, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education and issues of race/ethnicity, gender and disability since the mid 1970's. Her BS, from LeMoyne College is in Mathematics, her MS, from Syracuse University, is in Instructional Technology and her PhD, also from Syracuse University, is in Teacher Education. Dr. Campbell, formerly a professor of research, measurement and statistics at Georgia State University, has authored more than 100 publications including co-authoring Engagement, Capacity and Continuity: A Trilogy for Student Success and Upping the Numbers: Using Research-Based Decision Making to Increase Diversity in the Quantitative Sciences with Eric
T_ph uV_p p_hs T_ps uL_p p_hrho T_hs uV_T Specific Enthalpy, h Spe cific Entropy, s uL_T hV_p sV_p u_pT hL_p sL_p u_ph hV_T sV_T u_ps hL_T sL_T Specific Volume, v h_pT s_pT vV_p h_ps s_ph vL_p h_px
threshold, piecewise linear, sigmoid, tansigmoid and Gaussian are usedfor activation.3.2. Control Vibration control techniques for flexible structures are generally classified into twocategories: passive and active control 20. Passive control utilizes the absorption property ofmatter and thus is realized by a fixed change in the physical parameters of the structure, forexample adding viscoelastic material to increase the damping properties of the flexiblemanipulator 21, 22, 23. Active control utilizes the principle of wave interference. This is realizedby artificially generating anti-source(s) (actuator(s) to destructively interfere with the unwanteddisturbances and thus result in reduction in the level of vibration. Active control of
visual and animation tools. These tools will be accessed through The University ofTexas at Arlington (UTA)’s Web site for use in classrooms globally. The three major steps inachieving this research goal were: (1) accepting data from the user; (2) running a pre-definedexecutable on the input data, which produces “Web-friendly” output file(s); and (3) redirectingthe browser to the output file. This study was successfully completed by using ActiveX controlsthat accept data from the user, transfer and run the FORTRAN executable files, redirect thebrowser to the result files and perform checks before displaying resulting diagrams or tables. Theuniqueness of these tools is that the executables are transferred to the client machine and run onit
orientation toward cultural differences 35 Learning self-efficacy instrument: confidence in self-directed learning25, 36, 37 Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale (MGUDS-S) survey – cultural competency38, 39 Need for Cognition Scale: self-directed learning measure40 Pittsburg Freshman Engineering Attitudes Survey (PFEAS) 41, 42 Situational Intrinsic Motivation Scale: base motivation measure 43 Student Self-Determination Scale (SDSS) 44 Student Thinking & Interacting Survey 27, 28Bland notes that quantitative data such as the IDI should be linked with qualitative information,because the IDI can show that movement is taking place along the
topics and “new engineer” workforce skills—that we are seeking toprovide for students through the Build IT curriculum. Page 14.215.14AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grantnumber ESI-0624709. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Bibliography1 Jonassen, D. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools. Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.2 Chambers, J. & Carbonaro, M. (2003). Designing, Developing, and
enhance U.S. competitiveness.Using the findings of the 2005 Task Force panel, 1,2,3 which investigated the commonality offaculty reward systems in other professions such as law, this paper suggests parallel criteria forprofessionally oriented faculty reward systems in engineering and technology education thatcomplement scientific research and that better support the professional scholarship, teaching,and engagement functions of engineering practice for technology development & innovation.2. Professional Education for Engineers –The New Challenge for Industrial InnovationWhile the U.S. system of graduate education in Science and Engineering (S&E) continues to setthe world standard and sustains the preeminence of the U.S. scientific
model rocket manufactured by QuestAerospacet5. A diagram of the rocket is shown in Appendix A at the end of this paper. Thisrocket was chosen because of its unique payload section which is separate from the parachutestowing area. In model rocketry the parachute is deployed by the, “Ejection charge” that isproduced by the rocket engine after the thrust charge is depleted. The ejection charge effectivelyforces the rocket stages to separate and propels the parachute(s) out of the storage chamber. Byhaving a separate payload section, the sensors can be shielded from the violent pressure effectsof the ejection charge.The diameter and length of the combined payload and hollow nose cone sections placeconstraints on the physical design. A two-sided
the literature about thechallenges of advancing innovations from the interest or awareness phase into actualimplementation. When developing professional development programs, people should considerthis challenge. Further, they should include dedicated and structured time for programparticipants to discuss about the particular innovation that the program is focused on, in order tohelp facilitate change of practices.AcknowledgmentThe authors gratefully acknowledge support of this work by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No. 1524527.References 1. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College teaching, 44(2), 43-47. 2. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M
, Stanhope, & Wiebe, 2015).IV. Selecting and Designing Instruments for AssessmentSelection and design of instruments for assessment was directly aligned with research questionsand assessment objectives. The primary research questions examining the curriculum's impacton early elementary through middle school students specifically in areas of student (1)application of engineering design as an engineering approach in STEM education and (2)knowledge of and attitudes towards STEM- related fields, careers, and educational opportunities.To answer these questions, the team will utilize mixed methods in a pre-post with comparisongroup framework. The research instruments being utilized are (1) the are the Student AttitudeToward STEM (S-STEM) Survey
