Paper ID #11300Virtual Laboratories Using Simulink: A Pilot StudyDr. Mark David Bedillion, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Dr. Bedillion received the BS degree in 1998, the MS degree in 2001, and the PhD degree in 2005, all from the mechanical engineering department of Carnegie Mellon University. After a seven year career in the hard disk drive industry, Dr. Bedillion joined the faculty of the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology in Spring 2011. Dr. Bedillion’s research interests include distributed manipulation, control applications in data storage, control applications in manufacturing, and STEM
designer and reviewer in peer critique, andtransition to a small-group activity.There is both qualitative and quantitative evidence that the critique provided a novel aspect totheir engineering communication education, and students are willing to engage with the topic.However, presenting this visual design workshop in the last quarter of their senior yearunderscores how little time engineering students have to construct their knowledge of qualitative,design-based visual communication skills before they are asked to perform them in theirprofessional careers. In order to provide students with better scaffolding for building thisknowledge, students should have earlier and more frequent exposures to learning that scaffoldstheir ability to make meaning
relevance ofthose reflections towards the student’s ability to use what had been taught in the academic andprofessional setting. This grading scheme removed the higher scores that the women may havehad purely based on that most women have higher scores in English than their male counterparts.Instead, this shows that the women were benefiting more from the journal and the ability to drawconnections between the given lesson and the relevance on future assignments or career related Page 26.1740.11items.This improvement becomes more noticeable when comparing the median and mean scores asopposed to the complete table of data. In Figures 2 and 3, showing
Military Academy, West Point, New York. Dr. Barry holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rochester Institute of Technology, a Master of Science degree from University of Colorado at Boulder, and a PhD from Purdue University. Prior to pursuing a career in academics, Dr. Barry spent 10-years as a senior geotechnical engineer and project manager on projects throughout the United States. He is a licensed professional engineer in multiple states. Dr. Barry’s areas of research include assessment of professional ethics, teaching and learning in engineering education, and learning through historical engineering accomplishments. He has authored and co-authored a significant number of journal articles and book chapters on these
problems. As a result of a five-year grant aimed toward improving first-yearretention, the first-year course was substantially revised in 2013 to focus on developingmathematics skills, based on the work of Klingbeil and colleagues1–3. This paper describes thesemost recent modifications to the course and presents results from students who took the modifiedcourse as they moved forward in their academic careers and took second year mathematics andscience courses. We collected data both in the form of grades and measurements of students’self-efficacy to explore how increasing mathematical content in the first-year engineering classcan improve students’ performance in both co-enrolled and subsequently enrolled mathematicsand science courses.The work
the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Oregon State University. His research interests include conceptual change and situated cognition. He received the NSF CAREER award in 2010 and is working on a study to characterize practicing engineers’ understand- ings of core engineering concepts. Page 26.703.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015Examining Interruptions in a Student's Solution Generating Process for Indicators of Conceptual Knowledge Page 26.703.2AbstractAssessing a
Education. She is the recipient of a 2012 NSF CAREER award, which examines how engineering students approach innovation. She serves on the editorial boards of Science Education and the Journal of Pre-College Engineering Educa- tion (JPEER). She received a B.S.E with distinction in Engineering in 2009 and a B.S. degree in Physics Education in 1999. Her M.A. and Ph.D. degrees are in Science Education from Arizona State University earned in 2002 and 2008, respectively.Dr. Johannes Strobel, Texas A&M University Dr. Johannes Strobel is Director, Educational Outreach Programs and Associate Professor, Engineering & Education at Texas A&M, College Station. He received his M.Ed. and Ph.D. in Information Science
on Creativity and Innovation in theEngineering Design Process. 1. The trip to [the external training organization]! But not just because of how much fun it was, but because of what we learned and what privileges we were provided. 2. The exercises we did to promote better creativity. 3. The entire course and especially the trip was more than just seeing behind the scenes at [the external training organization]. 4. I feel so confident in my abilities to be creative and successful in my engineering career. 5. Learning about the inner workings of [the external training organization] and how to apply it to life everywhere. 6. I honestly didn’t believe creativity could be taught or worked on…. I have been
