differencesto form engineering design teams," Engineering Education, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 54-66, 2007. [Online].https://doi.org/10.11120/ened.2007.02020054.[12] R. Sach, M. Petre, and H. Sharp, "The use of MBTI in software engineering," 22nd AnnualPsychology of Programming Interest Group, 19-22 Sep 2010, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.[13] A. B. Soomro, N. Salleh, E. Mendes, and J. Grundy, "The effect of software engineers’personality traits on team climate and performance: A Systematic Literature Review," Informationand Software Technology, vol. 73, pp. 52-65, 2016.[14] A. R. Gilal, J. Jaafar, A. Abro, M. Omar, S. Basri, and M. Q. Saleem, "Effective PersonalityPreferences of Software Programmer: A Systematic Review," Journal of Information Science
response corresponds to a rating of 1 or 2 (strongly disagree or disagree), a neutralresponse corresponds to 3, and a positive response corresponds to 4 or 5 (agree or stronglyagree). Note: the number of responses is 20-21, however the total response may not add to 100%due to rounding. Construct Q# Statement Negative Neutral Positive Response: Response Response: Disagree Agree Growth Q1 I prefer to work on my own 19% 19% 61.9% Mindset through the design process. Q2 I believe the design review
: From Ab Initio to Monte Carlo Methods, 1999th edition. Berlin ; New York: Springer, 2000.[17] A. D. Rollett and P. Manohar, “The Monte Carlo Method,” in Continuum Scale Simulation of Engineering Materials, D. Raabe, F. Roters, F. Barlat, and L.-Q. Chen, Eds., Weinheim, FRG: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2005, pp. 77–114. doi: 10.1002/3527603786.ch4.[18] R. N. Giere, Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. in Science and Its Conceptual Foundations series. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1988. Accessed: Jan. 06, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/E/bo3622319.html[19] D. Hestenes, “Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction,” Am. J. Phys
ng un rd bj ec ue al oa ni O m n tT Q ar B
, 2010. http://donora.fire-dept.net/1948smog.htm .8. PBS. 1999. “Rage to Riches Timeline.” American Experience: The Richest Man in the World. Accessed January 4, 2011. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/timeline/timeline2.html.9. Beveridge, Scott. 2008, June 9. The Gamble on Donora Steel, Part II: Yellow Smoke and Big Money. Accessed December 21, 2010. http://scottbeveridge.blogspot.com/search?q=steel+for+%2445+million . Page 22.710.1310. Davis, Devra Lee. 2007, February. “Backs to the Future . . . Air Pollution Risks to Children: A Global Environmental Health Problem.” EM, The Urban Environment: 31-7.11. Snyder
shoebox.These images are of students’ environments before (left) and after (right) adding water. Page 22.283.19The pictures above are of oil spills before clean-up (left) and during clean-up (right). Severalstudents removed some of their land forms to make clean-up easier. Discussion followed as towhether they could do that in real life.The image above is of one of the most successful groups to clean-up their oil spill. They usedvarious materials such as q-tips, cotton balls, coffee filters and paper towels. They also hadleaves and sticks in their environments, which surprisingly, they were able to clean rather well
additional relevant websites to share forthe second year’s session and compiled a list: Resource Relevant InformationAccessScience Easy to navigate, articles broken down intohttp://www.accessscience.com/ sub-topics, vocabulary suitable for grade levels,(Carnegie Mellon’s subscription database) good Q & A and study center feature.MetaLib Participants may be overwhelmed with number(Carnegie Mellon’s federated search product) of articles in both the General and Engineering & Technology categories when using basic
in eacharea: 1. How well does the pitch/poster articulate a specific problem or unmet need and identify the customer/potential customer? 2. How unique and viable is the proposed solution in addressing the identified need? How well researched is the idea for the profit or non-profit business activity? 3. How effectively and passionately does the presenter articulate the problem, solution and call to action? 4. How effective or accomplished are the speaker’s skills? How well designed and presented is the poster? How well is the Q/A handled?At the competition, posters were displayed for judging during a two hour period. Each team
, Ward12 notes that “[q]ualified women applicants are not given theopportunity to become engineering faculty because it is presumed that women will not have thetime to serve as effective members of the professoriate given their family obligations.” Womenwho do join the faculty ranks experience “bias, lack of professionalism shown toward womenfaculty […], visibility/invisibility, patronization, faculty spouse issues, and other women notacknowledging women engineers.”13 The prevalent cultural norm “assumes a work week of morethan fifty hours a week, which continues to exclude women who have child care obligations,”12further hampering the advancement of women faculty.Over the years, research showing the effects of the institutional culture and
helped me to remember how to find I, Q, etc…. I looked back at it last night.” • “As an individual who had difficulty with Problem Set Zero initially, reworking the problem set really helped cement the ideas.” • “It was helpful. I am glad it was at the start of the semester so I had time to re-work the problems on it.” • “For me I didn’t remember anything from CE300 so it was an excellent review and helps me to better understand the material.” • “Delaying it until we start using the covered material would make sure it is fresh in our minds.” • “Problem Set Zero was so long ago and there was so much material in this block that I don’t think it had an effect at all.”Consideration of both