.Brown, R. E. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18–35.Bullen, M. (2007). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 13(2), 1–32.Candy, P. C., Crebert, G., and O’leary, J. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. AGPS Canberra.Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., and Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32.Collins, M. (2000). Comparing Web, Correspondence and Lecture versions of a second-year non-major Biology course. British
survey were brought to the attention ofthe faculty including the survey’s skip function when particular questions were answerednegatively and items requiring free response. The format of the interview followed that ofcognitive interviewing in which faculty were encouraged to explain their understanding of eachitem. Cognitive interviewing is an important step in survey development as this type ofinterviewing helps researchers to evaluate participants’ interpretation of the quality of surveyitems and their ability to measure the intended construct(s). In keeping with the sensemakingframework, this phase of interviewing was aimed at validating the items on the survey from theperspective of faculty who would be future implementers of the instrument
Underserved Students in the CSU Moving Beyond Race and Economic Status to Close Equity Gaps. Rethinking the Gap. [online] Long Beach, CA: CSU, pp.1-12. Available at: http://www.dashboard.csuprojects.org/rethinkingthegap/Historically-Underserved-Student- Factor-Model.pdf [Accessed 30 Jan. 2019].[4] French, B. F., Immekus, J. C., & Oakes, W. (2003, November). A structural model of engineering students’ success and persistence. In Frontiers in Education, 2003. FIE 2003 33rd Annual (Vol. 1, pp. T2A-19). IEEE.[5] Lichtenstein, G., McCormick, A. C., Sheppard, S. D., & Puma, J. (2010). Comparing the undergraduate experience of engineers to all other majors: Significant differences are programmatic. Journal of Engineering
prototypes created by the users.One view of technological development assumes that new ideas present themselves with apredictable, self-determining trajectory—the ideology of technological determinism. However,the new trends of empathy and human-centeredness of design convince us that human choice,not technology, moves history. Lo-fi prototypes, therefore, should be built with an explicitemphasis on having an element of understanding the impact on human users, both directly andindirectly.Consider the impact of automation trends in the 1970’s on the labor market [37]. Theintroduction of numerically-controlled machines, for example, has had social impacts onworkshops floor workers, who viewed the new technology as a threat to their jobs
, Be familiar with relevant background and technical knowledge that lead to successful design.The starting point of any design project, irrespective of the object or nature of the project, is theproblem definition phase characterized by: asking relevant questions and attempting to findplausible/realistic answers. No sooner has a client or professor defined a series of objectives for adesign project than the designer- whether in a consulting office or in a classroom- want to findout what the customer really wants. Questions such as: what is an economic project? How doyou define the best design? What is a safe design? What are the factor(s) that will affect thedesign the most? Phrasing it differently, knowledge resides in the questions
],and several other metacognitive measures (see Section 1).In both simulation activities, students build the car toy according to a set of customer requirementsshown in Table 1. The simulation activities also require that all the tasks are performed by onestudent for the individual activity (craft production) and by four students for the group activity(mass production). The student(s) need to minimize the total cost of producing the car toy whilesatisfying the requirements of the customer. Hence, there are four main functions: design, sourcing,manufacturing, and inspection. The simulation also involves a customer and a supplier (see Figure2). The descriptions of the four jobs are as follows: (1) Design Engineer: the design engineer
like to acknowledge the support from Leonhard Center for Enhancement ofEngineering Education at College of Engineering in Penn State.References[1] Ohland, M. W., Giurintano, D., Novoselich, B., Brackin, P., & Sangelkar, S. (2015). Supporting capstone teams: Lessons from research on motivation. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(6), 1748-1759.[2] Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.[3] Passow, H. J. (2012). Which ABET competencies do engineering graduates find most important in their work?. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 95-118.[4] ABET, “Criteria for accrediting engineering programs,” 2018
students’ weaknesses and strengths in domain knowledge [16].Instructors can assess students at earlier time points in a course, to identify potential areas ofweakness that can be addressed throughout the remainder of the instruction. In order toassess student learning, either formatively or summatively, an instructor needs to select anappropriate scoring method(s) for the concept maps. Several quantitative and qualitativescoring methods have been developed and applied to engineering students’ concept maps,with each taking a different approach to capturing a map’s complexity. Concept map scoringmethods typically include measures of conceptual depth, breadth, and connectedness [19].A concept map can be used before the start of a course to assist
average score earned). All statistical analyses were conducted usingIBM SPSS 25.The inter-rater reliability between the coders measured using Cohen’s kappa and is shown inTable 3. The two values in each cell of the table represent the reliability for the pre-interviews(left) and post-interviews (right). Agreement between Coders 1, 2, and 4 ranges from roughly“moderate” to “strong,” while agreement with Coder 3 is “minimal” to “weak” [32]. However,unless otherwise noted, Coder 3’s ratings are included in the aggregate results that follow as theeffect of removing Coder 3 is inconsequential, as will be shown.Table 3. Inter-rater reliability: Cohen's kappa for the four coders for pre / post interviews Coder 2
