the components of the tool and how tofill in these components of the tool. Then, students worked in teams to construct their own HoQassociated with designing a game to teach aerospace design. The assumption was that studentswere familiar with games, and they were familiar with what needs to be learned in aerospacebecause they spent 8 weeks learning about the field and how to analyze sub components of anaircraft system. Teams met during a regular 50 minute class session. The students were giventheir own room to work in and they had access to on-line resources and a projection device tofacilitate the entire teams‟ ability to view the HoQ diagram. The session was video recorded andresearchers observed and took field notes. Initial analysis
registered for engineering majors at one university are surveyed at the start oftheir second term of study to determine students’ perception of the value of various academicsupport activities to their academic development. The goal is to identify intervention strategieswhich have perceived positive impacts on freshmen engineering student success, and to explorethe extent to which these perceptions are based on personal vs. vicarious experience. Thissurvey is part of a longer-term project in which the objective effectiveness of these interventions(as measured by retention and by GPA) will be evaluated. Presentation at the 2010 meeting willbe of the first year’s results only, focusing on three interventions: Engineering FreshmanLearning Communities
Polar ResultsAfter the assignments were returned, the students were surveyed to indicate their impressions ofthe case assignment and its learning value. The survey was administered simply by providingpaper and asking students to write a short few comments indicating their impressions. Theresponses were largely consistent and can be summarized as follows: ≠ The assignment was found to be enjoyable and inspiring, and the students learned many details about the SR-71 that they had not previously known. Several students indicated that the project reminded them of the reason that they had decided to become aerospace Page 15.10.12
toassume that small scale projects with limited risk may be pursued with less hesitation, and may infact help advance the achievement of the aforementioned readiness factors required forimprovement on a larger scale. For example, Doman describes such an initiative in which leanprocess improvement was used as both an educational tool and a value-added addition to the gradechange process at Oakland University (Doman, 2011). Another similar opportunity for small-scaleimplementation exists in the course redesign process. For example, Balzer describes the utilizationof lean principles to the redesign of a course in leadership. (Balzer, 2010)Engineering Mathematics Sequence at Wright State UniversityAt Wright State University (WSU), proven processes
. Doerry. He has been a leader in internation- alization of Engineering at NAU since arriving in 1999, expanding this initiative to the Natural Sciences starting in 2005. Significant milestones in this area include the development of an effective model of re- ciprocal ”exploratory trips” to motivate international study in engineering; the International Engineering and Natural Sciences certificate program; and the Global Engineering College project, an NSF-funded exploration of a comprehensively internationalized curricular model for engineering education. These efforts culminated in 2010 with the creation of the Global Science and Engineering Program (GSEP), an innovative initiative to establish a comprehensive
collegiate experienceBriefly discussed, the background of this departmental educational project 27started in August2008 in our Institution. The main purpose was to re-design the DE course, implemented in ourinstitution. It was a collegiate work of the faculty members of the Academy of DifferentailEquations.The early findings demonstrated that there were several educational proposals claiming theurgent need to reformulate the way DE was taught. They also emphasized the DE object as a toolto model various phenomena. 21,23,28 We also observed a varied use of technology such as OpenEducational Ressources (OER) and specialized software such as Mathematica and Maple toteach certain topics in DE. As a result and with the active participation of the faculty
Peer Review: Modeling Civil Engineering Practice, Another Way To Improve Learning Scott R. Hamilton Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering, U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New YorkAbstractThis paper presents the initial results of a research project designed to foster in students the habitof checking their work for accuracy. The problem observed was that students seemed to regardtheir homework submissions as simply a product to be handed in, and the correctness of theirsolutions did not seem to concern them. This struck the author as the wrong approach ineducating
, which draws better students, who boost ex- ternal giving, which finances new projects, raises salaries, and increases the endowment for getting better students, which gets better rankings, which . . . , the second-tier school must perpetually treat the student as a transient consumer. That’s why good schools, really good schools, have all that stuff, all those things, that have nothing whatsoever to do with their oft-stated lofty mission. There is even a term for these things inside the in- dustry, competitive amenitiesthings such as Olympic quality gyms that few students use, Broadway-style theaters that are empty much of the time, personal trainers, glitzy student unions with movie theaters
