stable testbed in flight. The produced drawings were utilized in the design of theaircraft molds and overall construction of the aircraft. Figure 1 shows the CAD design of the YF-22 aircraft that was translated into the construction, shown in Figure 2. Figure 1: CAD Design of the WVU YF-22 Aircraft12 Page 15.507.5 Figure 2: Student Working on WVU YF-22 Construction12The molds shown in Figure 2 were used to lay-up carbon fiber and fiberglass shells to constitutethe aircraft body. The students worked to ensure that the aircraft body was strong enough tosupport the weight of the planned avionics
communicating effectively.1-5 Unfortunately, the implementation of this drive toprovide breadth to an undergraduate education often results in a general education curriculumwith a set of disparate and disconnected courses, instead of an integrated experience.6-7 Webelieve that the undergraduate experience must provide some coherence across courses,extracurricular activities, service learning and student life. In the Greater Expectations report, theAssociation of American Colleges and Universities recognizes the “fragmentation of thecurriculum” as a significant “barrier to high quality”.8 Similarly, the Boyer Commission onEducating Undergraduates in the Research University explains that “the freshman experienceneeds to be an intellectually integrated
2.5 and 2.9. The other GPA categories of 3.0-3.4 and 3.5-4.0had responses of 50 and 21 respectively.Research Design & ProcedureThe research design for this study was a survey. The survey was developed with a 5-point Likertscale. A copy of the survey can be found in Appendix A. Online survey software was used todistribute the survey to the participants. It was distributed by sending an email to each individualwith a link to the survey site. Participants were given two weeks to complete the 35 questionsurvey and were told that the survey would take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. Foreach of the questions, the students and faculty were asked to state whether they strongly agree(1), agree (2), neither agree or disagree (3), disagree
15.206.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Assessing Technology Literacy and the Use of Engineering and Technology Curricula by Utah K-12 EducatorsIntroduction: the Need for Common Technological LiteracyThomas Friedman in The World is Flat wrote, “The NSB (National Science Board) report foundthat the number of American eighteen- to twenty-four-year-olds who receive science degrees hasfallen to seventeenth in the world, whereas we ranked third three decades ago.”1 The primaryreason for this results from K-12 students’ declining interest in engineering and technology.Engineering and technology are as intertwined with society just as they are with each other,unfortunately members of society do not
engineering education shouldevolve from traditional lecture style instruction to models involving student centered (or activelearning) techniques, such as collaborative, inquiry, and problem-based learning. Incorporationof activities invoking student involvement during class meetings has been shown to fosterdevelopment of critical thinking and problem solving skills, as well as creativity and innovation,while enhancing retention of course material.1-5 The type of activity employed will likely dictatethe degree of critical thinking and problem solving skill development, as well as the degree ofmaterial retention. Integration of such activities may occur within a class meeting (such as relatively shortactivities) or may play a more major role
incorporating her work on metaphors into better understanding current models of women’s underrepresentation in the context of Purdue, and creating new models via institutional ethnography. Her past research has focused on using the metaphor of a boundary as a tool to better understand how faculty determine what counts as engineering, and to identify how engineering might be understood as a gendered discipline. Address: School of Engineering Education, 701 W. Stadium Ave., West Lafayette, IN 47907, 1-765-496-1209 (v), apawley@purdue.edu. Page 15.882.1© American Society for Engineering Education
Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST) project sponsored by the NationalScience Foundation (NSF) at Longwood and Virginia State Universities addressed a unique pedagogy and teachingmethod in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines for middle school students in theDigispired project. The primary goal of project was to provide learning and research opportunities to middle schoolstudents by focusing on programming and thus gaming, and the four science themes through Saturday and summerprograms for three years. Within this 36-month project, 90 low-income rural and urban students (1) learned abouttechnologies involved in game products; (2) learned about programming, computer graphics, and animation; (3)created
. Page 15.1086.3MEAs use open-ended case studies to simulate authentic, real-world problems that are addressedby student teams. First developed as a mechanism for observing the development of studentproblem-solving competencies and the growth of mathematical cognition, it became increasinglyclear that well-designed MEAs provide both instructors and researchers with tools to engagelearners in productive mathematical thinking and model construction. Specifically, a ModelEliciting Activity (MEA) presents student teams with a thought-revealing, model-eliciting [1],open-ended, real-world, client-driven problem. Originally developed by mathematics educators,MEAs were first introduced to engineering students, primarily at the freshman level, at
