asked to complete a survey on the use oflaboratory design notebooks in our course that semester. Although nearly 50% of students didnot use the ELN, response to the notebook survey was very good, with a 76% response rate. Ofour lab instructors, 6 used the ELN, 1 used both ELN and paper, and 6 used paper only.Instructors that used paper only did not respond to the survey. Overall, the percentage ofstudents who would choose to use the LabArchives ELN in the future was low at just 40 %.Here, we report some preliminary data related to time spent learning LabArchives (Figure 1),resources used to learn LabArchives (Table 1), and multivariate plots of ELNs vs. papernotebooks performance in logistical categories (Figure 2). Figure 3 shows a
the RCT, participants were asked to respond to two short open-endedscenarios, each depicting a commonly faced interpersonal communication scenario for womengraduate students. The first asked each participant to imagine that she had received criticalfeedback from her advisor, and the second asked the student to put herself in a situation in whichshe was confused by a comment made by her advisor about another student. These situationsdrew on the skills taught in two specific communication modules, namely, Receiving andResponding to Feedback and Active Listening for Question 1 and Question 2, respectively. TheAICS measured participant ability to illustrate how they would apply interpersonalcommunication skills in each scenario. Responses were
PDP. The identical questionnaire was administered a second time after theseminar and again three months later. We compare different formats of the seminar as well asinstructors from different academic disciplines. The focus is laid especially on instructors inSTEM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) versus non-STEMdisciplines. The data obtained suggest that (1) there are differences between STEM and non-STEM instructors with respect to their initial beliefs, (2) there is noticeable development of theinstructors’ conceptions about teaching and learning as a result of participation in the program,and (3) different formats of the same program may display widely differing effectiveness.1 IntroductionIn recent years
to traditional approaches can increasestudents’ conceptual knowledge and their ability to transfer acquired knowledge to newersituations [1-3]. Furthermore, exposure to real-world challenges, especially when presented in anactive and practical learning environment increases both student interest and pedagogicaleffectiveness. The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) in its report, “Educating theEngineer of 2020,” contends that solving the Grand Challenges will require more than justproviding students with technical training. It argues that an engineering education must producegraduates who combine technical excellence with a multitude of other skills includingcommunication, teaming, ethical reasoning, and contextual analysis. Students
programmingstructure”, were “usually not compatible with the existing experimental systems”, the “hardwaregenerally contained small-scale testing devices”, and “usually housed behind a panel thatprevented the students experiencing the real-life devices and the visual benefits of directexperimentation”1. As the capability of the computers, hardware-wise and software-wise,increased, engineering educators were able develop better-integrated and interactive visualizationcomponents to support the theory in their courses. Educators developed and adoptedtechnologies to create remote laboratories, and virtual platforms to provide students with theapplication experience. Although some of these set-ups were developed to support the onlinecourses, many of the set-ups
studentengagement is commonly acknowledged to significantly benefit the students as well as thestudent mentors involved in the program. Data from an initial student survey that measures theefficacy of the proposed mentorship program is included in this paper and these data arediscussed in detail. A 1-5 Likert scale is used for quantitative analysis of the data in order toevaluate the self-efficacy of the program. The group size of the mentorship cohort has beenlimited to a maximum of thirty students at this stage. Preliminary analysis of the data indicatesthat the participating students have a strongly positive opinion of the program.Keywords: Mentorship, Engineering, Project-based Learning (PBL).1. IntroductionMentoring is commonly acknowledged as a means
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Epistemological Foundations of Global Competencies: A New Theory to Advance Research on Global CompetenciesIntroductionAround the world, many influential stakeholders are concerned with increasing globalcompetitiveness of engineering graduates by increasing their global competency. Recent booksfrom the US, Australia, and Europe attest to growing interest in global engineering.1 In sum, Whether working on multi-national project teams, navigating geographically dispersed supply chains or engaging customers and clients abroad, engineering graduates encounter worlds of professional practice that are increasingly global in character. This new reality
