Paper ID #12614Results & Lessons Learned from a Chemical Engineering Freshman DesignLaboratoryProf. Anthony Edward Butterfield, University of Utah Anthony Butterfield is an Assistant Professor (Lecturing) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory and freshman design laboratory. His research interests focus on undergraduate education, targeted drug delivery, photobioreactor design, and
the second part of the session, the last 45 minutes, the student is asked to observe for a secondtime the software so that they can adapt it to the studied situation in class. They first studied thesystem of two tanks, but now salt is added to the incoming flow. Now what we are concernedabout is the variable Amount of Salt in the tank S(t) [The figure below is an example of 1 tankwith water mixed with salt]. dS = IS- OS;S(t = 0) = S0 dt dS
. (2006). Conducting Rigorous Research in Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 103.12. Douglas, E. P., Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Borrego, M. (2010). Challenges and Promises of Overcoming Epistemological Partiality: Advancing Engineering Education Through Acceptance of Diverse Ways of Knowing. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(3), 247 - 257.13. Flick, Uwe. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications.14. Jamieson, Leah H., & Lohmann, Jack. (2009). Creating a culture for scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education. Phase 1 report.15. Kemnitzer, S. . (2008). The need for theory-based research in engineering education. Video
Page 26.389.7same between the pre- and post-test. When a significant difference of “no” is indicated, thismeans that there is less than a 95% probability that the two groups are actually different.The significance of differences in overall student score for the six common questions of the pre-and post-test were determined using a one-tailed t-test (Equation 4). x 0 t (Equation 4) s/ nWhere: ̅ = Mean score on concept inventory, end-of-semester = Mean score on concept inventory, beginning-of-semester s = Standard deviation, end-of-semester n = Number of students, end-of-semesterThe internal consistency of the concept inventory was evaluated with the
, L.J., Ikeda, E.K., & Yee, J.A. (2000). How service learning affects students. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California Los Angeles. 5. Billig, S.H. & Waterman, A.S. (2003). Studying service learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 6. Blum, L. & Frieze, C. & Hazzan, O. & Dias, M. B. (2006) “ A Cultural Perspective on Gender Diversity in Computing” Proceedings of ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education 2006 7. Brainard, S.G. and L. Carlin (1998), “A six year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science,” Journal of Engineering Education, 87: 369-376. 8. Braxton, J. M., Hirschy, A. S., &
FDM CDM y FDM CDM s liance ity FDM
. Page 19.2.33.1 Detailed Schemes in the Research There are different and more numerous types of questions and answers betweenlearners and teaching staff in the distance learning environment. Fig.1 shows anexample of questions and answers (denoted Q/As) from learners (denoted S1 to S4) andteaching staff (denoted T), respectively. For instance, there may be a volley of answersfor Q3 if it is assumed to be of the highest priority at a certain time during the process oflectures/seminars. It is more effective to timely enhance dynamics between learners andteaching staff by making the usage of shared space mobile Q/A integration. It is alsopossible for any S to get an answer for each question uploaded if it can be found andmatched in the knowledge
score out of 80 pointswas determined for each team. 5: Excellent, 4: Above average, 3: Average, 2: Below average, 1: Poor Pitch Video/Q&A Content1. Product/concept was clearly conveyed2. Idea(s) were realistic/feasible3. Motivation/need for product was clearly addressed4. Market clearly identified5. Addressed all necessary components in detail6. Well organized with clear introduction of topic/idea, leading up to conflict and resolution with summary of key points/highlights7. Explains what their product/idea does and how it adds value8. Described why their product/idea is unique and different (and/or better)1. Knew material/answers to questions2. Spoke at
