group of students) o Presenting cartoon caption winners (students) o A creativity, innovation, entrepreneurship or marketing related video clip followed by a brief discussion (instructor) o Teaming and communication activity o Presentation and discussion (instructor) o Presentation on innovation followed by Q/A and group discussion (students) o Project discussion and presentation (towards the second part of the class) o Book discussion (5 discussions during the semester; usually led by students) o Invited speaker (4 times a semester) o Behavior, mainly driving, assignment (students) Homework assignments included: inventing, designing, building, testing, reporting andpresenting
Used to Load BridgeNewA 1000lb Q-Test tensile/compression machine was adapted for use in the bridge testing. Thebottom grip is removed and a support structure put in its place. This structure has a span of 22inches to accommodate the 24 inch long bridge. The upper grip is replaced with a welded steelU- shape. On the bottom of the U are openings for insertion of the steel rod(s). The machine isthen put into compression mode at a constant speed. The software controlling the machine isTestworks 3 from MTS. The loading is much smoother than before and the bridge top staysparallel to the ground. Since using this new method, the students are happier with the testingprocedure. More ‘A’ grades have resulted than with the old tester. The new tester is
attendeeswith a synopsis of research presentations that would be presented prior to the actual presentation.Because the elevator pitches were shared in advance, the audience could post questions/commentsprior to the event. The Q&A session that followed the presentation of the research videos wastransformed into a discussion session where the teams would more informally discuss aspects ofthe research that were not captured in the formal presentation and to address any question that wereasked in advance.Projects SummariesTraffic Video Analytics (Morgan State University)Participants gain experience in computer vision and machinelearning techniques for vision-based traffic analytics such astraffic object localization, traffic object identification
Advanced Engineering Study, 1993.[4] M. Tribus, "TQM in Education: The Theory and How to Put It to Work," 1993.[5] D. Seymour, On Q causing quality in higher education. Phoenix, Ariz.: Oryx Press, 1993.[6] D. Seymour, Once upon a campus lessons for improving quality and productivity in higher education. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1995.[7] S. Courter, "A Grounded Theory of the Positive Attributes of a TQM Curriculum Innovation: A Multi-Case Study of a Cross-Disciplinary Course in Engineering." vol. PhD: University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1996.[8] S. D. Bernardoni, "Implementing a Kaizen strategy in an Introduction to Engineering Design course to achieve continuous improvement," in IIE regional Conference University of
. Hence, both making the exercises zero 1 Page 14.316.13weighted and using student tutors was successful in changing quite fundamentally thelearning culture in the department.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank Duncan White of CSG for developing the onlinequestionnaire software Q. 1 Page 14.316.14References.Anderson, G., Boud, D., 1996, Extending the role of peer learning in university courses. Research andDevelopment in Higher Education, 19, 15-19Congos, D.H., Mack, A., 2005
Directors of Enron Corp. February 1, 20022. Business Week has published numerous articles about the Enron and its collapse, including: Street Wise: Why Enron Isn’t Your Run-of-the-Mill Utility, December 6, 2000 Newsmaker Q&A, Enron’s Ken Lay: There’s No Other Shoe to Fall, August 24, 2001 The Enron Debacle, November 12, 2001 The Fall of Enron, December 17, 2001 Enron: Let Us Count the Culprits (Editorial), December 17, 2001 Commentary: How Governance Rules Failed at Enron, January 21, 2002 Special Report–The Enron Scandal, January 28, 2002 The Man Behind Enron’s Deal Machines, February 4, 2002 Jeff Skilling: Enron’s Missing Man, February 11, 2002 At Enron, “The
Regulatory Genome: Gene Regulatory Networks In Development And Evolution.Elsevier Academic Press, Boston.19. Papin, J.A., T. Hunter, B.O. Palsson, and S. Subramaniam. 2005. Reconstruction of large-scale cellularsignaling networks and analysis of their properties. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 6:99-111.20. Bild, A.H., G. Yao G, J.T. Chang JT, Q. Wang, A. Potti, D. Chasse, M.B. Joshi, D. Harpole, J.M. Lancaster, A.Berchuck, J.A. Olson Jr., J.R. Marks, H.K. Dressman, M. West, and J.R. Nevins. 2006. Oncogenic pathwaysignatures in human cancers as a guide to targeted therapies
experienceand the introduction of the student participants and project staff to the audience of AB membersand Symposium invitees. The Symposium continues with the students’ oral presentations of theirwork and obtained results. Each presentation was followed by a brief Q&A session, duringwhich the audience asked the students pertinent questions about their research topic. Also, foreach presentation the AB members filled out an evaluation rubric to be utilized for feedbackpurposes. Furthermore, a poster session was held during the extended lunch break. Studentsattend their posters, while AB members and the other invitees (such as university dignitaries,etc.) have the opportunity go around, mingle with the participants, visit each poster and have
for specific applications. The college’s two Q-switchable, doublable,mode-lockable neodymium: YAG (yttrium aluminum garnet) lasers, and a 10-watt carbondioxide laser were the stars of the show. Participants saw the destructive results of high-powerlasers from some samples available in the College’s high powered laser laboratory.The favorite experiments were definitely the holograms and the high-power laser demonstration,and possibly the alignment exercise. Least favorites were the monochromator and thepolarization-sensitivity experiments. Overall, most of the active participants indicated that theygot a very valuable experience from this part of the program.CAD: The computer aided-design portion of TechASCEND introduced participantsto basic