novel processes or products for which a near-term value can be identified and/or abusiness case can be developed. That is, the academics would become members of technicalinnovation teams, and the university research endeavors would focus on projects that provide Page 10.1191.2value in a market oriented global economy. The utility to the final end-user is identified by “Proceedings of the 2005 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition” Copyright © 2005, American Society of Engineering Educationmethods consistent with good business practice. To obtain a complete picture, engineers mustnow
students have one class meeting in a computer laboratory for a hands-ondemonstration. Following this initial introduction, students are free to use the toolbox in theirhomework solutions, but they have to use tables for examinations. The use of tables is requiredbecause not all students have access to a laptop computer, which would be required to run thetoolbox.* The requirement to learn tables for examinations limits the students’ use of the toolboxduring the semester.The main application of the thermodynamic toolbox at CSUN has been for design projects.These projects are intended to provide students the experience of determining parameters in aprocess with several components. One problem that has been used in this regard is shown inFigure 9
stated needs.” Another educational goal of our course is tointroduce design through homework problems and short, simple and well-defined projects. Asthe student progresses to more advanced courses, i.e., machine design, structural design, etc.,projects become lengthier, open-ended and difficult, leading to the major design experience. In accordance to ABET EC200041, an engineering program must demonstrate that thegraduates of a program have satisfied Criteria 3(c) “an ability to design a system, component, orprocess to meet the desired needs…”. The approach proposed in this paper can be used todemonstrate Criteria 3(c) applied to individual structural components. Furthermore, if theapproach is used in other courses, i.e., statics, machine
discuss matters of mutual interest, includingpotential future collaboration.(1)Some of the adjunct faculty-particularly those who are seniors in specific industries-could offerimportant linkages for the development of industrial affiliate programs, co-op activities, summertraining opportunities, and employment opportunities for new graduates. They may also providenew ideas for senior design projects, topics for graduate theses, or render help in theestablishment of collaborative research programs.When a choice has been made and the candidate has accepted, it is important that he/she feelswelcome and be assisted in becoming familiar with his/her new surroundings. To expedite theprocess, new adjuncts should sit together with their new colleagues
height of the Lewinsky furor in June1998 [4], top White House officials learned of it almost immediately. On June 18, thePresident’s assistant for management and administration wrote a memo to Deputy Chief of StaffJohn Podesta describing the problem [5]. White House Counsel Charles Ruff was also notified.The first press mention was by the conservative newsmagazine Insight on the News in December1998 [1, 2, 20]. In two successive issues, it wrote of a “Project X”—a highly secret program toreconstruct tens of thousands of e-mails that a computer contractor had discovered missing in oraround June of that year [10, 20].Indeed, efforts were being made to resolve the problem. A February 1999 memo from KarlHeissner, of the White House Office of
be group leader if the males in the group are loafers” “ I was left with the documentation aspect of the project when the gender ratio was 1:5”. “Males see females in maintenance roles, as helpers. Females and males have different outlooks and I am usually the outsider because the males have consensus and I see things differently”Several of the women who stated that their role did not alter when in male dominated groupsindicated that it was because they were usually the leader in any group they joined. Some representative comments by these non-acquiescing women are: “ I tend to want to mange the group to make sure things run smoothly” “I have never had a problem taking charge when needed”.3. Both
assessment period consisted of ten multi-problem homework setswith each consisting of several separate problems, two special projects consisting of open endedproblems, two partial period quizzes, three full period exams and a three and a half hour termend exam. Several assessment tools were used to evaluate the course in the fall semester of1999. These tools included instructor course appraisals and student critiques in the form of in-class written critiques and out-of-class web-based feedback systems. Overall, the course hasbeen a favorite among the students at USMA for its real-world applications, motivated andknowledgeable instructors, and well-organized course content. However, students expressedconcern about the amount of time spent on the