longterm benefits of the design solution to the client and end users. These descriptions, justificationsand evidence are gained through thinking, in a reflective manner, about the ramifications of whatthe students are designing to solve the problem(s) presented by the project client.Research MethodologyA weekly reflective journal assignment was given to approximately 50 students during each ofour fall and spring semesters, using a template containing sixteen rows and three columns. Eachrow corresponded to a specific week in the semester. The columns contained responses to thesequestions: What did you learn? Why is it important? Where else could you use it? During eachweek, students identified a specific skill, concept or insight that they learned
Computer Science and integrative Joe McCannon, ConsultantBiology, University of Texas at Austin William B. Rouse, Director of the Center for Complex SystemsJames P. Bagian, Director, Center for Healthcare Engineering and Enterprises, Stevens Institute of Technologyand Patient Safety Elizabeth Teisberg, Professor of Family and communityMelinda Buntin, Chair of the Department of Health Policy, Medicine, Dartmouth CollegeVanderbilt University School of Medicine Deryk Van Brunt, President and Chairman, HealthyMolly Joel Coye, Chief Innovation Officer, UCLA Health System Communities InstituteGary S. Kaplan, Chairman and CEO, Virginia Mason Health
in multiple categories, following recommendations by Reid and his coauthors,we identified the top one or two content classifications for each course based on the percentageof subtopics covered in the course and the percentage of course time dedicated to each topic. Table 1. Summary Of Eight Department Introduction to Engineering Courses Typical Primary Credit Contact Department FYE Course(s) Course Content Hours Hours
engineering curriculum is not new. Many engineeringprograms meet EAC of ABET General Criterion 5 requirements through the use of project-basedsenior design course(s). Project-based design courses have been shown to have positive impacton professional skills post-graduation3. However, such courses occur at the end of thecurriculum and the ability to study the impact on the curriculum as a whole is not possible.Oregon State University demonstrated the use and benefits of a robotics project-based courseearly in an electrical engineering curriculum4,5 with the TekBot platform. Since that time otherengineering programs have implemented and studied the impact of project-based roboticscourses early in the curriculum. As an example, the United States Naval
solutions can vary drasticallybased on the perceived size of the solution space of the problem as a whole.AcknowledgementsThis research was supported by the National Science Foundation, Research in EngineeringEducation (REE) Grants #1264715, #1265018, and #1264551.References1. Silk EM, Daly SR, Jablokow KW, Yilmaz S, Rosenberg M. (2014). The design problem framework: Using adaption-innovation theory to construct design problem statements. Annual Conference of American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE), June 16-18, Indianapolis, IN2. Brophy DR (2001) Comparing the attributes, activities, and performance of divergent, convergent, and combination thinkers. Creat Res J 13:439–4553. Liu Y-C, Chakrabarti A, Bligh T (2003) Towards an
: What Effective Teachers Think. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington) June, 2006.2. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J. & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.3. Clark, C. M. (1995). Thoughtful Teaching. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.4. Fenstermacher, G. D. (1979). A philosophical consideration of recent research on teacher effectiveness. In L. S. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 6. (pp. 157-185). Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publisher.5. Carberry, A. R. (2014). Investigating the role teacher and student engineering epistemological beliefs plan in engineering education. In J. Heywood & A. Cheville (Eds
of the Fifth International Conference on Quality Software, pages 313–316, Washington, DC, USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society.2. T. Y. Chen and P.-L. Poon. Experience with teaching black-box testing in a computer science/software engineering curriculum. IEEE Trans. on Educ., 47(1):42–50, Feb. 2004.3. Z. Chen, J. Zhang, and B. Luo. Teaching software testing methods based on diversity principles. In Proceedings of the 2011 24th IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training, pages 391–395, Washington, DC, USA, 2011. IEEE Computer Society.4. S. H. Edwards. Improving student performance by evaluating how well students test their own programs. J. Educ. Resour. Comput., 3(3), Sept. 2003.5. S. Elbaum, S
Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 9–17). ACM. doi:10.1145/2090116.20901185 Few, S. (2006). Information dashboard design: the effective visual communication of data (1st ed.). Beijing ; Cambride [MA]: O’Reilly.6 Malik, S. (2005). Enterprise dashboards: design and best practices for IT. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley.7 Siemens, G. (2014). Supporting and promoting learning analytics research. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(1), 3– 5.8 Siemens, G. (2012). Learning analytics: envisioning a research discipline and a domain of practice. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, ACM: 4
Engineering Education, 2015 Development and Implementation of a Pathway Assessment Model for the ASPIRE ProgramAbstractThe University of New Haven received S-STEM funding for A Scholarship Program to IncreaseRetention in Engineering (ASPIRE): Improving Work-Study-Life Balance. The goal of the 5 yearprogram is to improve retention, particularly in the sophomore and junior years, for engineeringstudents who show academic potential but are at risk of not completing their studies due tofinancial concerns and/or life-work-study balance issues. The ASPIRE program aims toaccomplish this by: providing scholarships for sophomore and junior level matriculated studentsbased on both financial need and merit; recruiting and
, and multivariable control. Dr. Rodriguez has given over 70 invited presentations - 13 plenary - at international and national forums, conferences and corporations. Since 1994, he has directed an extensive engineering mentoring-research academic success and professional development (ASAP) program that has served over 500 students. These efforts have been supported by NSF STEP, S-STEM, and CSEM grants as well as industry. Dr. Rodriguez’ research inter- ests include: control of nonlinear distributed parameter, and sampled-data systems; modeling, simulation, animation, and real-time control (MoSART) of Flexible Autonomous Machines operating in an uncertain Environment (FAME); design and control of micro-air vehicles
://www.ifmachines.com/, accessed March 2015.3. Adafruit (2015) “About Us,” http://www.adafruit.com/about, accessed March 2015.4. Adafruit (2015) “Wearable Electronics,” http://www.adafruit.com/beckystern, accessed March 2015.5. Goulev, P., Stead, L., Mamdani, E. and Evans, C. (2004). “Computer aided emotional fashion.” Computers & Graphics. 28(5), 657–66.6. Catrysse, M., Puers, R., Hertleer, C.,Van Langenhove, L., Van Egmond, H., Matthys, D. (2004). “Towards the integration of textile sensors in a wireless monitoring suit.” Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 114(2-3), 302– 311.7. Dunne, L.E., Brady, S., Smyth, B., Diamond, D. (2005). “Initial development and testing of a novel foam-based pressure sensor for wearable
Homeland Page 26.668.3Security S & T professionals, Mississippi Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting, and ATMAEAnnual Conference. The students had the opportunities to present research papers, participate inworkshops and social events, as well as to interact with the representatives from federal, state,and local governments, hospitals, charity organizations, and private sector.During the past several years, the EMT program has placed students into internship positions atthe National Transportation Security Center of Excellence at Tougaloo College, NationalWeather Service (Jackson, Mississippi), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
of the historical case studiespresented in class as well as to apply the risk assessment tools developed during the seminar.Final papers were judged using the same rubric as the initial writing assignment. On averagestudents’ understanding of ethical concepts more than doubled to 4.3 out of 5 as did their abilityto apply risk assessment tools to ethical problems (4.1 out of 5).AcknowledgmentsThe development of this seminar was partially supported by the John J. and Dorothy Byrne FirstYear Seminar Program Endowment at Rutgers University.References1 Haws, D.R. (2001). Ethics Instruction in Engineering Education: A (Mini) Meta-Analysis. ASEE Journal ofEngineering Education, 90:2, 223-229.2 Thiel, C. E., Connelly, S., Harkrider, L., Devenport, L
identify the applicationsof digital circuits, perform simulations, and conduct experiments firsthand. As a result, they havea better grasp of the subject, and have a better understanding and significance of digital circuits.The proposed format became very attractive to students as they were able to see the benefits intheir learning during a short span of time, and were better prepared for future courses inengineering disciplines.Bibliography1. A. Ganago, H. Liao, “Student learning in a required Electrical Engineering (EE) course for non-EE majors: Perception of values for future work in multidisciplinary teams,” Proceedings of American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2013.2. D. G. Rosa-Pohl, S. A
