there are guest PEVs who are on a training visit. Theteam members are expected to arrive on the Saturday before the visit, or at least in time for theSunday brunch and initial team meeting at 11:00 am. Before the visit, it is expected that the PEVhas read the program self-study, completed a pre-visit evaluation, and audited student transcripts.On the Sunday afternoon, the ABET team proceeds to the campus and initiates visits with thevarious program facilities starting around 1:30 pm and lasting until about 5:00 pm. This is thetime set aside for meeting program administrators, visiting laboratory facilities, and reviewingthe program outcome and course notebooks. Any clarification of the materials will be initiatedduring this first visit to the
education.Dr. Barbara B. Kawulich, University of West Georgia Dr. Barbara Kawulich is Interim Director of the Evaluation Center and Associate Professor of Research in the Educational Technology and Foundations Department at the University of West Georgia. She teaches qualitative and action research, ethics, leadership, and diversity to graduate and undergraduate students. Her research focuses on research methods, research pedagogy, and issues related to indigenous women. She has authored numerous publications on these topics and has co-authored two books on research methods.Prof. P.K. Raju, Mechanical Engineering Dept, Auburn University,Al Dr. Raju is the Thomas Walter Distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering at
Paper ID #8215Training Secondary Math and Science Teachers to Bring an Engineering Per-spective to the ClassroomDr. Anant R. Kukreti, University of Cincinnati Dr. Anant R. Kukreti, Ph.D., is director for Engineering Outreach and professor in the School of En- ergy, Environmental, Biological and Medical Engineering at the University of Cincinnati (UC), Cincin- nati Ohio. He joined UC in August 2000 after working for 22 years at the University of Oklahoma. He teaches structural mechanics, with research in steel structures, seismic analysis and design, and engineer- ing education. He has won five major university teaching
lean implementation and training and development. His experience in program and course development and teaching includes work in industry, community colleges, and at the university level. He has served as an examiner for several Baldrige based quality award processes, including The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, and state awards in North Carolina and Georgia. His research and consulting interests include the improve- ment of organizational performance through quality initiatives such as the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Process, Six Sigma, Lean, etc., and the application of these initiatives to education, manu- facturing, services and healthcare
Paper ID #7252A Computer-Controlled Biodiesel ExperimentDr. William M. Clark, Worcester Polytechnic Institute William Clark is an associate professor in the Chemical Engineering Department at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. He holds a B.S. from Clemson University and a Ph.D. from Rice University, both in Chemical Engineering. He has taught thermodynamics, separation processes, and unit operations laboratory for over 25 years. In addition to research efforts in teaching and learning, he has conducted disciplinary research in separation processes.Mr. Nicholas Janeiro Medeiros, Worcester Polytechnic InstituteDonal James
work with academic assessment, particularly relating to ABET. She can be reached at jmcferran@uaa.alaska.edu.Dr. Steffen Peuker, University of Alaska Anchorage Dr. Steffen Peuker is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and the Director of the Thermal System Design Laboratory at the University of Alaska Anchorage. He is teaching the Thermal System De- sign, Thermal System Design Laboratory, HVAC Systems Optimization and Introduction to Engineering courses. His work in engineering education focuses on hands-on undergraduate engineering education in the HVAC&R area, student-industry cooperation, and developing innovative ways of merging engineering fundamentals and engineering in practice and research
through her work in experiential learning. She focuses on areas of pharmaceutical, biomedical and food engineering. She has been honored by the American Society of Engineering Education with several teaching awards such as the 2004 National Outstanding Teaching Medal and the 2005 Quinn Award for experiential learning. Dr. Farrell has conducted workshops on a variety of topics including effective teaching, inductive teaching strategies, and the use of experiments and demonstrations to enhance learning.Prof. Jennifer Vernengo, Rowan UniversityDr. Mary Staehle, Rowan UniversityDr. Jennifer Kadlowec, Rowan UniversityDr. Tom Merrill, Rowan UniversityDr. Robi Polikar, Rowan UniversityDr. Johannes Strobel, Purdue University, West
Paper ID #6547The Case for On-Line College Education - a work in progressDr. Brian E. White, CAU-SES Brian E. White received Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in Computer Sciences from the University of Wiscon- sin, and S.M. and S.B. degrees in Electrical Engineering from M.I.T. He served in the United States Air Force, and for 8 years was at M.I.T. Lincoln Laboratory. For five years Dr. White was a principal engi- neering manager at Signatron, Inc. In his 28 years at The MITRE Corporation, he held a variety of senior professional staff and project/resource management positions. He was Director of MITRE’s Systems En- gineering