will be displayed. However,the author dyed silk squares in various combinations of mordant and dye, and and crafteda quilt from the squares. The quilt demonstrates the range of colors available with fournatural dyes and five mordants, as well as some artistic flair.Method:The dyeing procedure is divided into four steps. Each step can be modified for differenteffects. The students completed these steps throughout the semester.Step 1: Mordant the fabricNatural dyes will not permanently dye natural fabrics without the aid of a mordant.Typical mordants include alum, tin, chrome and copper (available from aurorasilk.com2,or in many chemistry laboratories). The combination of fabric, mordant and dyedetermine the final shade. An early experiment
renewable fuels and related climate change topics.The process outlined in this paper can be presented three ways, depending on the pedagogicalcontext:1) Process Demonstration2) Lab Activity with predetermined process parameters3) Lab Activity with process parameters developed in worksheetBiodiesel Reaction ParametersMost vegetable oils and fats (triglyceride) can be easily converted into fatty acid methyl ester(FAME = biodiesel) with a catalyzed process that can occur at room temperature and pressure.The ratios of reactant and products are outlined in Table 1. A reaction using 400 ml of oil willproduce nearly 400 ml of biodiesel. Typically excess methanol is used to push the reaction closerto completion(1). The demo process outlined in this paper
into how the engineering educational community has been teachingcontrols from the time-domain and frequency-domain, the author conducted a comparativeliterature review. “Controls”, along with “Root locus” and “Bode plot” respectively, were usedas keywords to search the IEEE Transaction in Engineering Education and the ASEE AnnualConference Proceedings. The results from this quick review, as summarized in Table I, indicatethat, in both sources, more efforts on time-domain methods were reported than those onfrequency-domain methods, confirming the discrepancy between the existing efforts in the time-and frequency domain. Moreover, few publications returned from these two searches directlyaddressed the abovementioned concern [1-9].TABLE I Time
hasspecific objectives that will support these goals. They are: (1) develop and maintain an effectiveliaison between BRCC and LSU; (2) utilize scholars to develop a peer ambassador/mentorprogram facilitating transfer success; (3) establish and conduct a pre-transfer academiccounseling program; (4) expand existing seminars to orient and integrate BRCC and othertransfer students into LSU and (5) invite BRCC math, science and engineering faculty toparticipate in ongoing Faculty Development.Activities of the program to date have included outreach, professional development, advising,and developing an overall assessment tool. All scholars participated in outreach activities thatconsisted of Peer-to-Peer talks at BRCC each semester and Shadow Days at LSU
Outcome FrequencyIntroductionFirst-year programs nationwide typically feature an introductory curriculum featuring a semesteror yearlong “Introduction to Engineering” course or sequence. Examining a number of thesecourses shows that the content can vary significantly. For example, one course could focus onMATLAB programming while another course could emphasize technical communication. Mostcourses are a combination of these topics to varying degrees; therefore, an NSF-sponsoredproject to classify these courses was conducted which resulted in the First-Year Introduction toEngineering Course Classification Scheme.1 This taxonomy allows programs or instructors toquantify the content of their course(s) using the scheme. As a result, the scheme has
theoretical foundationand the overall framework of this program, this paper describes its three primary elementsincluding: 1) recruitment and selection of REU participants, 2) REU research projects, and 3)seminar and workshop series and a final symposium. Selected student comments, as well aslessons learned, are also presented in this paper. Many REU students expressed their desire topursue further graduate studies, or teaching, to advance their professional careers.IntroductionExtensive research evidence has suggested that undergraduate research experience (REU)significantly improves students’ academic performance and confidence, and has a lasting impacton their career paths 1-3. The National Science Foundation has been supporting
those goals. For example, thetraditional “development and dissemination” approach to teaching has been identified as a majorbarrier to the STEM reform efforts [1]. Concurrently, research from the field of Social-CognitivePsychology has investigated the role of student motivation and its impact on academicachievement [2,3,4,5,6,7,8].One theory from Psychology, Self-Determination Theory [9], states that there are three innatepsychological needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—which when satisfied can Page 26.1041.2promote intrinsic motivation and increase student learning outcomes. In this model, autonomycan be conceptualized as having