and team activities that directly contributed to theachievement of learning outcomes. The effectiveness of peer evaluation will also be assessed inthe future.References Page 26.1074.101. ABET, Engineering Accreditation Commission, 2010, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs,” ABETInc, Baltimore, MD.2. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., Ross, G., 1976, “The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving,” Journal of Psychology andPsychiatry, 17, pp. 89-100.3. Bender, W. N., 2012, “Project-Based Learning: Differentiating Instruction for the 21 st Century,” Corwin Press.4. Boss, S., Krauss, J., 2007, “Reinventing Project-Based Learning,” International
course increased my knowledge of the subject. 208 103 13 3 0 4.55 5. The examples and activities helped me understand 157 113 47 8 0 4.24 the information. 6. I could follow along with the instructor(s) in the 241 74 10 0 0 4.65 student guide. 7. I was encouraged to ask questions and participate 219 84 23 1 0 4.57 throughout class. Page 26.1088.6 8. The course prepared me for the test. 205 87 24 2 0 4.40 9. I would recommend this course to others. 208 85 25 7 0 4.47 10. Overall, the course met my
, organization is key for this experience! 3. For each dye: • Wet the fabrics thoroughly with warm water • Dip the fabrics in the dye for about five minutes • Remove the fabrics from the dye, squeeze out until damp, and arrange to dry • As you arrange them to dry, keep track of mordant/dye combination!Assignment: Due 3/5/14Arrange your dry fabric swatches in a pattern so you can draw conclusions about theeffect of mordant and fabric type. You may cut the fabric if you wish. Hand in thearrangement(s) along with the worksheet (below).Name: ___________________________________Dyeing Conclusions (available on Moodle)Effect of:Fabric Type
. Prosser. Engineering students' conceptions of and approaches to learning through discussions in face-‐to-‐face and online contexts. Learning and 63 19.9% Instruction, 18(3), 267-‐282. 2008. R.A. Ellis, P., Goodyear, M. Prosser, A. & O'Hara. How and what university students learn through online and face-‐to-‐face discussion: Conceptions, intentions and approaches. Journal 51 16.1% of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(4), 244-‐256. 2006. S. Ozkan & R. Koseler. Multi-‐dimensional students’ evaluation of e-‐learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical
taught a variety of classes ranging introductory programming and first-year engineering design courses to introductory and advanced courses in electronic circuits. He is a member of ASEE, IEEE, and ACM.Dr. Kathleen A Harper, The Ohio State University Kathleen A. Harper is a senior lecturer in the Engineering Education Innovation Center at The Ohio State University. She received her M. S. in physics and B. S. in electrical engineering and applied physics from Case Western Reserve University, and her Ph. D. in physics from The Ohio State University. She has been on the staff of Ohio State’s University Center for the Advancement of Teaching, in addition to teaching in both the physics department and college of
profession. 4. Develop flow diagram construction and structured programming skills in MATLAB. 5. Learn the use of engineering tools (spreadsheets, drawing software, math, economics, etc.) 6. Become knowledgeable of dimensions (length, time, mass, force, temperature, electric current, energy and power) and related engineering parameters. Page 26.1461.4Instructional approaches, the flipped classroomA key aspect with respect to ENGR100’s instructional approach was the decision to implementthe flipped classroom, often referred to as “Learn before Lecture”. The professors were asked toimplement this strategy in each of their
manufacturing or other related fields withincolleges of Engineering in a reasonably representative manner.Popescu (2012) outlines the following five attributes for engineering students to be successful ina global environment: a) ability to appreciate other cultures; b) ability to work in diverse teamenvironments; c) ability to communicate in cross culture environments; d) experience orexposure to engineering in a global context; and e) ability to deal with ethical issues emanatingfrom cultural and national differences. Specking et al. (2013) performed a comparative study oftwo universities (University of Arkansas, a public university, and Stevens Institute ofTechnology, a private university) to investigate as to what factor(s) is (are) keeping