their professional career. However, there are much fewerattempts to introduce the theme of sustainability in first-year courses4,17, particularly in anengineering communication course.Graduate AttributesCommunication instruction at the Faculty of Applied Science started with a stand-alonemandatory second-year course, APSC 201: Technical Communication. The topics of this coursedid not include sustainability. At first the learning objectives were limited to CEAB graduateattributes outlined in Criteria 3.1.7 and 3.1.6: communication skills, as well as individual andteamwork skills. In 2010-11 they were expanded to include three additional attributes5 : 3.1.8
learners annually). Dr. Madhavan was the Chair of the IEEE/ACM Supercomputing Education Program 2006. In January 2008, he was awarded the US National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER award for work on learner-centric, adaptive cyber- tools and cyber-environments. He was one of 49 faculty members selected as the nation’s top engineering educators and researchers by the US National Academy of Engineering to the Frontiers in Engineering Education symposium. Dr. Madhavan leads a major NSF funded effort called Deep Insights Anytime, Anywhere (DIA2) that attempts to characterize the impact of NSF and other federal investments in the area of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education using interactive knowledge
engineering concepts can flow to a child allows us to see theconnection these abilities have to the child’s growth in knowledge of engineering and the child’spotential growth into a professional engineer. Analysis of the toys children are put in contactwith can help us gain a better understanding of how best to prepare children for potential careersby developing the skills most relevant to that career using toys. And although formal education iscertainly the primary avenue through which students will learn these ideas, the complementaryeffect of learning through play shows children how these normally-abstract topics can be appliedin real life.Research QuestionsWhile this study is primarily meant to explore how gender bias in the purchase of
were framed in the context of the engineering disciplineof the faculty member leading the module. The panel sessions were designed to provide studentswith an overview of engineering disciplines not represented by course instructors. Thus, ABE,CEE, CSE, ISE, and ME hosted panel sessions with two 45-minute panels held on each panel Page 26.867.10day. Suggested panel composition included a student, a faculty member, the undergraduate coordinator, and the department head, with final panel composition left to department heads’discretion. Each panel was asked to briefly introduce different concentrations available in theirmajor, typical career paths
in: engineering design, electromechanical systems, sensor technologies, power electronics and digital signal processing. His professional activities include: program chair of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Division of the American Society for Engineering Education; chair of a new IEEE program on Early Career Faculty Development; editorial board of IEEE/HKN The Bridge magazine; and ABET EAC program evaluator. Page 26.884.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Impact of a First and Second Year Culminating Experience on Student Learning in an
, implementation, and assessment of modeling and design activities with authentic engineer- ing contexts. She is currently a member of the educational team for the Network for Computational Nanotechnology (NCN).Krishna Madhavan, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Krishna Madhavan is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue Univer- sity. He is Co-PI and Education Director of the NSF-funded Network for Computational Nanotechnology (nanoHUB.org which serves over 330,000 global researchers and learners annually). Dr. Madhavan was the Chair of the IEEE/ACM Supercomputing Education Program 2006. In January 2008, he was awarded the US National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER award for work on learner
interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and re- flective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, interdisciplinary pedagogy for pervasive computing design; writing across the curriculum in Statics courses; as well as a CAREER award to explore the use of e-portfolios to promote professional identity and reflective practice. Page 26.60.2 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 A Knowledge-Delivery Gravity Model to Improve Game-Aided