and competence are low.Combine this state of development with the need to present 3-6 hours of new material each weekper class in an engaging and meaningful way, and it’s a wonder we didn’t hit the highway andhead back to what we’d known!Depending on the mode of instructional delivery, preparation for a single hour-long class cantake 1-6 hours, based on content, level of familiarity with the subject, and degree of calculationsrequired to be performed at the front of the class. Among faculty, the term “new course prep” isoften met with pitiful gasps and painful expressions typically reserved for dental surgery orcompound fracture wounds. One of the greatest challenges coming from industry has beendealing with the need to dust off areas of
' ability to use critical thinking skills to tackle engineering problems, as well as theirability to research and discuss current technologies. There were two goals of this project: 1)implement a challenge-based learning module (based on the Legacy Cycle framework) todiagnose skin cancer with optical spectroscopy in a junior to senior-level undergraduate courseon biomedical optics and 2) assess the value of this module compared to previous years' lecture-only method of teaching optical spectroscopy. The experimental design was introduced over onesemester. The module was assessed using 3 indicators: comparing test answers between 5semesters worth of classes, a 1 page study guide on an emerging technology of skin cancerdiagnosis created by the
involvement of MDSGC leadership at JHU, faculty atUMES, MSU and UMCP, and personnel of the Education Division of GSFC helped students. Inthis paper, we will highlight the novelty and learning outcomes of the student exchange program,as well as the experiential learning and research endeavors that the students participated induring the course of this program.1.0 IntroductionBenefits of experiential learning and research in undergraduate engineering [1-3] and science [4,5]education are well documented. While fundamental concepts acquired in classroom settings canbe enhanced through project work integrated within engineering courses and the culminatingcapstone design experience, involvement in intensive summer research internships, co-ops andexchange
-based user interface program that is loaded onthe student’s PC and is used to run the experiment and collect data. The third component is theactual experimental setup or the sensor system to perform the measurement. Four experimentalsetups have been developed. These are a DC motor/tachometer system, a heater/temperaturesensor system, a vibrating cantilever beam, and a temperature measurement system. The paperfocuses on two of these experimental setups and their testing in two different undergraduatemechanical engineering courses.IntroductionProviding engaging laboratory experience is one of several challenges to effective undergraduateeducation in STEM disciplines as reported by The National Research Council (NRC) [1]. Thereis also need for
Health, Science and Technology at Harvard/MIT Engineering ResearchCenter) for Bioengineering Educational Technologies1, Personal Response Systems (PRS) toenhance formative assessment, and challenge-based homework assignments to emphasize theapplication of fundamental engineering skills in biomechanics. The goal of this paper is todiscuss our experience with these methods, highlighting how we have used PRS tosystematically diagnose and address common misconceptions associated with prerequisite coursematerial and guide our delivery of new concepts in order to improve learning outcomes.1. IntroductionOver the past twenty years, undergraduate education in the field of biomedical engineering(BME) has undergone a period of rapid growth. Fueled
developed with high school teachers.TechSTEP Our TechSTEP program follows a professional development model that engages high schoolteachers with the aim of giving them an opportunity to lead students through hands-onengineering projects. We refer to this professional development model as u-Discovery(Understanding through Discovery)5, and we propose that this model can be readily adapted byother universities interested in developing meaningful K12 relationships. Currently, TechSTEPhas three different projects which are rotated on a three-year cycle. Each project shares thecommon u-Discovery approach.The u-Discovery model consists of three phases, although there is considerable overlap amongthese phases:1. Initiate Understanding by leading the
professionalism; theestablishment of social and intellectual communities improve student attitudes and retention.The FIGs program at UW-Madison is a cross-campus opportunity; most FIG courses are NOT inengineering – note that data summarized in Table 1 is based on 32 FIGs classes, only TWO ofwhich were in the College of Engineering – and both were “freshman comp” classes.In brief overview, students elect to join the FIGs program for their first semester work; they thenregister for a core class plus two linked classes. They usually have the same dorm housing andare encouraged to build a social and intellectual community within the larger university setting.For an overview of FIGs at UW-Madison, visit: http://www.lssaa.wisc.edu/figs/As already stated, the
