the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition Copyright 2004, American Society for Engineering Education” Figure 2. Basic block diagram of the 7106 IC.The new course was first taught in the fall semester of 2003 with 14 students and the author aslecture and laboratory instructor, to work out the bugs that always exist in a new course. Of the14 students, 10 had a successfully working project at the end of the semester, 3 had significantPCB design errors that were corrected and resulted in a semi-functioning project, and 1 studenthad several major PCB design flaws that prevented his project from functioning. The authorconsidered this a successful first run
where technology isadvancing rapidly.Bibliography1. Williams, E.T. and Bramwell, F.G. 1989. Introduction to research, Journal of Chemical Education, 66, 565- 567.2. Schildcrout, S.M. 2002. Learning chemistry research outside the laboratory: Novel graduate and undergraduate courses in research methodology, Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 1340-1343.ROGER G. HARRISON is an Associate Professor in the School of Chemical, Biological, and MaterialsEngineering at the University of Oklahoma. He is a member of ASEE, AIChE, and ACS. He received his B.S. inchemical engineering from the University of Oklahoma and his M.S. and Ph.D. in chemical engineering from theUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison.MATTHIAS U. NOLLERT is an Associate Professor in
Format The teaching experiment described herein was carried out in the “Mechanical SystemsDesign” course taught at the University of Wisconsin-Platteville (UWP). This is a junior/seniorlevel course that serves as a precursor to Senior Design. Key elements of the course include acomprehensive “design and build” project, and a lecture focus on developing the completedesign process. In the semester studied, students in the course were required to design and build alaboratory experiment to demonstrate the functioning of a mechanical system. The premisewas that the experiment would become part of a “lab kit” to be used in conjunction with an on-line presentation of the Mechanical Systems Laboratory course taught at UWP. Students worked on
, teacherswere to gather knowledge from collaborative learning, lectures, and laboratory activities at theinstitute. Then they would apply the knowledge to solve the design project [5].Daily activities in the institute would consist of the following three interrelated components:1) Lectures: The purpose was to provide the background knowledge for conducting engineeringdesign, and illustrate how mathematics and science are used to solve real world problems.2) Experiments: Participants were to conduct an inquiry-based learning that combinedobservation with hands-on activities. Some commonly available devices were used as theexperimental objects to learn how mathematics and science were involved in making thesedevices. This type of experiments did not
Description of the TX-0 Computer,” Memorandum 6M-4789-1, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lincoln, MA, October 1958. On-line (retrieved 8 July 2004) at http://bitsavers.org/pdf/mit/tx- 0/6M-4789-1_TX0_funcDescr.pdf 3. Bell, C. Gordon, J. Craig Mudge, and John E. McNamara, Computer Engineering: A DEC View of Hardware Design, Digital Press, Bedford MA, 1978. 4. Osborne, Hugh, "The Postroom Computer," Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, Volume 1, Issue 4 (December 2001), pp. 81 - 110.
quarter with three 1-hour lectures and one 3-hourlaboratory each week. The laboratory content of the course is dominated by learning howto use the Handy Board microcontroller and a variety of sensors and actuators. Thelaboratory sessions are currently devoted to hands-on exercises that provide them withexperience using different sensors and controlling several types of output device with themicrocontroller. The students complete six or seven weeks of canned lab exercises toacquaint themselves with the programming skills and capabilities of the microcontrollerand sensors. They spend three to four weeks designing, programming, and building aproject that requires the microcontroller be used to sense, control, and respond to somedesign problem of the
number of requests per minute successfully served bythe database engine. Results of the testing are compiled and interpreted, showing performancetrends and comparisons of the database implementations.IntroductionIn 2003, Brigham Young University’s School of Technology began building a laboratory forhardware and software testing and performance analysis. The lab contains 20 workstationcomputers, a few high-speed machines and switches, and one Itanium 64-bit computer. Thepurpose of this lab is to provide students and faculty with a means to perform research that canbe used to characterize the performance of a system. This experimental environment is ideal forcreating and performing benchmarking tests to scientifically describe the performance of
). Additionally, thereis a unique research opportunity for both educator and NASA career employees in the NASAAdministrator's Fellow Program (NAFP).NAFP Program The NAFP program provides opportunities for both NASA employees and theMathematics, Science, Engineering, and Technology (MSET) faculty of Minority ServingInstitutions (MSIs). The NAFP program is designed to enhance the professional development ofthe participants. Furthermore, NAFP program assists NASA by increasing the ability of theparticipating MSIs to respond to its overall research and development mission. The NAFP hasbeen successfully implemented since 1997, with participants from all NASA Centers, JetPropulsion Laboratory, and MSIs, which are listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively
