global problems in to their X X local and more actionable components6. Guide students in refining problems X X7. Guide students in planning investigations to better understand X X different components of problems8. Provide opportunities for students to gather information about X X problems or issues of importance9. Provide students with opportunities to explore multiple X X solution pathways for problems10. Guide students in weighing the pros and cons of different X X solution pathways11. Provide opportunities for students to test their solution X
nature of the courses that they identified as their favoriteand least favorite. How engineering students approach and think about learning can substantiallyinfluence their success as students, completion of degrees as engineers, and their effectiveengagement in careers. Further, if instructors, advisors and administrators have a deeperunderstanding of the learning process and traits of students they can teach, advise and plan inways that enhance student success.As we answered our first research question it became apparent that engineering students’motivational goals for learning shift significantly and substantially from mastery in their favoritecourses to more of a performance approach in their least favorite courses. Our findings indicatethat
-level 3Dprinting sessions for returning students and/or expanding the program to other middle schools inthe local area.References 1. Gonzalez, S. and D. Bennett. (Fall 2014). Planning a 3D Printing Service in an Academic Library. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship. 78. DOI:10.5062/F4M043CC 2. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). P21 Framework Definitions. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf 3. Johnson, M., M.J. Clapp, S.R. Ewing, and A.G. Buhler. (2011). Building a Participatory Culture: Collaborating with Student Organizations for 21st Century Library Instruction. Collaborative Librarianship. 3(1), 2-15
his Ph.D. he worked at the University of California, San Diego as postdoctoral fellow in the area of bioacoustics. He teaches dynamics, machine design, numerical methods and finite element method. His research inter- ests are in vibration, numerical methods, finite element methods, continuum mechanics and acoustics. He has work for the automotive industry in drafting, manufacturing, testing (internal combustion engines –power, torque and exhaust emissions, vibration fatigue, thermo-shock, tensile tests, etc.), simulations (finite element method) and as a project manager (planning and installation of new testing facilities).Dr. Arif Sirinterlikci, Robert Morris University Arif Sirinterlikci is a University Professor
Illinois University Carbondale as an assistant professor in the Department of Mining Engi- neering. He served as the Associate Dean of the College of Engineering from 1998 to 2006. He was appointed the Dean of School of Engineering at SIU Edwardsville in August 2006. Until 2000, most of Dr. Sevim’s publications were in mine systems optimization and open pit mine pro- duction planning. After 2000, in parallel to his administrative appointments, he published in engineering education. Page 26.117.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 A supplemental instruction model
friendly competition of trying tofind the lowest IAE. Table 1 presents some of the survey questions with the percent of studentsselecting each answer. There were also short answer, open-ended, response questions thatyielded numerous positive comments about the value of the simulation allowing them to quicklyand easily observe the effect of each parameter by adjusting them one at time. Although nearlyall the students indicated that the simulations were highly effective in helping them learn thematerial, there was an understandable desire on the part of some students to conduct morephysical experiments and to seek to bring the simulation in closer agreement with the physicalexperiment as we had originally planned. Overall this new experiment was
of RBIS in engineering courses. The virtual aspect ofthe project aims to overcome the barriers of cost, scale and physical location that are inherentwith local (face-to-face) communities. A previous paper described the structure, goals, organization and technology of the VCP forChemical, Materials, and Biological Engineering12, but the previous paper did not include anydetailed information on the instructional innovations developed and implemented by individualmembers of the community. This paper specifically focuses on the experiences of eight partici-pants who transformed their courses through the implementation of a variety of RBIS. Facultyparticipants developed individual action plans to transform their course through RBIS using ap
that works bestto include international service learning projects within their environment. When designing theprogram, the length of time that students are required to work on the project has to be selected.The program can be a short term project such as a week, or as long as one or more semesters[10]. Short mission-style trips abroad for engaging students in simple projects that provideservice where needed, e.g. physical labor in construction, is one of the initial efforts to exposestudents to the overseas issues. Although they are easy to plan, manage, require less funding, andrequire less curriculum changes to incorporate, they have low educational impacts. By increasingthe time that students are involved, and requiring them to engage in