Page 15.13.3for academic reform are enumerated as: 1) Build awareness and commitment 2) Commission pilot projects 3) Create venues for ongoing discussion and development 4) Organize skill development and consultation services 5) Broaden the rewards, recognition, and incentives environment 6) Adopt performance-based resource allocation 7) Develop an internal oversight and review capacityIn June 2009, Task Force members again participated in an NAE-sponsored workshop on“Developing Engineering Faculty as Leaders of Academic Change.” This workshop set out withfour key goals: “catalyze knowledgeable faculty to engage in change leadership activities ontheir individual campuses, convene knowledgeable engineering faculty
students may have. This framework is based on the works ofReiner, Slotta, Chi and Resnick 1 and Chi 2. The second framework from the works of Steif 3describes the common errors that students make in their solutions of Statics problems and theStatics concepts that they represent. Findings of this study show that students who got the answerincorrect made four common errors. In conjunction, when explaining the reasoning behind theseerrors, students talked about the force(s) as represented in the problem and solution as asubstance or a material object. Introduction The scientific principle taught in Statics is the principle of equilibrium. The primaryscience prerequisite to understanding the principle of
areas such as space and human body. A challenge facing TEGs is their low efficiencydue to obtaining their energy from low energy sources such as waste heat and a low figure ofmerit (ZT) that enable conversion of heat into electricity1. , where T is the absolutetemperature, s is Seebeck coefficient, is electrical conductivity, and k is thermal conductivity.In power generation, the Seebeck effect enables the direct conversion between heat and electricenergy streams. Heating one end of the unit cell while holding the other end cooler induceselectromotive force within the material and may be harnessed for electrical power2. In Figure 1,two dissimilar semiconductors A and B are connected electrically in series but thermally inparallel with
opportunity for an exchange of content, emphases, and approaches thatcan enrich the classrooms of both fields.This paper analyzes the similarities and differences of typical engineering economy and finance(1) texts, (2) students, and (3) faculty. For example, most engineering economy texts will havechapters of detailed coverage with 20-year projects that may have different cash flows in everyyear. In contrast, the typical project in a finance text has a five year life and uniform cash flows.The engineering students are on average better with mathematics, tables of factors, andspreadsheets, but the finance students analyze problems more quickly by using financialcalculators.The textbook authors and classroom teachers in each field have honed their
evaluator. It is demonstrated that the course objectivesand ABET requirements were met by student projects, reflections and the evaluationinstrument.1. IntroductionThe recent globalization of business and engineering practices present both challenges andopportunities to the professionals of engineering education 1. The past two decades have seenentrepreneurship emerge as a mainstream business discipline in the United States2.Universities are now expected to inspire entrepreneurship in order to prepare students tosucceed in the globally competitive business setting 3. Entrepreneurship, as a core businessskill, has become an increasingly popular course in the curriculum of business colleges. Itspopularity results from not only college students who
usable MEAs to differentengineering disciplines; and extending the MEA approach to identifying and repairingmisconceptions, using laboratory experiments as an integrated component, and introducing anethical decision-making dimension [1].Our overall research goal is to enhance problem solving and modeling skills and conceptuallearning of engineering students through the use of model eliciting activities. In order toaccomplish this goal at the University of Pittsburgh, we are pursuing two main research routes:MEAs as teaching tools and MEA as learning assessment tools. Under the first – using MEAs asa teaching tool – we are focused on three main activities: 1. Development of effective model eliciting activities: The creation of MEAs for upper
better their understanding of the concepts instead of justlearning enough to get the correct solution.IntroductionThe use of technology in the classroom has reduced the work load for instructors and offers thepotential for improved learning, but many time the use of technology alone fails to grasp the at-tention or interest of the students enrolled. Interactive demonstrations, whether computer-based orhands-on, have been shown to enhance comprehension especially when dealing with higher levelconcepts often encountered in science and engineering courses [1–5]. Though hands-on activitiesare likely more effective for student learning, in class demonstrations of simulation tools related to
programs. Development of an interdisciplinary minor innanotechnology will also be discussed. This effort is supported through the National ScienceFoundation under the Course Curriculum Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) program.Introduction and BackgroundRecent growth in the field of nanotechnology has put a new demand on educators to train aknowledgeable workforce in this field with suitable background to meet the demand ofnanotechnology based industries. According to Jack Uldrich 1 of Nano Veritas, the U.S. willneed between 1 and 2 million new workers trained in nanoscience, with a majority requiringskills that must be taught at undergraduate level. Developing new learning facilities andforging collaboration between different academic institutions