keytheorists, namely Jay W. Forrester, W. Edwards Deming, Russell Ackoff, Peter Senge, andMargaret Wheatley, and outlining some of the central lessons that would enable a person familiarwith systems thinking to make a difference at an interpersonal, team, and organizational level.ForresterKnown and credited for being the creator of the field of systems dynamics in the mid 1950’s, JayForrester’s ideas about the behavior of systems began to emerge long before. Born in Nebraskaon July 14, 1918, Jay W. Forrester went on to received a B.S. degree in electrical engineeringfrom the University of Nebraska in 1939 and his M.S. degree from MIT in 1945. He stayed on tobecome director of MIT's Lincoln Digital Computer Laboratory until he changed his focus
Handbook for College Teachers, 4th edition ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1993.[10] R. A. Guzzo and M. W. Dickson, "Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness," Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 47, pp. 307, 1996.[11] J. R. Katzenbach and D. K. Smith, The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1993.[12] J. S. Byrd and J. L. Hudgkins, "Teaming in the design laboratory," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 84, pp. 335, 1995.[13] E. Seat and S. M. Lord, "Enabling effective engineering teams: a program for teaching interaction skills," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 88, pp. 385, 1999
environmental burden of a product, process or activity byidentifying and quantifying material and energy usage and waste outputs at every life stage.LCA involves three steps: identification of scope of analysis, life cycle inventory, and impactanalysis. Such an approach has two attractive features for engineers. First, it is a rational andquantitative process that is easily appreciated by engineers. Second, because it examines allstages of the life cycle, it allows engineers to easily identify what design or processimprovements will lead to the greatest reduction in environmental impact.The present paper will describe a laboratory experience used in a senior level materials andprocess selection design course developed by the author. The project
. Each of the other goals from Table 1was addressed chiefly through use of a design project, which was the focus of laboratory work aswell as several supporting class lectures. The specific goals of this project, and their relationshipto the course goals, is given in Table 3. A further characteristic of this project was that, becauseit occurs early in the semester, it should be non-discipline specific and require no more than themath and physics skills the students have developed after 2-3 weeks in those courses.Table 3: Module 1 Project GoalsGoal Teaching Course Goal Assignment medium medium (Table 1)Work on an ill 1 course lecture 4
projects.• A group of 4 – 7 students works on issues of an industrial enterprise, typical 6th, 7th and 8th semester projects. Cases from the specialisation Industrial Technology: • Co-operation with a larger enterprise on 6th semester. The starting point is a manufacturing and quality point of view in connection with two automated TIG welding processes was carried out in the laboratory with the 14 critical parameters on which a profound theoretical examination was afterwards based. An advanced mathematical model was developed together with development and programming of a neural network. • Co-operation with a small enterprise on 7th semester: After profound analyses of the company’s order
with new situations in industry.Assessment MethodologyStudent attitudes towards new technology used in a learning environment are an important factorin the assessment of student learning. An extensive survey was developed to assess studentattitudes toward the Tablet and use of the Tablet in the classroom, laboratory, and outside ofclass. Significant research has been conducted to study student attitudes toward the integrationof information technology in the classroom. Many of the survey questions were taken from theseprevious surveys. Doolen, Porter and Hoag used a survey to measure six areas related to PDAusage – anxiety, confidence, liking, usefulness (general), usefulness (course), and enthusiasm3.This PDA study used constructs from a
. Anothermathematics related project, Adventure Engineering, uses engineering-based curricula in middlegrade science and mathematics classes.2 The Adventure Engineering project focuses on problemsolving and the engineering design experience. A third project saw engineering graduate studentsassisting high school mathematics teachers in developing hands on approaches for algebra andtrigonometry classes.3 These laboratory activities were incorporated into the normal lesson plan.Both high school students and teachers benefited from using laboratory activities to demonstratespecific principles such as linearity and trigonometric functions.Adding new engineering courses to the curriculum is a luxury that most school systems can notafford. With the addition of so
recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. We thank Chet Plank, Chris Davis, Clay Hamblen, Daniel Seaton, Justin Cochran, Nadja Bliedung,Sean Cook, Ven Raju, and Srinivas Kumarasetty who developed the STEM connections to the case study CD-ROMdiscussed in this paper. All these undergraduate and graduate students were part of the LITEE project.Biographical Information Shivram K. Sankar worked as a undergraduate research assistant at the Laboratory for InnovativeTechnology and Engineering Education (LITEE) during Summers 2002 and 2003. He is a senior at the Weinberg
Coordinator for the Integrated Teaching andLearning Program’s K-12 Engineering Initiative at the University of Colorado at Boulder. A former middle and highschool math and science teacher, she received her MAT in secondary science from Johns Hopkins University andher MS in civil engineering from the University of Colorado at Boulder.JACQUELYN F. SULLIVAN is a founding co-director of the Integrated Teaching and Learning Laboratory andProgram. She received her Ph.D. in environmental health physics and toxicology from Purdue University. She spentthe first 13 years of her career in leadership positions in the energy and software industries, and served nine years asthe director of a CU water resources engineering simulation and optimization research
Chemical Engineering, Washington University. He received M.S. from WashingtonUniversity in 2003 and has been nominated as a web page designer for Association of Graduate EngineeringStudents at this University.Dr. PRATIM BISWAS is the Stifel and Quinette Jens Professor of Environmental Engineering Science and Directorof the Environmental Engineering Science Program at the Aerosol and Air Quality Research Laboratory atWashington University in St. Louis. His major research interest focuses on the examination of particle formationand growth dynamics in high temperature environments. He has published extensively in his field and has made
attacks and countermeasures. Emphasison laboratory experiments.Course Learning Objectives:Upon completing this course a student will: • Understand the ethics of using hacking tools • Be able to describe the TCP/IP network protocols and the effect of an open network protocol on security • Be able to snoop traffic from a network and decode the data • Be able to describe methods to counter traffic attacks like snooping, spoofing, redirection, and flooding. • Understand the importance of passwords and methods to select good passwords • Be able to crack passwords and understand the importance of authentication • Understand the issues of social engineering when used to discover passwords • Be able to describe
description is given below: Prerequisite Courses: M 115 (precalculus), a laboratory science course; co-requisite: M 117 (Calculus I). Students will be introduced to typical problems encountered in various branches of engineering and will gain experience using computer tools to solve these problems numerically. This course will require extensive use of a spreadsheet program and the development of programming fundamentals. Topics include simple statistical methods, logical and numerical functions, solving sets of algebraic, differential and difference equations, regression, interpolation, integration, data types, assignment and conditional statements, program flow control, passing parameters, returning
the work. Our assessments are made therefore by interviews and demonstrations ofthe work in the laboratory where these skills can be observed and brought out in to the open byoral examination, as well as by examination of written Engineering reports, where the studentsmust express their design process on paper. In addition Engineers usually work in teams so ourprojects are often undertaken in teams, and the interviews and demonstrations are presented bythe Design team, while staff examine group members individually to give a fair assessment.Confidential peer evaluations are used to monitor group dynamics and unequal efforts bystudents.The themes in design projects take students through each phase. The problems given to studentsare not fully
sometimes significantly simplify the VHDL specification andcombinational logic.4. Illustrative Design ProjectsIn the fall semester of 2003, an “Advanced Digital Design” course was offered to the senior andgraduate classes at Bucknell University. This course consisted of two components, includinglectures and laboratories. The lectures were comprised of three modules. First, logic synthesiswas taught. The issues covered included Quine-McClusky method for two-level logicminimization 11, 13, 14, multiple-level logic optimization 4, technology mapping for FPGA andstandard-cell implementation 10 as well as finite-state-machine synthesis. The second modulecovered the VHDL language 2, 3, 7, including the syntax and semantics of the language as well asthe
, judging by student attendance and conduct during computer laboratory help sessions.Students do collaborate, and therefore benefit through the debugging assistance of theircoworkers, but produce individually written scripts for their particular version of eachassignment.Ranking All Previous Entries in the Competition Using the Current Rules A total of 85 bridges have been entered in the contest over the past four semesters. As away of spurring interest in the contest in current and former students, all of these entries areranked on the class web site (Table 1). Each semester the rules are changed so that a particularlygood design cannot be reused from semester to semester. Each semester some of the parametersaffecting the cost and/or the