Decomposition”,“Concept Generation”, “Concept Selection” and “Prototype Planning” for the first time. From aconstructivist educational standpoint, it can be problematic for students to apply these designtechniques for the first time on what is often a complex, real world capstone design problem.One solution to this problem is to incorporate a short design experience at the beginning of thetwo-semester capstone course. This can allow the students an initial experience with the designmethods that can provide a “learning scaffold” for their implementation of the full suite of designmethods over the course of a two-semester project. For the last three years, we haveimplemented three versions of a short, introductory design project (i.e. designette) in our
cultivated to expand the breadth of therelationships. And finally, in developing and maintaining relationships, one size does not fit all –multifaceted activities provide for more diverse partnerships and opportunities. Page 26.501.7References1. University of Dayton Web Site . [Retrieved 01/05/2015]2. University of Dayton China Institute Strategic Plan (draft). November 20123. Memorandum of Understanding between the University of Dayton China Institute and Partner Institutions.4. Wikipedia . [Retrieved 01/05/2015]5. UD Industrial Assessment Center Website . [Retreived 01/05/2015
daylighting devices (“solatubes”) in classroom. Youth assist professional roofing contractor to plan and execute circular incisions in ceiling and roof and install, to bring daylight into interior spaces where traditional skylights and windows simply can’t reach.Waste-to-Energy and Complete waste assessment of the Santa Cruz Municipal Wharf’sWaste Management waste stream. Results guide feasibility and selection of a technology (pyrolysis or anaerobic digestion) to introduce waste-to-energy system on the wharf. Assessment includes comparisons with calculated
something in CFL, it is easy to translate that into C language syntax.However, we cannot completely rule out the possibility that the seemingly encouraging resulthas been obtained purely by chance. Therefore, another experiment is planned for the comingsemester.References1. Roberts, E. “An Overview of MiniJava”, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 33 (1), 2001, pp. 1-5.2. Brusilovsky, P., Calabrese, E., Hvorecky, J., Kouchnirenko, A., and Miller, P. “Mini-languages: A Way to Learn Programming Principles”, Education and Information Technologies 2 (1), 1997, pp. 65-83.3. Swan, D. “Programming Solutions for the LEGO Mindstorms NXT,” Robot magazine, 2010, p. 8.4. Sattar A., Lorenzen T. “Teach Alice programming to non-majors”, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 41(2), pp
that severalof previous students of the new course have contacted me for input on their current designprojects. This demonstrates an acknowledgement that physics concepts are practical toolsoffering an advantage to the design process and their future careers. To generate morequantifiable metrics over time, I plan to compile surveys on student satisfaction and perceivedutility of the course as they continue through their Design studies.ConclusionConceptual Physics at WIT has undergone a novel transformation toward a project-basedapproach. The course uses the engineering of a complex RGM system as a learning tool andattempts to align the curricula with the learning style of design students. These changes werelargely successful in improving both
, but then found out the wood used wouldnot support the bobby pins and simplified the plan by using just a piece of plywood. Please seeFigure 3 for examples of instruments designed and created by student groups. Figure 3. Examples of Student Designed Instruments Via the Audacity program, students tested their instruments to see if they were in tune. Iwould have the program up and running when the students came into class. After playing theinstrument and importing it into Audacity, students would take the cursor and highlight aselection from the song, and zoom in until they can see the wave form. Often, they would haveto magnify to thousandths of a second to measure the length of one cycle of the wavelength. Todetermine if
faculty members in front of students added to students’ sense that theenvironment was chaotic rather than well planned. The transition to student autonomy may haveoccurred too rapidly for these students.Most students seemed to better understand why the PI learning experience was designed as itwas by mid-semester, suggesting that some of the initial faculty concerns about studentconfusion may have been exaggerated. The time and pace required for this transition will be anobvious area of research moving forward.Nevertheless, it became clear that a full four year curriculum design was needed to help studentsconceptualize how they would move through the program and how their current work would tieto long-term academic and professional goals
