern Polytechnic State University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Engagement in
regarding class size, teaching load, laboratory availability,service expectations or research requirements.Policies and procedure requirementsEach accrediting group features policies and procedures that regulate the release of informationto the public. Prior to an accreditation visit, programs should review the latest requirements toensure compliance, especially on websites and in printed materials. These often change andprograms are expected to be up-to-date or make efforts to become compliant. For example,ABET requires three types of information to be available to the public: the program educationalobjectives, the student outcomes as well as headcount data, including enrollment and the numberof graduates. This information should be “easy” to
working with a faculty for at least 6 weeks at theirhome campus and spending 2 weeks with a second faculty on the University Park campus.In addition to research, the two weeks at University Park were designed to expose students toopportunities and available resources through programmed activity. The first week at UniversityPark included an arrival weekend orientation with a program information session, group icebreakers, campus scavenger hunt and a half day leadership challenge workshop at a nearbyuniversity recreational facility. During the weekdays, the participants met daily for 1.5 hourswith research program staff for professional development workshops (e.g., safety training,research ethics, communication skills, etc.) and laboratory tours
, 2016.[2] N. Rutten, W. R. van Joolingen, and J. T. van der Veen, “The learning effects of computer simulations in science education,” Computers & Education, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 136–153, Jan. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017.[3] Z. A. Syed et al., “Evaluation of Virtual Reality Based Learning Materials as a Supplement to the Undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Laboratory Experience,” p. 11.[4] A. Akbulut, C. Catal, and B. Yıldız, “On the effectiveness of virtual reality in the education of software engineering,” Computer Applications in Engineering Education, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 918–927, 2018, doi: 10.1002/cae.21935[5] E. A.-L. Lee, K. W. Wong, and C. C. Fung, “Learning with Virtual Reality: Its
, Heather Dillon worked for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) as a senior research engineer.Dr. Nicole Ralston Dr. Nicole Ralston is an Assistant Professor and co-Director of the Multnomah County Partnership for Education Research (MCPER) in the School of Education at the University of Portland in Portland, Ore- gon. She received her Ph.D. in Educational Psychology with an emphasis in Measurement, Statistics, and Research Design from the University of Washington. An elementary school teacher at heart, she now teaches educational research and STEM methods to undergraduate and graduate students. Her research fo- cus involves bringing active learning strategies to STEM, best practices of research-practice
Laboratory I” (EE 081) course adopted a version of “Specifications Grading”, as outlinedin Linda Nelson’s book of the same title [1], in Fall 2018. Though the main goal of this teachingand grading intervention was to raise the quality of student writing, it was anticipated that this typeof grading would bring secondary benefits. These include instilling good writing habits in generalfor follow up lab courses as well as provide more transparency and consistency in grading. Theprinciples of specifications grading are detailed in Section 2 of this paper alongside the adaptationsmade for this introductory electrical engineering lab course. The results of the intervention are laidout in Section 3, from both a student and instructor perspective. Section 4
assist teachers with student engagement, helping them to be successful throughout the STEM pipeline. A few of these key areas include enhancing student’s spatial abilities (k-12 and higher education), integrating ser- vice learning into the classroom, implementing new instructional methodologies, and design optimization using additive manufacturing.Dr. Charles D. Eggleton, University of Maryland, Baltimore County Dr. Charles Dionisio Eggleton is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the Uni- versity of Maryland Baltimore County. He has twenty-two years of experience teaching theoretical and laboratory courses in thermo-fluids to undergraduate students and was Department Chair from 2011 - 2017
the Freshman Engineering Program, in the Benjamin M. Statler College of Engineering and Min- eral Resources at West Virginia University (WVU). She graduated Summa cum Laude with a BSME in 2006, earned a MSME in 2008, and completed her doctorate in mechanical engineering in 2011, all from WVU. At WVU, she has previously served as the Undergraduate and Outreach Advisor for the Mechani- cal and Aerospace Engineering department and the Assistant Director of the Center for Building Energy Efficiency. She has previously taught courses such as Thermodynamics, Thermal Fluids Laboratory, and Guided Missiles Systems, as well as serving as a Senior Design Project Advisor for Mechanical Engineer- ing Students. Her research