brief review of Adaption-InnovationTheory (the cognitive style framework used in this study), the Kirton Adaption-Innovation (KAI)Inventory (the corresponding assessment instrument), and details concerning its administration.Section 4.0 discusses learning preferences and the definitions we applied in this research, as wellas a description of the data collection and general methodology. Section 5.0 presents our researchfindings thus far, including the reported KAI scores and both qualitative and quantitativeanalyses of the relationships between cognitive style and learning preferences as we have definedthem. Finally, Section 6.0 addresses our conclusions, lessons learned from this project, and plansfor future work in this area.2.0 Course
among the most likely to cheat in college. To investigate this concern,the authors have undertaken a research project on the Perceptions and Attitudes toward Cheatingamong Engineering Students (P.A.C.E.S.). The premise of this research is that a combination ofpressures, rather than malicious motivations, account for most student cheating. The P.A.C.E.Sstudy consists of a seven page, self-reported survey that investigates: (1) student definitions ofacademic dishonesty; (2) the magnitude of academic dishonesty among engineeringundergraduates; (3) the correlations of academic dishonesty with theories of psychological,demographic and situational factors; and (4) student opinions on different approaches used todiscourage academic dishonesty. The
type for measuring the qualitative component of mathematical reasoning. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 303– 322.[17] Burstein, J. (2001, April). Automated essay evaluation with natural language processing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Seattle, WA.[18] Chung, G. K. W. K., O’Neil, H. F., Jr., & Herl, H. E. (1999). The use of computer-based collaborative knowledge mapping to measure team processes and team outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 463– 494.[19] Chung, G. K. W. K., Harmon, T. C., & Baker, E. L. (2001). The impact of a simulation-based learning design project on student learning and teamwork skills. IEEE Transactions on Education
Consultants to assist engineering undergraduates with technical reports. She publishes and presents research in two fields: engineering ethics and writing, and literature.Dr. Hyesun You, The University of Iowa Hyesun You, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning. Before joining UI, Hyesun worked as an assistant professor at Arkansas Tech University. She also previously served as a post-doc fellow at New York University and Michigan State University, where she participated in NSF-funded grant projects. She earned her BS in Chemistry and MS in science education from Yonsei University. Her MEd in quantitative methods and Ph.D. in Science Education at the University of Texas at Austin
California, San Diego Dr. Sandoval is the Associate Director of the Teaching + Learning Commons at the University of Cali- fornia, San Diego. She earned a PhD in Adult Education-Human Resource Development. Her research interests include adult learning and development, faculty deProf. Curt Schurgers, University of California San Diego Curt Schurgers is a Teaching Professor in the UCSD Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. His research and teaching are focused on course redesign, active learning, and project-based learning. He also co-directs a hands-on undergraduate research program called Engineers for Exploration, in which students apply their engineering knowledge to problems in exploration and
• Writing seminar and support for AENG/MCHE 4911 Capstone Design • Seminar talk: “Why Engineers Must Be Excellent Communicators” for BIOE 8970 Bioengineering SeminarCreation of a UGA-writing-resource websitePartially as a result of the aforementioned writing initiative, UGA has indeed developed ahealthy culture of writing across campus, including a recent Faculty Learning Community (FLC)titled “Creating a Culture of Writing at UGA.” This FLC’s major project was the creation of awebsite called The Write@UGA Guide to Writing Resources (https://write.uga.edu/guide-to-writing-resources/) where writing-focused colleagues from the English, Marine Science,Biological Sciences, Religion, Economics, History, and Philosophy Departments (as well
bridges with fifth graders, Roth3 found that in over50 projects, only one group chose to abandon their current design and begin again. This isconsistent with the behavior of beginning designers described by Crismond and Adams1, some ofwhom “will not abandon their design ideas, even after running many tests and design iterationsthat clearly demonstrate a plan’s ineffectiveness” (p. 767). They attributed this trend toineffective diagnostic troubleshooting: because beginning designers do not actively look for“worrisome” patterns, they do not recognize “flawed performances,” resulting in final designsthat are “strikingly similar” to the initial plans (p. 767).Instead of continuing on with their initial idea, Marco and Vincenzo are very willing to
those activities are properly designed.BYOD in the Measurements and Analysis CourseMeasurements and Analysis with Thermal Science Application is a required junior level coursefor mechanical engineers at Northeastern University. The course consists of three lectures andone lab section per week. It covers topics such as statistical data analysis, experimental design,and measurement of engineering quantities such as pressure, temperature, strain, fluid flow, andheat transfer. Seven lab experiments are performed in teams of 3-4 students during the course ofthe term. Each team is also required to do a term project in which they design, execute, andreport on a measurement experiment of their choosing. These projects have ranged frommeasurements of
