Engineering Education .Leiden .Enschede . Delft . Wageninge .Heerlen Fig. 1. The Netherlands2. Education in The NetherlandsThe Dutch educational system for children consists of mandatory education from age 5 through16 consisting of two stages: primary education and secondary education. Primary schools startteaching children at age 4 until about age 12. These schools focus on teaching reading andwriting skills, science, history, and society-related topics [1,2]. For primary education one
course. The trueessence of engineering practice and engineering spirit can have a meaningfuldevelopment with the presence of real-life tools-of-the-trade. The training of teachers tounderstand, use and teach the use of these tools is a major component of the program.The importance of this aspect of the program should not be underestimated. And theprocurement of needed infrastructure is secured by attending to the partnership of statedepartments of education, industry, universities, and, of course, local school systems.Project Lead The Way programProject Lead The Way has developed a curriculum of five courses for high schools andone course for middle schools. The high school affiliate must agree to offer all fivecourses. These courses are for any
Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Educationregard to legal limits, giving the students a chance to gain experience with the FAA certificationprocess.Fabrication WorkA strong emphasis of the Penn State flight vehicle design and fabrication course is on “hands-on” experience in the laboratory, which the students are required to attend for several hours perweek. Ideally, here the students put into reality what had previously been developed in thedesign groups. In the laboratory, students work in small teams usually consisting of at least onemore experienced classmate acting as a leader. The students learn simple tasks, such as sanding,as well as more complex composite-material fabrication methods, such as the processing of pre-preg or
; Symbolic and Numerical Computer; Electronic; Operational Systems; Construction Techniques of Programs; Antennas and microwaves; Formal Languages and Automata; Communication Systems; Digital Laboratories; Electrical Materials and Processes. · 4th. Year: Digital Systems; Automatic Control; Digital Communications; Software Engineering; Hydraulic, Thermal and Electrical Machines; Graphic Computer; Teleprocess and Computer Network; Digital Processing and Stochastic Processes Signals; Mathematical Programming; Software Engineering Laboratories. · 5th. Year: Integrated Circuits Conception; Telephonic Systems and Planning Systems of Communications; Tolerance Basis to Flaws; Communications Technology; Artificial Intelligence; Data Base; Generation
in engineering requires that students understand their professional and ethicalresponsibilities. ABET also asks programs to ensure that students integrate ethicalconsiderations into a "major design project." Even a quick look at these ethics requirementsmakes it clear that the ethical component of this new engineering curriculum cannot becompletely delegated to the ethics expert, for example, a philosopher who would teach afreestanding course in engineering ethics required of all engineering students. For reasons thatwe will discuss below, the freestanding course, while an essential part of a successfulengineering program, does not by itself achieve the integration of ethics into the engineeringcurriculum that ABET requires.One of the
logical one and an ideal vehiclefor the delivery of the 180-hour MPI program. 60 hours of this program will be spent inclassroom and laboratory activities (covering manufacturing processes and systems, problemsolving, communications, teamwork, and project management) while 120 hours will be spent atan industry partner’s site working on a paid internship. The instructors for the program will berecruited from the PRIME colleges and universities while mentors for the internships will belocated from area industry. A pilot MPI program was conducted in Summer 2001 at a single sitein one county with 25 students from 4 different high schools. In the Summer of 2002, ten sitesare planned with 25 students at each site – the program will impact the ten
andposition engineering graduate education to meet both the technology and societal needsof the 21st century. This paper adds value for the preparation of adjunct faculty membersas graduate instructors and future teaching scholars. The paper contains an expanding setof Promising Practices in engineering and technology education that are currently beingused. Teaching at the graduate level requires a high level of motivation in faculty whoare committed to excellence in knowledge, in research, and in contributions to theprofession, and/or serve to the community. Adjunct professors are an excellent way tobridge with the community and add richness to many course and degree programofferings.Historical PerspectiveThe role of the adjunct within the modern