Aerospace Engi- neering at San Jos´e State University since 1994. Prior to coming to SJSU, he worked at IBM in San Jos´e in the development of disk drive actuators and spindle motors. He has also worked as a consultant in the optomechanical and laboratory automation industries. His areas of teaching and research are primarily focused in mechatronics, precision machine design, engineering measurements, and programming. He was one of the faculty members who redesigned the E10 Introduction to Engineering course in 2007.Prof. Ping Hsu, San Jose State University Dr. Ping Hsu graduated from University of California, Berkeley in 1988 with a Ph.D. in Electrical En- gineering. After graduation, he joined the Department of
forward. Once thedesign is made, it is build and the prototype is tested repeatedly for flaws that require arectification. Validating, rectifying and justifying are prime attributes to solve a technicalproblem. This entire process will teach students all the steps that are required to obtain the bestdesign that meets all specifications.This project is a control system that could be included in an engineering/technologist curriculumto demonstrate the process of converting theoretical knowledge into practical implementation.This will boost the confidence in the engineering students and encourage them to come up withnew ideas and solutions [12]. It has the strength to inspire students to be more interested inSTEM fields by knowing the process that
facilitate energy-efficiency in the commercial building industry. Another research interest of Kristen’s is engineering education, where she explores how project- and experience-based learning foster better understanding of engineering and management principles. Prior to joining ASU, Kristen was at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) as a Postdoctoral Fellow (2009-11) and then a Scientific Engineering Associate (2011-2012) in the Building Technologies and Urban Systems Department. She worked in the Commercial Buildings group, developing energy effi- ciency programs and researching technical and non-technical barriers to energy efficiency in the buildings industry. She has a background in collaborative design
dividedbetween 14 sections of the class. Each section of the course has 120 students as the maximumenrollment, and most sections begin the semester at class capacity.The course has a faculty coordinator and a team of instructional support staff to help keep thesections aligned, coordinate common exams, and maintain the course blackboard site. There aretwo classrooms used to teach, a studio classroom, where there are laptop computers available forevery other student (60 computers supplied), and a laboratory setting where there are 120 laptopsavailable. Students may also bring their own laptops, which enable the class to be taught in the Page
for 2004 UNI Book and Supply Outstanding Teaching Award, March 2004, and nominated for 2006, and 2007 Russ Nielson Service Awards, UNI. Dr. Pecen is an Engineering Tech- nology Editor of American Journal of Undergraduate Research (AJUR). He has been serving as a re- viewer on the IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging Manufacturing since 2001. Dr. Pecen has served on ASEE Engineering Technology Division (ETD) in Annual ASEE Conferences as a reviewer, session moderator, and co-moderator since 2002. He served as a Chair-Elect on ASEE ECC Division in 2011. He also served as a program chair on ASEE ECCD in 2010. He is also serving on advisory boards of International Sustainable World Project Olympiad (isweep.org
: ExploringEngineering and Engineering Communications. Exploring Engineering I & II, each have twocomponents: (1) a one-hour lecture section that meets twice a week, and (2) a one and one-halfhour laboratory section that meets once a week. The lecture section is one for which all thestudents are registered while the laboratory component is split into classes of twenty-fivestudents or fewer. In Exploring Engineering I, the fall semester iteration of this course,attendance is mandatory. However, in Exploring Engineering II students have been given theoption of viewing the recorded lecture, rather than being physically present when the lecture isgiven. Attendance is taken in the lecture with an iClicker™. Students, who choose not to attendthe lecture, access
Paper ID #6041Using Nonlinear Programming to Optimize the Fiber Packing Density of Op-tical Fiber Cables- A Short Problem-Based Learning CourseDr. Kenneth W. Jackson, Southern Polytechnic State University Kenneth W. Jackson, Ph.D. – P.E. Dr. Ken Jackson received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. He also holds an M.S.M.E and a M.S. I.E. from Georgia Tech and a B.S.M.E from Auburn University. Before joining SPSU he worked for 15 years at the Bell Laboratories as a Consulting and Distinguished Member of Technical Staff. At Bell Labs Dr. Jackson worked on the design, development and