fabricated by students. This is just the beginning of an excitingchapter of discovery that will enable us enrich the student experience and shape the engineer of thefuture.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge the contribution to this paper of the many faculty and students atGeorgia Tech in the Engineering Information Systems (EIS) Laboratory and the Engineering ComputingServices Department (ECS) Department. Their on going work provides the basis for the thoughtsincluded herein. Thanks also go to the faculty and students at UMD - College Park and University ofIllinois at Urbana-Champaign for their hard work in making this project possible, and to our associatesat John Deere and PTC for their guidance and support. Special thanks to
develop courses that are relevant, challenging, rigorous, and pedagogically sound. This paper discusses the manner in which physics concepts are presented in theclassroom. Specifically, how we motivate the cadets, by bringing the military relevance ofphysics into the classroom and the laboratory. We place a heavy emphasis on the focusedpresentation of theoretical concepts coupled with innovative and interactive demonstrations andexercises centered around actual military hardware. A selective curriculum of physics topics,tailored to meet our program goals of educating future officers, has been developed andimplemented. This paper will highlight the techniques that provide a positive driving force tocadet learning and result in an Army
in teams rather than independently and including cooperative learning,especially in the earlier undergraduate years; increased use of modern educational technology,with computer-based methods of delivering courses increasingly taking the place of traditionallectures; and integration of engineering with other disciplines, such as mathematics, physics andchemistry, writing courses, and social sciences and humanities more generally. Many of thecourses resulted in increased interactions with industry, with firms sponsoring courses andproviding equipment, supplies, and guest teachers. One enhancement was `just-in-time'teaching, where concurrent lecture and laboratory courses are sequenced so that lecture topics arecovered just as they become
electromagnetics: A geometrical approach for problems with plane symmetryDa Silva, J.A.P. (Applied Electromagnetics Laboratory, Escola Politecnica, Universidade de Sao Paulo); Rossi, LuizNatal; Cardoso, Jose Roberto; Silva, Viviane Cristine; Lebensztajn, Luiz Source: IEEE Transactions on Magnetics,v 38, n 2 I, March, 2002, p 1313-1316Teaching electromagnetic fields and FEM for undergraduate studentsLebensztajn, L. (Escola Polit. da Univ. de Sao Paulo); Silva, V.C.; Rossi, L.N.; Cardoso, J.R. Source: IEEETransactions on Education, v 44, n 2, May, 2001, p 209LMGA-2D: A software package to teach FEA conceptsAbe, Nancy M. (Escola Politecnica da Universidade de Sao Paulo); Cardoso, Jose R.; Clabunde, Douglas R.F.;Passaro, Angelo Source: IEEE Transactions on
laboratories usedin traditional engineering courses.Many of the examples currently used in Engineering curricula seem better suited to the "GreatestGeneration" than to the students in school today. While some of these examples are stilleducationally sound, twenty-first century students need twenty-first century examples. Ourexperiments are intended to promote learning through guided inquiry. There is a constant battlein educational circles between traditional explicit instruction where students are told what theyneed to know and then expected to know it and discovery learning where students are given afew parameters and then given the chance to “play” and figure out the way things work. Theformer seems more expedient and most engineering faculty seem
whole experience are summarized. Hopefully, thisdocumentation will help others in planning similar experiences for engineering undergraduates. Enhanced analytical and computational capabilities and higher strength materials have led tolighter, larger and more complex and unconventional civil structures. To design such structures,one must be able to evaluate their overall behavior under both static and dynamic (seismic)heavy overloads, both in laboratory and field environments. The inherent non-linearities indescribing the material behavior and the interaction between the components of a structure,makes simply using analytical tools for studying the response inadequate. This can only be doneby experimental testing. Research projects for the
tasks in the laboratory [3]. Although the studentsparticipating in this project pledged not to discuss their work with each other face to face, theywere certainly familiar with each other, if only because they attended class together. “Remotelylocated” team members likely had an informal rapport with each other that may have increasedthe effectiveness of their communications efforts at the outset of the project. This factor mayhave led to the final outcome of this study, which found that the distance technology did notsignificantly impact the final quality of the teams’ work positively or negatively, at least in thisparticular instance. Because their course was limited to one section of students collocated at WPI, the authors ofthat study