math. She was kin dof beaming and just said “well, that stuff is easy.” I was surprised to realize that justencouraging students and interacting on a one-on-one basis is so important in helping them feel Page 7.296.2successful. “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright ©2002, American Society of Engineering Education”Oliver’s in-class experienceThe ‘in-class teaching’ is a real challenge for all fellows. Of our program it is the only regular‘one-on-all’ activity between fellows and K-12 students. Standing in front of the class andteaching in a
academia. The UT-Austin ASEE student chapter was established in the fall of 1996.The steps taken to establish this student chapter are described by Matsumoto et al. 1 The primarypurposes of the student chapter at UT-Austin are: · to encourage students to consider careers in academia; · to enhance the teaching and presentation skills of prospective educators; · to develop the skills needed to establish and lead a research program; · to assist students in their search for academic positions. · to encourage undergraduate students to consider graduate school. The ASEE student chapter at UT-Austin has evaluated its effectiveness in achieving theseobjectives by surveying former graduate
to enhance the learning of biomechanical principles. The goal of thispaper is to describe the course, report on our instructive experience and students’ evaluation ofthe class and suggest future teaching strategies. Twelve, two-hour weekly sessions werescheduled during the fall 2001 semester to teach this course. Based on our experience, webelieve that the integration of ADAMS into existing bioengineering courses can greatly improvestudents’ understanding of biomechanical systems, while simultaneously adding to theirengineering skills. However, the efficient use of this software requires training and regular use.We suggest that students be required to take a course similar to the Introduction to ADAMS forBioengineers course discussed in this
reasonableamount of high-level software engineering that is engineering based. However, there is no waythat an undergraduate CE program can require each of these courses in an already crowdedcurriculum. The solution to this problem that has been implemented at Western MichiganUniversity (WMU) is to create a junior level course that teaches high-level software engineeringusing Visual Basic that is applied to data acquisition, signal processing and networkcommunication. This experiment has, in the opinion of the authors, been highly successful in thatstudents not only learn a great deal of information but also gain experience in applications thatare will be useful in further course work and senior projects as well as their future careers.The ProblemComputer
2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationConventional Statics instruction has been successful in teaching students to write and solveequilibrium equations based on a known free body diagram, and to construct free body diagramsfor textbook problems in which the forces and moments at supports and connections are largelyimplied by standard symbols in the problem diagrams. However, where Statics is finallyrelevant to engineering practice in the analysis and design of mechanical systems, instruction hasbeen notably unsuccessful. Students cannot go beyond textbook problems to apply Statics topractical situations, and they
that can be earned back is based on the percentage of small group quizzesand the number of homework assignments submitted. A sliding scale is used to encouragestudents to attend class and turn in homework assignments. Many students are willing to reworkmissed problems; those students who are focused on grades are interested in improving theirgrade, and those students focused on learning are interested in improving their understanding ofthe material. · Have students work in small groups3 Students are divided into small groups at the beginning of the semester. Groups areformed based on the laboratory section in which the student is enrolled. Group size depends onlaboratory enrollment, and ideally three to five students are assigned
, however,curricular-level educational reform is hard for an individual instructor to implement. It is far Page 7.1131.1easier to influence pedagogical outcomes in one’s own classroom – at the course level, than atthe departmental level. Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationMethodologyWith this in mind, the authors focused on a 3-credit-hour (2 lecture and 2 laboratory hours)course in Manufacturing Processes taught to junior mechanical engineering students. Course-level competency gaps were
course meets for five weeks and represents one class period of four hoursand one hour of work outside class each week. Typically the professor lectures for one hour,has a break, then lectures with illustrative problems or laboratory exercises, and then gives thestudents an assignment. The students work as a team in their office on the problems and theinstructor goes to the student’s office to check on their progress and clear up any difficulties.Students may visit the professor after class if they still have difficulties, but it important to notethat the professor goes to the student’s office to provide help. The classes typically have 25-35students, with a maximum of 40 students and 4-6 teams. A few large classrooms are used for