videoclips, simulations, and PowerPoint presentations.Future Work and Concluding RemarksWe plan to fully complete this project including the identification of resources andimplementation of the website by fall 2015. We not only would like our own students to use thewebsite extensively, but also sincerely hope that other interested students from all over the worldwould do the same. To this end, invitation letters and emails will be sent to as many nuclearengineering programs as possible to introduce our website to a wider audience after thecompletion of the project. In addition, the letters would invite members of the American NuclearSociety (ANS) student chapter to participate in the website review and provide feedback aboutselected resources. This
communication barriers.The analysis of the subgroup Ambivert types has been combined with the analysis of the currentcommunication modes to present a recommended intra-team communication structure. Thisstructure describes modes of communication that may generally be expected to be successful. Itshould be noted, however, that individuals within the sub-teams may have differentcommunication types and that this plan may, and probably will, have to be adjusted by theproject manager based on the personnel actually involved.Figure 5 shows the proposed communication flow chart for the team. The Engineering Managernow communicates with all of the engineering teams on a two-way base communication system.All of the engineering teams are also on a two-way base
. Page 26.1091.3The Role of Building RelationshipsIn order to undertake challenging design and build projects with industry sponsors, a substantiallevel of trust must be established between the university and the sponsors. Such projects requirean understanding of the capabilities of the student teams on the part of the corporate sponsors, aswell as an understanding of the culture and expectations of their corporate partners by thestudents and faculty. This level of trust requires long term planning, development, and nurturing.The engineering programs as Grand Valley State University were launched at the request of localindustry in the 1980’s. The programs were designed by a team of faculty in collaboration withpracticing engineers from industry
integration. Theactivity provides an excellent opportunity for students to integrate their knowledge of automationbuilding blocks (such as sensor, actuator, relays, switches, push buttons, PLC and interfacing) inreal-life problem solving. The experience is challenging, but seems positive and has been well-received by students (some have even brought their parents to see their projects). Future plansinclude combining multiple models to form a large scale system, creating an on-linedocumentation system so that teams can blog about their learning experience throughout theproject development stage, and making the systems available to be controlled remotely via theweb. We also plan to conduct experiments using mobile devices for remote control of systems
accurate interpretations of the items by engineering students, (2)accurate alignment of what the instrument is measuring as evaluated by content experts, and (3)support of the instrument and planned intended use of the instrument by education researchersand practitioners. The initial steps for validating the SCAEI presented here, steps which areoften overlooked or ignored by instrument developers [12], have provided valuable informationfor the development of the SCAEI.These results also indicated social and behavioral context that engineering instructors shouldconsider when planning classroom activities. Specifically, the engineering students perceived“arguing” or “defending” ideas as something that is disrespectful to the instructor. If
workThis paper demonstrates that it is possible for a public PUI to develop and deliver a successfulMOOC for relatively low cost using local resources. For this plan to be replicated at other publicPUIs, the instructor(s) must be willing to be only partially compensated for their time; theSummer 2012 workshop stipend and six units of release time received by the lead authorrepresents a fraction of the total time put into the creation of the hybrid course and MOOC. AMOOC developed using the model discussed in this paper would have to be a “labor of love.”While this may turn off many faculty members from creating their own MOOC, the lead authorexperienced a tremendous amount of personal satisfaction from helping hundreds of peoplearound the world
concept. Materials on ‘soft skills’ such as communication, teaming, and project planning may be more universally transferrable. The application of the engineering design process is sufficiently unique for each course to potentially require individualized university-specific introduction videos. In-class exercises need more context and definition. Quizzes need to address higher levels on Bloom’s Taxonomy rather than just recall, understanding, and comprehension. There is currently no consensus on best practices to achieve high compliance of participation for out-of-class activities (watching videos, completing quizzes).Through collaboration with other engineering faculty at the FYEE conference
published, and they are used by over 6500 facultyat over 1200 institutions in 62 countries. The peer-evaluation instrument can be previewed atwww.CATME.org. Although the tools were developed to help instructors manage teams,4,5 theycan also facilitate research on students’ learning and document student outcomes related tolearning and the quality of their team experiences.6 We propose seven empirical studies tomeasure the effect sizes of the following learning experiences: teamwork training, working inteams, rating teamwork, and giving and receiving feedback.Research OverviewThe research plan illustrated by Figure 1 shows our outcomes (in rectangles), the strategies bywhich we expect to achieve them (in ovals), and the studies by which we will