assignments has numerous familiaroptions available. Consider just a few: 1. Ignore the poor writing 2. Mark every error directly 3. Mark every error with a marginal comment 4. Give general feedback about the poor writing over the entire assignment 5. Expect students to rewrite and resubmit work 6. Change careers or retireInstructors who use one or more of the above techniques in response to their students’ work mayor may not see their efforts bear fruit, but they do invest time in the process, sometimes quitesignificant amounts of time. This work questions whether a minor intervention could guidestudents without adding an excessive burden on the instructor. We describe a tool for studentsmay use
Paper ID #13526A Tale of Two Common Reads: Models for Developing a Successful CommonReading Program for First Year Engineering StudentsStacie Edington, University of Michigan Stacie Edington is the Honors and Engagement Program Officer within the University of Michigan, Col- lege of Engineering.Prof. Archie L Holmes Jr., University of Virginia Archie is a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering and serves as Vice Provost for Educational Innovation and Interdisciplinary Studies at the University of Virginia.Prof. Petra Reinke, University of Virginia Petra Reinke started her career with a M.S. degree in Chemistry and a
Page 26.142.9following sections: 1) quote the student outcome, 2) describe the measurement method, 3)describe the metric, 4) professor’s assessment, and 5) the evaluation and recommendedimprovement.Some of the other common problems Program Evaluators often see result in findings in Criterion1. Program Evaluators will look closely at student transcripts and talk with students to make surethey are being advised properly. If students are taking classes without the proper prerequisites,out of sequence or graduating without all the required courses a finding will result. Criterion 1requires that “Students must be advised regarding curriculum and career matters”. If it isdetermined that the problem is actually because need courses are not being
solving, critical thinkingand team skills. Since these skills are critical to being successful in industry, it is our job to givestudents ample opportunity to develop these skills in their engineering student career, and usingTBL as a teaching/learning technique in engineering courses is one option. Another benefit for the students is in-depth knowledge and understanding of topics that comesfrom solving complex problems. Students gain an appreciation for team work and learn to workas an effective team mate. The effectiveness of team work can also be demonstrated to thestudents—Michaelsen et al.2, has shown that in the past twenty years, over 99.95% of the teamshave outperformed their best member by an average of almost 14%, and the worst team
University of Colorado at Boulder. He has worked for Texas Instruments, Lockheed Martin, NASA, University of the Pacific, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and MSC Software Corp. His research includes design of Micro Air Vehicles, development of innovative de- sign methodologies and enhancement of engineering education. Dr Jensen has authored over 100 refereed papers and has been awarded over $4 million of research grants.Prof. Paul Henry Schimpf, Eastern Washington University Paul H. Schimpf received the B.S.E.E (summa cum laude), M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from the Uni- versity of Washington, Seattle, in 1982, 1987, and 1995, respectively. Dr. Schimpf began his academic career in 1998, and is currently a Professor in the
Paper ID #11518Advanced Undergraduate Engineering MathematicsDr. Michael P. Hennessey, University of St. Thomas Michael P. Hennessey (Mike) joined the full-time faculty as an assistant professor in the fall of 2000. Mike gained 10 years of industrial and academic laboratory experience at 3M, FMC, and the University of Minnesota prior to embarking on an academic career at Rochester Institute of Technology (3 years) and Minnesota State University, Mankato (2 years). He has taught over 20 courses in mechanical engineering at the undergraduate and graduate level, advised 11 MSME graduates, and has written (or co-written) 45
indicated that students initially struggled with the new format and that the students feltthat “freshman did not have the academic maturity needed to succeed in an [inverted classroom]setting” (p. 343).A recent study by Love et al.[8] found that students in a linear algebra course employing theflipped classroom approach performed as well as their traditional lecture counterparts on exams,but also reported increased enjoyment of the course and a greater perceived relevance of the Page 26.175.3course material to their career. Students also reported an increase in the strength of their socialnetwork in the flipped section as opposed to the tradition
) educationmore broadly” (p. 1). Generally, the endorsement of K-12 engineering education is motivated byinterests in improving the quantity and quality of domestic students pursuing STEM careers. Thebenefits of an engineering education at the K-12 level extend beyond the expansion of theengineering pathway, reaching further to provide students opportunities to authentically interactwith subject matter from other subjects, and actively engage the world around them. As Authoret al.4 explain, “Because engineering requires the application of mathematics and science through Page 26.177.2the development of technologies, it can provide a way to integrate the STEM