biotechnology over a one-year period. This paper describes how our assessment of theclasses evolved over the year to build on lessons learned from previous classes.IntroductionAs part of the VaNTH ERC Northwestern faculty have revised various courses to enhance thelearning experience of students. The VaNTH engineering faculty recognize that courses shouldembed the subject matter in a practical context, foster the development of practical skills such asoral and written communication and teamwork, as well as teach the underlying scientificprinciples. The reason for embedding learning in context is based on a theoretical as well aspractical stance. Learning and instructional theories explain that providing real-life contextsincreases students’ interest
significance of theInternet as it applies to engineering education and many predict profound changes in how, when, where,and what we teach.We assume that the reader is an Engineering Educator familiar with the use, or authoring of, web sites,email, file servers, and presentation software. In addition, we focus on the lecture-style teaching format,as it is the most common technique in practice today. Specifically, we do not discuss distance learningparadigms nor implementation specifics such as costs, ROI analysis, and integration with campus ITServices. Expectations for this paper include an understanding of the options available to supportclassroom web sites and suggestions for effective use of presentation applications.The next section sets the
teaching innovation, the project “template”. These templates serve as thestarting point for student simulations with either static (bias point) or dynamic (transient)behavior. The templates are partially completed PSPICE projects from which new studentschematics may be created. These templates possess static logic signals, a clock source andbinary counters of two to four bits width. These signals have been carefully adjusted relative toone another to avoid set up and hold time violations. The templates also store key defaultsettings. For example, the template’s simulation profile is preset for a fixed duration which islonger than one cycle of any anticipated course exercise. The template’s profile is also preparedto initialize all flip-flops to
for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Educationstrategies to quickly find solutions to professional problems. Lecturers at Fachhochschulen musthave professional experience along with their scientific abilities.The practical orientation in teaching and application in research and development are elements ofthe profile of Fachhochschulen. Approximately 40% of graduates from all institutes of highereducation in Germany come from Fachhochschulen. In some courses the amount is even higherespecially in courses important for industry and commerce. It is as high as 50% for computerscience, and even 70% of engineering graduates come from Fachhochschulen
on a stick,which act as seeds for the growth of larger crystals. The important points to note from thisexperiment are: (i) the sugar solution is about as fluid as water, and (ii) the growth of crystals,even a few mm in size, takes several days. For the remaining three experiments, we need the following readily available Equipmentand Supplies: 1 one-quart stainless steel pan 1 hotplate 12 metal tablespoon 1 laboratory balance (or fluid measuring cup at home) 1 metal tray to hold hot candies (up to ~175 °C/ 350 °F) 1 laboratory or good quality candy thermometer that reads up to ~ 205 °C or 400 °F
Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationBibliography1. Brackin, Patricia, and Williams, Julia Teaching and Assessing Team Skills in a Senior Level Design Course, Proceedings of the 2001 ASEE Annual Conference, Albuquerque, June 20012. Hunter, Kenneth W. Sr., and Matson, Jessica O. Engineering Leadership and Teamwork Development through Experiential Learning, Proceedings of the 2001 ASEE Annual Conference, Saint Louis, June 20013. Fowler, Wallace Teaming in Engineering Design Courses, Proceedings of the 1999 ASEE Annual Conference, Saint Louis, June 19994. Biernacki, J., J., and C., D., Wilson Interdisciplinary Laboratory in
, which will helpimprove teaching and offer the means to evaluate and disseminate robotics programs. Toachieve these goals, the educational research should thoroughly examine possiblecurricular models and team learning experiences in order to optimize educationaloutcomes of the robotics course. This includes studying educational features of roboticcompetitions, which can significantly stimulate learning motivation of students, andintensify the learning process.In this paper the authors consider their experiences in teaching robotics as an introductoryengineering subject at the university and high-school levels in the United States and inIsrael. Examples include a first-year engineering design course at Trinity College and ahigh-school course at