rigorously tested. Thus, another goal of our project is torigorously establish the link between students’ expectations and student resistance. We have recently been awarded a National Science Foundation grant to study studentresistance to nontraditional teaching methods through a range of observations, surveys,interviews, and focus groups capturing both student and faculty perspectives. In this paper, wefocus on the insights into student resistance that can be gained by interviewing students in afocus group setting. We compare the results of focus groups conducted at two institutions usingtwo similar sets of questions. We reflect on both the different insights from two differentpopulations of students, differences in the focus group protocols
in this figure. The “Other” 90% 15.5% 16.5%reasons included sleeping in, subway delays and 100% 7.7% 13.8%commuting, and having a test on that day. Themajor difference in the “Too much work” Figure 3. Primary Reason for Missing Lecturesresponses could be due to the fact that one ofthe other courses in this term modestly reducedtheir design project requirements from 2012 to2013. However, this is likely only part of thereason given that the change was not as drasticas the data reflects. The fact that 16% of theinverted cohort chose “Too early” is likely dueto the fact that of the three lecture sections, onesection did have a 9 AM class, while for thetraditional
” that the crowd goes wild as the victor celebrates thewin while the loser’s corpse is dragged out of the ring. [Students’ eyes snap wide open as theylisten to the play-by-play, getting the idea, and yet perhaps wondering if their instructor is feelingalright.] The next most expensive alternative is sent into the ring, and combat continues until thelast project alternative standing alive is the overall choice. The students laugh, but theyremember the analogy and have better recall of the technique on exams.To illustrate the effects of this technique, results from two similar sections have been compared.The scores for each student in answering an incremental rate of return exam problem wererecorded for both sections. The Spring 2011 section was
critical of their instructors than thosewho left.The findings for co-op in this study not only lend support to those who have long asserted thatquality co-ops can enhance undergraduate retention but also demonstrate co-op’s enduringenhancement of students’ work self-efficacy.IntroductionThis study is part of a larger research project, supported by a National Science FoundationResearch on Gender in Science and Engineering program grant # 0827490, designed todetermine the effect of self-efficacy and other factors on retention, especially of women inundergraduate engineering programs. These data represent the pre-survey of the studycompleted in the 2009-2010 academic year (referred to as Time 1), a post-survey follow-up inthe 2010-2011 academic year
students build the instruments at the end of the semesterand prepare for a day out with the SeaPerch ROVs. The success of the outreach competition has beenoverwhelming and the experience our undergraduates have received has been invaluable to their success intheir senior capstone projects as well as in their job searches. Although we are just ending our second year of the implementation (this year we taught anadditional 250 students), we had over 450 students from 15 schools use some of the ROV curriculum wedeveloped to learn about STEM, and then design and build ROVs, and later use those ROVs in the secondUtah ROV Competition. Local media and STEM companies, in addition to the students, parents, teachers
education research and providing educational opportunities on sustainable assessment processes for program continual improve- ment worldwide.Dr. Steven W. Beyerlein, University of Idaho, Moscow Dr. Beyerlein has a Ph.D. from Washington State University and has taught at the University of Idaho since 1987. For the last fifteen years he has been the college coordinator for an interdisciplinary capstone design course that features industry sponsored projects. In 2012, the faculty team responsible for running this course was recognized by the National Academy of Engineering for creating a capstone course that is an example of real world engineering education.Dr. Patrick D. Pedrow P.E., Washington State University Dr
theirsources of intellectual contributions to their design.It was theorized by the authors that presenting an exemplar prior to setting the students onto adesign project could alter, if not hinder, the number and type of creative solutions generated bythe students. Of particular interest is whether the presence of a prototype exemplar contaminatesthe design process for novice designers. That is, does the prototype exemplar cause novicedesigners to fixate on particular design features thereby limiting creativity or does it help them toimprove the performance of their designs?The concept of designers fixating on particular design features is not new to the study ofengineering design. Jansson and Smith1 were among the first who “clearly and