identified as an essential component in the U.S. STEM Educationsystem with a total of 1,738 2-year institutions: 967 public, 100 non-profit and 671 private.1 In2012, there were over 20 million students enrolled in an academic institution across the UnitedStates with over 6 million being educated at a two-year public institution.2 These public two-year institutions also have a large population of underrepresented minorities with approximately34% of the total number of African Americans enrolled in an academic institution and 46% ofthe total number of Hispanics students enrolled in academic institutions.3 In addition toexpanding underrepresented minority participation through institutional partnerships with two-year public institutions, 33% of the
, signal integrity and THz sensors. He is a member of IEEE and ASEE. Page 26.1685.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Using Systematic Literature Reviews to Enhance Student LearningI. Introduction and motivationLiterature review is a skill assumed to be in the arsenal of all graduate students pursuing thesisoptions at the MS or PhD level. There are many resources on writing literature reviews, fromcampus writing centers to books such as Machi and McEvoy.1 One would also assume that this isamong the very first tasks that research-oriented students would undertake. However, our
iscategorized as inter-level. Students’ trans-level triad classification is based on their abilityto answer the question correctly in the entire domain. Page 26.213.6 The Question The following question is designed to observe participants’ ability to transform analgebraic function from to its geometric/graphical representation by calculating the relatedlimit and derivative questions. A2G Problem: Please draw the graph of f ( x) = xx+1 at (e) below by finding and applyingeach of the following information if they are applicable.a) Vertical and horizontal asymptotes of f(x) and limiting values of f(x) at the vertical asymptotes if there exists any
analysis of thedegrees of freedom for stage-wise separations, however, do not offer a generalized formalism fora broader range of problems. Rodriguez and Gayosos12 extended an earlier formalism proposedby Ponton13, also for stead-state processes.Current texts, however, offer a number of starting points that are quite useful. Felder andRousseau1 present and illustrate a degrees of freedom approach wherein they state that: ndf = nunknowns – nindependent equations (1) where ndf is the number of degrees of freedom, nunknowns is the number of “unknown variables”and nindependent equations is the number of “independent equations” relating the
our rankings.IntroductionAcademic programs are ranked using different objective and subjective metrics, providingdifferent perspectives on the quality, productivity and affordability of the programs. Programrankings are closely followed by aspiring students, universities and employed in hiring andfunding decisions. Among the many rankings of programs, U.S. News rankings have a widefollowing. U.S. News updates the ranking of graduate programs in multiple fields annually.According to the statement from U.S. News’ website 1 , they rank the graduate programs based onboth statistical data and expert assessment data. The statistical data includes both input and outputmeasures, reflecting the quality of resources into the programs and educational
their STEM outreach. Although the event waslabeled as being national, the vast majority of teams were located near the company’sheadquarters. The recruitment begins in October and the final contest is in mid-February. Thereare several checkpoints along the way which determine whether a team has accomplishedenough to stay in the contest. This paper describes one high school competition that began as a“national competition” at a single location in 2009 and has evolved over the past three years to acompetition that now includes three regional contests where national qualifiers are selected tocompete nationally.IntroductionIn 2010 the authors approached Phoenix Contact 1, an international controls company, to becomea technology supplier for a grant
and transgender (LGBT) individuals in U.S.workplaces often face disadvantages in pay, promotion, and workplace experiences.1-7 It is stilllegal in many states to fire LGBT persons due to sexual identity or gender expression.8 Recentscholarship on the experiences of LGBT students and professionals suggests that thesedisadvantages may be particularly pernicious within science and engineering-related fields, giventhe patterns of heteronormativity and heterosexism documented therein.9-12 LGBT faculty inscience, technology, engineering and math (STEM)-related departments face harassment anddiscrimination, marginalization, and chilly departmental and classroom climates.10 In a study oftwo NASA centers, furthermore, LGBT professionals encountered
been employed. Thiscourse is entitled “Introduction to Mechanical Engineering Practice,” and is a required course formechanical engineering majors. The course comprised of three hour-long lectures every weekalong with a group project in reverse engineering. The lecture classes were devoted to the basicelements of mechanical engineering practice which came from a text entitled “An Introduction toMechanical Engineering.”[1] This text introduced the students to the vocabulary, skills, andapplications associated with the mechanical engineering profession. Chapter 1 of the textintroduces the profession of mechanical engineering, and the next seven chapters talk about thevarious disciplines within mechanical engineering with intent to develop useful