data were shared with fellow researchers and colleagues as a meansto ensure trustworthiness.ResultsOf the 42 posdocs in this study, 69% were in their first postdoc position, 29% were in theirsecond, and 2% were in their third. Of these 42, 48% were interested in academic positions aftertheir current position, while 29% were interested in industry. The remaining postdocs eitherwere uncertain of their plans or had plans unrelated to industry or academia. The followingsections summarize the reasons these postdocs decided to pursue postdoc positions, and theresponsibilities, benefits, and challenges that came with the position. The participants’ genderand field are represented by M (male), F (female), SCI (science), and ENG (engineering).Reasons
expected to be a guy in engineering,” with a sense of exasperation at theprogram coordinator’s lack of acknowledgement of the hypocritically stacked playing field (i.e.women are powerful! but actually be a guy). She continues this deconstruction of the idea ofstereotypically feminine team roles further, pointing out the hypocrisy of blaming girls for doingwhat they are good at: If because you are a girl and just happen to be really good at organizing or planning or doing numbers or making nice spreadsheets, that should not be an indication that you are failing. 1st interview, (emphasis hers) If she's good at paperwork, paperwork! I mean again, no one wants to do it, yet why do people go to business school to
countries. The peer-evaluation instrument can be previewed atwww.CATME.org. Although the tools were developed to help instructors manage teams,4,5 theycan also facilitate research on students’ learning and document student outcomes related tolearning and the quality of their team experiences.6 We propose seven empirical studies tomeasure the effect sizes of the following learning experiences: teamwork training, working inteams, rating teamwork, and giving and receiving feedback.Research OverviewThe research plan illustrated by Figure 1 shows our outcomes (in rectangles), the strategies bywhich we expect to achieve them (in ovals), and the studies by which we will measure theconnections (arrows). The model is informed by prior research. To establish
engineering student project teams. Additionally, she has co-developed a framework for measuring and in- terpreting an array of team dynamics. An online assessment tool has been created based on this framework which allows teams to diagnose and improve the ”health” of their team. She is passionate about her area of research and plans to continue conducting research on factors that contribute to effective teamwork.Ms. Amanda Deacon, University of Calgary I am currently in my second year masters in Industrial Organizational Psychology at the University of Calgary under the supervision of Dr. Tom O’Neill. My area of focus is teams within organizational contexts and that results in a plethora of research conducted with engineering
tovariation in 1) delivery method, 2) collaboration, 3) feedback response, and 4) performanceconsequences. Ideally, a full factorial design of experiments would be conducted to obtain aproper analysis of the interaction effects of different combinations of learning resources. Thelogistics involved in planning, documenting, and executing the numerous combinations offactors in the same semester for our large cohort presents a logistical challenge. Future workplans to include the evaluation of new learning resources designed with the combination offactors that were not met in this study. The end goal is to determine an optimum combination oflearning resources to provide the ideal educational experience for the collective group ofstudents.MethodsFor this
corresponding allowable stresses.Separate lectures were presented on materials selection. The students were made aware of thefact that a designer had to choose the material best suited for the specific situation from a vastmenu of materials. The material selection decision could be effectively performed usingAshby’s book [3] and elements from the Cambridge Engineering Selector [4]. The software CESEduPack[4] was not used, but was planned to be used the next offering of the course. To establishthe rational way of material selection, the concept of the material indices as discussed in Ashby’s Page 26.265.4text [3] was briefly mentioned. These indices
, including the NSF grant principalinvestigator (PI) and co-PI. The aforementioned data shows that 65.6% of students fromtechnology programs took the survey. Even though demographics and baseline data left no doubtthat the communities served are disadvantaged, come from low-income families in WestVirginia, and require financial assistance, more insight is needed to determine a proposed, well-rounded plan to increase retention using the prospective grant.Data CollectionTo obtain objective information for the grant-writing process, fifteen survey questions werecreated. All survey questions were closed-ended, and were either multiple-choice or scaled.Students were surveyed during the same week by the instructors of pre-selected courses in orderto avoid