gained increased popularity in engineering education.The functionality of simulating paper and pencil by allowing the user to use a stylus and writedirectly on the computer screen to create electronic documents that can be easily edited usingcommonly available computer applications makes Tablet PCs more suitable than laptopcomputers in solving and analyzing problems that require sketches, diagrams, and mathematicalformulas. Combined with wireless networking technology, Tablet PCs have the potential toprovide an ideal venue for applying previously proven collaborative teaching and learningtechniques commonly used in smaller engineering laboratory and discussion sessions to a larger,more traditional lecture setting. Currently, the range of use of
developmentworkshops with a response rate of 42 %, indicated that the workshops changed the behavior ofmany of the respondents with 52 % of the respondents having reread the workshop notes, 54 %having read one or more related articles or website material, and 78 % having tried someimplementation of the approach, although the extent of the changes and the sustainability werenot discussed.47Programs through campus-based centers for teaching and learning provide another mechanismfor faculty development, and many of these centers offer a wide variety of programs, events, andservices through a collaborative approach. However, engineering faculty members often do nottake advantage of these opportunities, perhaps because they fail to see the connections betweenthe
learning techniques3,4. The programprovides guidance to K-12 teachers on using design problems in their classrooms to teachapplied mathematics and science. The PDIs teach engineering concepts through the use ofeveryday technology, directed laboratory activities, and design briefs. Since 1998 our programhas used LEGO® MINDSTORMS® robotics as the focus for hands-on experiences. The programhas its roots in engineering design theory and learning science research. To clearly demonstratethe effectiveness of this teaching approach, the entire program is taught using the methods theparticipants are expected to use in their classrooms. This curriculum exchange paper is presentedas a part of dissemination of the program’s research and resources; information
in-depth project provided by the industrial mentor or communitypartner. The experience was enhanced through field trips to the industrial mentors’ sites, guestspeakers, laboratory experiences and tours, technical writing seminars, as well as history andethics of engineering innovation sessions. Additionally, the participants were guided through awell-structured curriculum writing experience modeled after that used for a highly successfulregional STEM teacher professional development program. Through this experience, the teamsmade use of a curriculum template that was developed to ensure that the resulting lessonsprovided high quality inquiry based STEM experiences for the students that included concepts ofengineering innovation and design
Paper ID #7191Using Educational ”Hands-On” Experiential Tools to Introduce Math, Sci-ence and Engineering Concepts to K-16 Students (Research to Practice)Ms. Kelly Doyle P.E., University of Nevada, Reno Kelly Doyle is a licensed professional engineer and has B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Engineering from University of Nevada, Reno. She currently works as Administrative Faculty at the University where she recently managed a large research project on curved bridges in the Large-Scale Structures Laboratory. In addition to her research and management capacity, Doyle handles educational outreach for the Center for Civil
answer. However, they doless well when learning is required to be tacit; enacted as skill; context-specific; and thereforedifficult to articulate1. The professors wanted to create an opportunity where students couldcome together in a learning environment that was more like a working studio or laboratory than atypical classroom.The Multidisciplinary Learning and Team Teaching Initiative (MLTT) from the Office of theProvost funded all of the design-build-test activities. In launching this initiative, the Universityof Michigan dedicated $2.5 million dollars to support fourteen team-teaching efforts and cross-disciplinary degree programs at the undergraduate level, 2005-2009. In launching the initiative,the University of Michigan asserted that
Paper ID #7120Augmenting a First-year Design Course with an Undergraduate Student Ad-ministered SolidWorks ModuleDr. Richard Whalen, Northeastern University Richard Whalen received his Ph.D. from Northeastern University in Mechanical Engineering. Over the past decade he has been a member of the Northeastern University’s Gateway Team. This is a team of teaching faculty devoted to the development and enhancement of the first-year General Engineering pro- gram at Northeastern. The focus of this team is to provide a consistent, comprehensive, and constructive educational experience in engineering that endorses the student