course in the curriculum. Collect and interpret results that will be of the most value to improving the learning and teaching process and use sampling techniques to collect a snapshot of student achievement. Ø Find ways to reward the efforts that faculty put into assessment. Rewards may be monetary, but they can also include release time, publication possibilities, recognition during annual faculty evaluations, and support for attending assessment -related conferences.The Role of ABET in Outcomes AssessmentObviously the introduction of student outcomes and assessment requirements to the accreditationprocess [6] has catalyzed the recent interest in assessment activities in engineering
specified speed. Thispaper provides the authors’ personal experiences in teaching project-based thermodynamics toKettering University junior students for six quarters and documents the results showing promisethat encourages design integration and project-based learning in the energy systems curriculum.Effects of this teaching method on students’ learning are also documented.2. CURRENT STATUSAt present, Kettering University offers the Energy Systems Thread (EST) that spans over three4-credit hour courses and one laboratory course. A thread is defined as a sequence of courseswith an identifiable set of objectives and outcomes, tying a number of courses to each other andis consistent with the program’s educational objectives. The courses belonging to
according to specifications provided by the instructors. Finally, each stu-dent was directed to develop a teaching unit that integrates some of the concepts of scientificinquiry and application discussed in the course into their 7-12 teaching. This paper describes ourMasters program, provides an outline of the course titled “The Engineering Process,” andpresents results from our first offering of the course.IntroductionThe precollege education system in America is currently under pressure to adopt standards-basedcurricula. Outcome assessment of learning is of paramount importance in this new educationalclimate. Nearly all of the national standards in math, science and technology include standardsrelated to the inclusion of “real-life” applications
features of virtual, collaborative engineering environments, state-of-the-artsimulation tools, and advanced learning management systems. An integral part of this projectinvolves the development and teaching of a new, two-semester senior level design course that isoffered synchronously at both institutions and which emphasizes teamwork, collaboration at adistance and multidisciplinary activities. One long-term goal of the project is that the courseprovides the context for feedback on the nature of virtual interactions, and therefore on how toimprove the AIDE. In addition, we aim to study whether multifaceted instructional methods thatleverage emerging information technologies can enhance student learning on fundamentaltechnologies, systems-level
concentrate on the elements required to master embedded systems design, andalso satisfy the needs of engineers currently working in industry.Due to the lack of time and facilities, traditional university education tends to emphasize theoryand concepts. Even though implementation (laboratory) projects are associated with manycourses, these projects tend to be more abstract than real implementations that can be useddirectly in industrial and commercial products. Typically, there is a large gap in students'understanding between theory (conceptual understanding) and implementation (concreteunderstanding). As a result, many students who have a good understanding of theory andconcepts do not have confidence to map their knowledge onto implementations. One
also challenging to teach. In particular, itis difficult to introduce the field to beginning engineering students – they seem to have to know Page 7.751.1so much in order to begin to “get wet”. For the past four years we have tackled the problem of “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”engaging students in our exciting field through the use of a seminar class that introduces oceanengineering via a hands-on project experience.The course is entitled “Build a PVC ROV!” (MIT course 13
one in terms of the negative influence it may have on the quality ofeducation engineering students get.Firstly, by having two sets of professors (the non engineers and the engineers) and two sets ofcourses (the complementary studies and the science/technology courses), the teaching is offeredin a compartmentalized way and students develop two sets of competencies that do not mingle,that are not integrated. This is what we, at Sherbrooke, call the “two solitudes”. This fact is inline with the findings of Al-Holou et al [1].1 Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) in the United States and Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) in Canada.2 To be fair, it is essential that one widely spread exception be
of the form used to report a summary of the assessment results and anyrecommendations based on the evaluation of the results. Any particular assessment tool,homework, group project, laboratory reports, quizzes, testing, or combination deemed necessaryby the instructor could be used. The assessment might be used to monitor (M) or summatively Page 7.238.2assess (S) the student achievement. Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationFig. 2. Schematic diagram depicting the process for course