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 1 Data Management Model Selection: IT Professionals’ preferences Gholam Ali Shaykhian, Ph.D. Mohamed Abdelgadir Khairi, Ph.D. Jinan Ziade, ABDAbstractData Management Models selection (Centralized Data Model or Federated Data Model)for managing organization data is influenced by many factors. The goal is to determinethe best architectural model for managing enterprise data; and help organizations to selectan architectural model. The study compared and contrasted the federated and centralizeddata models within
werecollected from 1) middle school science teachers, 2) science education college faculty(responsible for preparing middle school teachers), and 3) college of engineering faculty. Bothgroups of faculty teach at Arizona State University, where the study was housed. Each group wascomprised of four to six individuals, and they received no incentive or compensation for theirparticipation. The groups represent a convenience sample comprised of faculty and classroomteachers who were already associated in some way with the university.Data Collection. Participants volunteered to complete the Interpreting Engineering DesignSurvey (IEDS) online with the only identifying information gathered being their professionalrole. The respondents were prompted to consider
solution will be used to demonstrate the basic concepts of balanced three-phase power inan introductory setting.Project GoalsThe basic project goals are based on the project goals from the article “Synthesis of Low-Voltage Three-Phase Power for Use in Low-Cost Motor and Systems Experiments at theSophomore Level”1. Some variation has been made to the goals but the overall scope of theproject has not changed. The goals are: to develop a meaningful three-phase system for sophomore engineering students who have only introductory knowledge of three-phase power to improve student knowledge concerning the basics of those systems to give the students increased confidence in applying the knowledge obtained to work at
) • To cultivate teamwork, communication and leadership skills (d, k) • To kindle a sense of professionalism and encourage ethical practice (f, n)Based on the above principles, the content of the new syllabus is as follows:week 1 1 Introduction to AEC Industry/ Organization Structures Page 26.1001.7week 2 2 Project Delivery Methods/Business Developmentweek 3 . 3 Project Participants/Organizing and Leading the Projectweek 4 . 4 Leadership, Estimating and Budgetweek 5 5 Estimating and Cost Control, WBSweek 6 6 Project Management/ Planning & schedulingweek 7
and students could still test the approach and had much deeper understanding of theapproach.1. IntroductionEngineering education is a student-centered learning process in which students learn a specifiedset of knowledge, techniques and skills with the guidance and help of instructors. Even thoughnumerous pedagogical approaches have been and will be created and implemented in this nobleprocess, the ultimate goal of the engineering education was, is and will be always the same,which is to prepare them for practice in the field of their chosen careers.In the engineering education process, there are four key elements. The first key element is the setof knowledge, techniques and skills which is specified by higher levels of engineering
modules have the following sequence of activities: • Complete an instrument (learning style inventory or motivation questionnaire) • Go through a tutorial that gives a first hand experience of the influence of learning style or motivation • Go through a tutorial about learning style or motivation strategies • Respond to reflection questions • Evaluate the module Figure 1 describes the architecture of the learning styles module. It begins with a Barschlearning style inventory2. This module creates the “first hand experience” by asking students tolearn material that is presented in different learning styles. It presents tutorials on mitosis andPunnett squares, with one
. & Prod. in Ind. & Tech. (IT 508) and Adv. Quality Eng. Methods. • Less emphasis on qualitative methods, despite the fact that the degree is an interdisciplinary degree with students coming from a diverse background and career. • Unfamiliarity of a majority of students with the resources available to help them with their directed MS project, how to prepare the final report, and as such (a similar concern is mentioned in [1]). This is in particular, important since the majority of students are non-traditional (e.g., part-time students) who may have been out of academia for a number of years and therefore, they are not familiar with the expectations and degree requirements they need to be
to Middle-school Students Using LegoTM Machines (Work in Progress)1. IntroductionIn 2011, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) identifiedadvanced manufacturing as a key sector for revitalizing the economy and for promoting a cultureof innovation in the United States (US) [1]. Following this, several federal programs andinitiatives, such as the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP) and the National Networkfor Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI), have been announced to promote manufacturingresearch, education and jobs in the US [2-5]. While these steps are geared towards enabling a“manufacturing renaissance” in the Nation, the high-tech manufacturing sector is faced with aserious shortage of a skilled