design, open-ended problem solving, laboratory work, etc. As the learning styles ofstudents can vary considerably [1-7], achieving this goal can be very challenging even whenother variables which impact student learning are taken into account. Various teaching methodssuch as case studies, projects based learning, contexts based learning, computer based learning,etc, address the learning styles of different student populations [2], [8-11]. In this paper, weconcentrate on student populations who favor “learning by doing” [3], [6]. We will use the term“learning by doing” to refer to the approach of learning by solving many individual problems orthrough practice as opposed to studying the theory with which the problems are solved.The instructor of a
programas possible. Therefore, we teach the required Capstone Design and Senior project courses with amix of ME and MET students. Prior to creating the ME program, we taught these courses to amixture of MET, Applied Technology, and Manufacturing option students where the emphasiswas given to product development and completion of a small production run. With thedevelopment of the new ME program, we decided to teach these classes with a combination ofME and MET students and take advantage of the strong research and development approach. Wedesigned the stronger R&D approach to expose the MET students to applications of the theoriestaught to the ME students. On the other hand, we expose the ME students to the hands-on shopskills involved in
course and where presentation of out-‐of-‐context facts is avoided. The paper first examines the basis of traditional classes in order to identify and discuss their main shortcomings and to explain the need for modifications. This explanation will be in part grounded in our findings about teaching technological literacy and competency classes. INTRODUCTION Engineering colleges and programs were very successful in producing a technical workforce and a number of effective leaders in technology in the late 19th and 20th Centuries. During that period, the engineering curriculum in higher education has gone through major changes. The historic launch
Paper ID #5731Software Simulations and Project Based Active Learning to Engage Studentsin an Introductory Statics CourseDr. Abhijit Nagchaudhuri, University of Maryland, Eastern Shore Abhijit Nagchaudhuri is a Professor in the Department of Engineering and Aviation Sciences at University of Maryland Eastern Shore. Dr. Nagchaudhuri is a member of ASME and ASEE professional societies and is actively involved in teaching and research in the elds of engineering mechanics, robotics and control systems; precision agriculture and remote sensing; and biofuels and renewable energy. Dr.Nagchaudhuri received his bachelors degree
Georgia Tech programsuse alumni from its Research Experience for Teachers program to teach the camps. This has twobenefits – the teachers are veteran classroom science teachers and they have experience in NSEboth in terms of research and in teaching.The initial offering was a combination of faculty lectures, lab tours, and some hands-onactivities. The camp was taught by graduate students who were not necessarily doing research innanoscale science but had an interest in working with students. Faculty were invited to speak oncurrent research topics such as nanoscale materials, carbon nanotubes, and nano-bio applications.Results from the post-camp survey (Table 1) indicated that the participants preferred activitiesover lectures. This was also
Initiatives at CSULA, Arizona State Polytechnic University, and U. C. SantaCruz that feature adaptations of the Harvey Mudd (HMC) Clinic model. The goal of aprofessional practice program should be to prepare students for engineering practice in allits aspects: technical and social. Resistance to incorporating professional practice into anexisting curriculum takes many forms. This includes a natural resistance to change andinadequate rewards to faculty for teaching and advising team-based projects, especiallysponsored senior design (capstone) projects. For those institutions interested in aprofessional practice program, there are a number of other academic issues to beovercome. For example, there may be concerns about teaching credit for project
andinvestigate faculty awareness and adoption of a wide variety of research-based instructionalstrategies in engineering education.13 They found three major types of factors that contribute tothe decision to adopt innovations:13 The most prevalent type of factor was resources (e.g., funding, computers, classroom and laboratory space, etc.). Faculty member related issues occurred as the second most common type of factor, and included: time for preparation, management of labor-intensive innovations, culture of the faculty members’ environment, “resistance to change, marginalization of teaching in promotion and tenure, and skepticism regarding evidence of improved student learning. (p. 199)”13 The third
threefocus areas for the Center and review plans to create high-tech teaching and research laboratoriesthat meet industry workforce demands and projections. This Advisory Board includesrepresentatives from IBM; Alcatel-Lucent; AT&T; CA Technologies; Juniper Networks; Dvirkaand Bartilucci Consulting Engineers; Golden Seeds, NY; Goldman Sachs & Co.; In ZeroSystems; Leviton Manufacturing Co.; Motorola Solutions; Pegasus Global Holdings; Power Page 23.543.2Management Concepts, LLC; Retliff Testing Lab, and others.The School of Engineering has signed, or is in the process of signing, non disclosure andcollaborative agreements (e.g., NDAs and MOUs