week or just 2 or 3 examinations throughout the semester, there was overwhelming support for weekly quizzesSome of the student comments were incorporated into this year’s course (until the virusshutdown forced strict on-line course presentation) while others are on the way to beingimplemented. The Civil Engineering Department has approved the laboratory component to beadded to the course and the modules for the lab are being developed. This still needs to beapproved by the University but is anticipated to start next year. The homework questions werefurther reduced by making some questions to be optional as extra credit questions. The authorsagree that the 75-minute lectures are long and try to break it up with a video or
. S., & Williams, J. G., “Thermal-Hydraulic Design of the B&W mPower SMR,” The 15th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal – Hydraulics (NURETH-15), Pisa, Italy, May 12-17, 2013.2. Martin, R. P., Miller, J. K., & O’brien, J. E.. “A Scaling-based Applicability Assessment of the CAER Integrated Systems Test Facility.” BWX Technologies Inc. and Idaho National Laboratory. (n.d.).3. Ishii, M., Kataoka, I., “Scaling criteria for LWR’s under single phase and two-phase natural circulation,” Proceedings of the Joint NRC/ANS Meeting on Basic Thermal Hydraulic Mechanisms in LWR Analysis, NUREG/CP-0043, Bethesda, MD, (1982).4. Ishii, M., Kataoka, I., “Similarity and scaling criteria for LWR’s under single-phase
, such as visiting the State Key Laboratory, and participating in the 30th Asianremote sensing conference.(3) Teachers’ active participation in class constructionThe head teacher and the counselor have actively participated in their class construction. Thehead teacher is responsible for lecturing professional knowledge and creating academicatmosphere, whereas the counselor for daily management and supervision. The classcommittee would also regularly collect students’ opinions and hold discussion among thehead teacher, the counselor and the students.(4) Development of colorful class activitiesFeaturing “promoting class construction through class activities”, the class committee hasheld a variety of class activities such as fun sports meetings
student learningthat many find most important in guiding continuous improvement actions.Aside from collecting too much data, programs often fail to link course-level assessment ofCLOs to the program’s student outcomes, making it difficult or impossible to determine theextent to which student outcomes are attained. In other instances, it becomes difficult todetermine if students in the program have attained the desired knowledge or skill. Assessmentinstruments that are simultaneously used to measure attainment of more than one studentoutcome or performance indicator1 confound the data. For example, grades on a laboratoryreport are used as data for assessing written communication. If the same grade covers bothtechnical aspects of the laboratory and
(Taxol) through the use of plant cell cultures from the Taxus Yew Tree. Throughout her time at Rowan and UMass, she developed a passion for undergraduate education. This passion led her to pursue a career as a lecturer, where she could focus on training undergraduate chemical engineering students. She has been teaching at UK since 2015 and has taught Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics, Computational Tools and the Unit Operations Laboratory. She is especially interested in teaching scientific communication and integration of process safety into the chemical engineering curriculum. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Student Performance in an Online Chemical Engineering
integrate modern educational technology tools and inquiry-basedhands-on learning activities to reinforce science and mathematical concepts required to enterSTEM careers, especially high-demand and emerging field of drone technology.Students learned about potential college and career opportunities and why a background inadvanced science and mathematics is crucial to achieving these careers. However, a balancemust be met for providing a rigorous informal academic environment for the students whileallowing them to enjoy the program’s activities so that they will remember the experiencepositively and perhaps consider STEM-related degrees and careers. We met this challenge bysupplementing classroom instruction with exposure to laboratory and field-based
Paper ID #28288Students Taking Action on Engineering EthicsDr. Heather E Dillon, University of Portland Dr. Heather Dillon is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Portland. She recently served as the Fulbright Canada Research Chair in STEM Education. Her research team is working on energy efficiency, renewable energy, fundamental heat transfer, and engineering education. Before joining the university, Heather Dillon worked for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) as a senior research engineer.Jeffrey Matthew Welch, University of Portland Jeff Welch is a doctoral student in
following the same design as that reported inthe previous study [4]. The textbook for the course was “University Physics” by Young andFreedman [9]. Students of the course also attended weekly laboratory sessions where “Tutorialsin Introductory Physics” by McDermott and Schaffer [10] was used extensively. All the courseactivities, including the tests, were conducted in Spanish.To measure conceptual understanding, we administered a version in Spanish [11] of theConceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM) [12] as a pre- and post-test along with12 DC circuits questions from the Electric Circuits Concept Evaluation (ECCE) [13]. While allthe students enrolled in the course participated in the pre-test, only 63 students took the post-test.During