Nu. His re- cent and current works are funded primarily through NSF’s CAREER and Energy, Power and Adaptive Systems (EPAS) programs.Dr. Ying Tang, Rowan University Ying Tang received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from the Northeastern University, P. R. China, in 1996 and 1998, respectively, and Ph.D degree from New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, in 2001. She is currently a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at Rowan University, Glass- boro, NJ. Her research interests include virtual reality and augmented reality, artificial intelligence, and modeling and scheduling of computer-integrated systems. Dr. Tang is very active in adapting and devel- oping pedagogical methods and materials
perception of what they had learned.This survey included 3 questions: 1. What is the most important thing you learned from this exercise? What did you learn that you may use in 10 years in your career? 2. What is the most surprising thing you learned? (or…what was your “Ah-ha” moment during this exercise?) 3. What would you suggest next time I use this exercise?Results:We were first interested in how many students would consider the 4 Ps when approachingvarious engineering challenges. Table 4 and Figures 1 – 3 show that typically less than half ofthe students mentioned people (who it would affect), prosperity (how much it would cost), planet(how it would affect the environment) or politics (how would the
Paper ID #11315Developing ”Critical Thinking Skills” in Graduate Engineering ProgramDr. Shekar Viswanathan, National University Dr. Viswanathan is a Professor at the Department of Applied Engineering at National University, Cali- fornia. Dr. Viswanathan is an educator, researcher and administrator with more than twenty-five years of industrial and academic experience encompassing engineering and environmental consulting, research and development, and technology development. Career experience includes teaching at the University level, conducting fundamental research, and developing continuing educational courses.Mr. Ben D
made by preparing a wider array of supplies such as different sensors, various motors andchassis building materials. This would allow high school students to have more options duringthe robotic design and implementation process, which would result in more demandingbrainstorming sessions. Exposing students to challenging concepts will make it easier for themto solve more complex problems when they move on to college to pursue a career in engineering.Introduction Many educational researches show that students will be better prepared for rigorous studyin engineering sciences if exposed to engineering concepts in the years prior to college oruniversity study 1, 2. Through a pre-college engineering program, high school students can havean
careers. Dante is a consultant (former research assistant) for the Space Systems Group (SSG), a graduate research team advised by Professor Norman Fitz-Coy in the Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering. SSG designed and developed a cube satellite mission known as SwampSat, which launched in 2013. SwampSat is a CubeSat for on-orbit demonstration of a compact three-axis attitude control system de- veloped at UF geared to affect rapid retargeting and precision pointing (R2P2) of pico-class (1 kg) and nano-class (<10 kg) spacecraft. Through Dante’s leadership, SSDC won the Annual Florida University Nano-SATellite (FUNSAT) design competition sponsored by the Florida Space Grant Consortium and Space
energy knowledge and projects are important to prepare students to becompetitive for careers in the growing fields of instrumentation, automation & control, energy-related engineering, science, and technology. Preliminary projections from the Bureau of LaborStatistics state that the number of expected energy related green jobs is expected to increase by11% by 2016, and most of it in environmental or energy-related sectors [20-21] . Edgar Dale’scone of learning shows that participating in discussions or other active experiences may increaseretention of material by up to 90% [22]. Richard Felder and Linda Silverman recommend severalteaching techniques to address all learning styles, one of which is to provide demonstrations forstudents with
familiarize students with material properties that affect asphalt durability, but also to provide multiple hands on fundamental type 8 9.6 8 to 10 experiences. Based on your assessment of the final class presentation, did it? Non-numerical responses (3): a) Yes; b) Yes; c) Yes 4. In your assessment, do classes of this nature help prepare students for careers in 8 9.8 8 to 10 asphalt paving? Non-numerical responses (3): a) Absolutely; b) Very Much!; c) Yes, very good 5. In your assessment, was industry/agency support used effectively during the