-National STEM ResearchersI. IntroductionThe "Four Component Model" of moral behavior developed by Rest,1, 2, 3 and applied toprofessional ethics by Bebeau4 and others argues that ethical behavior is a consequence of fourfactors: (1) ethical sensitivity, (2) ethical judgment, (3) ethical motivation and commitment, and(4) ethical character and competence. The majority of theoretical and pedagogical research inthe field of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering (EESE) has centered on ethicaljudgment.5 Significantly, relatively little work has been done on ethical sensitivity in EESE eventhough ethical sensitivity provides an individual with the range of concrete considerations uponwhich that person makes ethical judgments. Ethical sensitivity
support for FEP students. For example, the professor who writes the mid-term and final exams for MATH 2554 conducted review sessions for FEP students prior to the mid-term and final exams. These review sessions were heavily attended by FEP and non-FEP students taking MATH 2554.The Fall 2008 Freshman Engineering Program CohortThe Fall 2008 FEP (FY08) cohort includes 420 students. Table 1 includes summary statisticsregarding the students in the FY08 cohort who entered the University of Arkansas with verifiedACT scores. Table 2 contains summary statistics regarding the students in the FY08 cohort whoentered the University of Arkansas with a verified high-school GPA. Table 3 contains summarystatistics on the AP credit obtained by
survey were published in the 1998 ASEE Proceedings9. In 2002 RIT mailed 5,632 surveysand received 743 responses. The results of the 2002 survey were published in the 2004Proceedings.1 In 2009 RIT mailed and e-mailed 7,715 alumni. Response rates on the most Page 15.49.3recent survey were not as successful for the overall group (approximately 5%) but response fromthe most crucial group, graduates between 2003 and 2008 was approximately 10%. Forassessment of PEOs and reporting information for this paper, results from this group have beenused.All of the RIT surveys collected basic success measurements such as salary information, jobtitles and
groups and encouraged totalk about the various parts of the problems, each student is ultimately responsible for submittinghis/her own work.Additionally as part of the grading structure in place for this course, students have weeklyhomework assignments, an out-of-class final exam and an in-class final exam. Theserequirements add up to 60% of the total final score.Integration of Issues using Course ModulesStudents were assigned four course modules after the introductory portion of the course. Eachmodule accounted for 10% of the final grade and in addition each had both a technical part and areflective essay part. Brief descriptions of each of the various modules used in the first twoofferings of the course follow. ≠ Course Module 1: Gini
also states that completionof an associate degree or a 1-year certificate program increases an applicant’s chances foremployment and promotion.The Center for Water Resource Studies (CWRS) and the Bowling Green Community College(BGCC) of Western Kentucky University (WKU) formed a partnership in 2007 to address thisanticipated Water and Wastewater Operator/Technician shortage by creating the Water TrainingInstitute (WTI). WTI is a joint initiative with the employment sector, state primacy agencies,and trade associations to refine a curriculum driven by industry needs. It utilizes on-line coursedelivery to provide options for both traditional and non-traditional students.Three tracks that lead to an Associate’s Degree currently exist in the
contrasted to maleresponses along with some open ended responses. The survey findings presented here are basedonly on engineering student population and not alumni students.Common Concerns for prospective students: In this survey conducted online, the students were asked to rank a list of eleven mostcommon concerns with 1 as the greatest concern and 11 as little or no concern. The commonconcerns were: 1. Transcript evaluation 2. Meeting the deadlines for admission 3. Getting VISA 4. Being accepted into the program 5. Housing 6. Language and culture change 7. Funding/ Support 8. Finding a good academic advisor 9. Finding good courses 10. Finding job after graduation 11. Safety and security of the Campus Figure 1
difficulty level of an engineering problem, until they realize the weakperformance that students exhibit in solving such a problem on an exam. Therefore, the lack ofproblem-solving skills among engineering students has to be further addressed throughinvestigating and researching the underlying reasons for this deficiency.Over the past two decades, extensive research on conceptual knowledge has focused on assessingand enhancing the student’s understanding of the engineering concepts1-4. Research onconceptual knowledge is central to all research addressing engineering instruction and learningmechanisms. Concept inventories (CIs) 1 were developed to assess the student understanding of aspecific engineering course or domain. These inventories have