stresses p’, q and void ratio space, as embodied in the critical state soil mechanics framework [2]. Theoretically, geotechnical field problems may be involved in four or five dimensionsof space (x, y, z, t, gravity, passion/love or interest of the subjects) which may better prepare andhelp learners to see the truth out there. The interest, enjoyment or love of a subjects as mentionedin the blockbuster “Interstellar” is borrowed herein and adopted in the soil mechanics II coursesintroduction to help boost or pique students’ interest in studying the subject at a higher level ofunderstanding of soil mechanics theoretical subjects. The same general formula may be appliedto many other different art, science and engineering disciplines study as
-time_management_AAPT- NFW_June2013-final.pdfTorosyan, R. (2011). Time Management Reminders that Boost Efficiency, Peace of Mind. http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-careers/time-management-reminders-that- boost-efficiency-peace-of-mind/University of South Carolina CTE. Tips for Time Management. https://www.sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/cte/teaching_resources/maintainingbalance/t ime_management/Vincens, Q. Ten Simple Rules to Combine Teaching and Research. http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept- ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/posting.php?ID=948Time Management ToolsBlock Site https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/blocksite/ and https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail
professional development activities.Table 1 outlines the day-to-day structure of the program. Any space designated as “Free”indicates that students had the option of choosing how to spend their time (preparing for the nextday’s classes, working on the group project, etc.). Table 1. E-GIRL Program Structure Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday8:30 AM Intro to Presentation9:00 AM Engineering and Practice Industrial Environmental Q&A with9:30 AM Project
any preliminary prototype data to a review panel. This panel consists offaculty with appropriate backgrounds who are not part of the project team. The instructor aloneassesses the quality of the presentation. The panel is instructed to focus solely on the quality ofdesign; they are NOT involved in the assessment process. The purpose is to allow students theopportunity to honestly present their ideas and get feedback on their designs before entering theExecuting Processes. The students provide a copy of their presentation slides to the panel a fewdays before the review, present during the review for 20 minutes, and spend 40 minutes in a Q/Asession.Prototype Demonstrations - Teams are required to include prototype demonstrations in theirproject
conduct ofthe required Q&A chat sessions are discussed next.The second concept involves minimal or no lecture material presented during the online chat sessionswhen students and instructor meet synchronously on a weekly basis, twice a week. The College ofEngineering determined that there is very little time to providea thorough lecture-based material during online sessions.The online chat concept allows more student engagement as afollow-up to the multimedia content presented during theweek. The chat sessions are recorded. If students are unableto attend the chat session, then they must view the recordingand turn in an assigned project or solve a particular homeworkproblem described during the chat session. Figure 4 depictsthe need for
published on a consistent weekly basis following the format outlining in the course syllabus Materials are available for downloadCommunication Expectations on instructor to student communication have been clearly established (towith Students reduce one off emails and build a course community; consider addressing questions on a designated discussion thread, and allow/encourage students to answer each other) The instructors plan for classroom response time is clearly stated (36-48 HR) Weekly Virtual Office Hours or an Q&A session are offered, and recorded Communication with students
2: The annual program cycle from application to final deliverable. Text in black indicate participant tasks while text in blue refers to program coordinator tasks. Key Dates Activity 1-Oct Applications Open 15-Jan Applications Close List of Municipal, Industry, Faculty clients confirmed 1-Mar Applicants are notified: Accepted/Waitlisted/Scholarships Q&A Sessions via Skype; Send out Project List 1-Apr Confirmation of Acceptance Due 1-May Pre-Course Assignment Due: 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice project with Cover Letter Pre-program survey administered (content) 15-May
=e59adb2e0267339ae9aa40a0c1da0d94.30. Torres D, Zoltowski CB, Buzzanell PM, Feister MK, Oakes WC. Using Social Network Theory to Elucidate the Impact of Diversity on the Social Processes in Design.31. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. Birds of a Feather : Homophily in Social Networks. Annu Rev os Sociol. 2001;27:415-444. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2678628.32. Hoppe B, Reinelt C. Social network analysis and the evaluation of leadership networks. Leadersh Q. 2010;21(4):600-619. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.06.004.33. Smith DG, Schonfeld NB. The Benefits of Diversity: What the Research Tells Us. About Campus. 2000;5(December):16-23. doi:10.1073/pnas.0703993104.34. Astin AW. What Matters in College? : Four Critical Years Revisited. San Francisco
some interesting questions, and poses another potentialfactor to be considered in student retention.References1. National Academy of Engineering (NAE). 2008. Grand Challenges for Engineering. National Academies Press, Washington DC. http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/File.aspx?id=11574&v=ba24e2ed Accessed Jan. 31, 2017.2. National Academy of Engineering (NAE). 2004. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. National Academies Press. Washington DC.3. Mihelcic, J.R., C.C. Naughton, M.E. Verbyla, Q. Zhang, R.W. Schweitzer, S.M. Oakley, E.C. Wells, L.M. Whiteford. 2017. The Grandest Challenge of All: The Role of Environmental Engineering to Achieve Sustainability in the World’s Developing
: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom, (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-42. Capobianco, B., & Lehman, J. D., & Huang, Q., & Nyquist, C. (2016, June), Impact of Elementary School Teachers' Enacted Engineering Design-Based Science Instruction on Student Learning (Fundamental) Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.25540 Chazan, D., & Ball, D. (1999). Beyond being told not to tell. For the learning of mathematics, 19(2), 2-10. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., DiSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design