mechanicalengineers. Future research will expand this to other engineering disciplines.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.EEC 1751369. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham, Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.[2] Z. S. Roth, H. Zhuang, V. Ungvichian, and A. Zilouchian, "Integrating Design into the Entire Electrical Engineering Four Year Experience."[3] B. I. Hyman, "From capstone to cornerstone
surrounding the usefulness of faculty evaluation measures—studentevaluation in particular. We argue that in order to improve faculty perceptions of teachingevaluation practices, future work should explore the potential of AOE questions for moremeaningful approaches to faculty evaluation. Such approaches might provide faculty withconcrete, useful suggestions, and empower them to make positive pedagogical changes. ReferencesAlbanese, M. A., Schuldt, S. S., Case, D. E., & Brown, D. (1991). The validity of lecturer ratings by students and trained observers. Academic medicine, 66(1), 26-28. 11Aleamoni, L. M. (1999). Student rating myths versus research facts
with theirinternational team-members [9].Recently, a study abroad framework has been proposed in which faculty develop “proactivelearning interventions” wherein students are intentionally challenged and supported in engagingin, and reflecting on, cross-cultural experiences [10] (originally from Berg [11]). Demetry et al.[10] provide one example of such a framework, or “paradigm change,” that shifts thepedagogical approach from one of lassez-faire to one that provides intentional interventions“intended to foster intercultural learning among engineering and science undergraduates.”Demetry et al.’s [10] approach focused on developing two different types of project teams –mixed teams comprised of Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) students and
and Extent," Journal of Engineering Education, Article vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 539-564, 07// 2012.[8] S. Pruitt, "The Next Generation Science Standards: The Features and Challenges," (in English), Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 145-156, 2014/03/01 2014.[9] P. A. S. Ralston, J. L. Hieb, and G. Rivoli, "Partnerships and experience in building STEM pipelines," Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, vol. 139, no. 2, pp. 156-162, // 2013.[10] J. Strobel, J. Wang, N. R. Weber, and M. Dyehouse, "The role of authenticity in design-based learning environments: The case of engineering education," Computers & Education, vol. 64, no. 0, pp. 143-152, 5
(i.e., undergraduate students in the class, other LAs,graduate TAs and faculty on the instructional team), the LAs develop a broad set of socio-technical competencies that may help better prepare them for engineering practice.AcknowledgementThe authors are grateful for support provided by the National Science Foundation grant DUE1347817. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] S. Olson, and D. G. Riorda, "Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Report to the President," Executive Office of
(design parameter), and DC (design constraint), as well as the designrelationships such as CN-FP, FR-FR, FR-DP, etc. If the Function-Behavior-Structure (FBS)framework is taught, then designers should assign the codes such as R (requirement), F(function), Be (expected behavior), Bs (actual behavior), and S (structure), as well as thedesign operations such as formulation, synthesis, analysis, and evaluation.The candidate functions abstracted from the peer products can be represented in differentformats. Two commonly used representations are “verb+noun” pairs and “input-outputtransformations” of energy, material, and signal.Step (3): Calculate similarity between peer product and target productStudent designers are guided to calculate the similarity
research are available indicating the importance of integrating various skillsfrom the job market into the engineering curriculum. Chikumba, S. et al. discusses the benefit ofintegrating hard technical skills and technologies with the soft skills required by IndustrialEngineers to satisfy the marketplace [3]. The University of Florida produced a study on the“talent paradox” in which students cannot find jobs because they do not possess the skillsrequired by companies and companies cannot find the right employees because of the lack ofskills in applicants [4]. One article outlines a course for engineering students in their lastsemester. This course aims to bridge the skills gap from school to real life situations [5],[6]. TheU.S. Department of
the earliest ages standthe best chance of continuing on career paths that will bring them greater economic prosperity.By increasing the opportunities for a greater and more diverse population of students to haveaccessibility to these subjects, the greater the number of curious, scientifically literate studentswill be prepared to learn and pursue engineering careers.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (under GrantNo. 1647405) and National Grid. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of thefunding partners.References[1] J. P. Holdren, M. Cora, and S. Suresh. Federal STEM
Construction Management Education. American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Construction Education, 82. Arnett, J. J. (2000) Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469-480.3. Austin, R. B. (2017) Reengineering BGSU’s Construction Management Capstone, 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Columbus, OH4. Berg, D., Manib, H.S., Marinakis, Y., Tierneyc, R. and Walsh, S. (2015) An introduction to Management of Technology pedagogy (andragogy). Technological Forecasting & Social Change 100 1–45. Berg, T., Erichsen, M. and Hokstad, L.F. (2016) Stuck at the Threshold, Which strategies do students choose when facing liminality with certain
instructors work with their technical counterpart(s) toensure the classes are in unison, and that any concerns can be quickly addressed.To implement this course, we worked with the individual senior design course coordinators foreach program and have created and implemented a synchronized timeline and milestones planthat is used across all majors – see Table 4. We have designated sections of our innovationcourses that the students can conveniently fit into their schedules. This current design andinnovation pedagogy has now been implemented across all engineering programs in the Schoolof Engineering & Science and is comprised of biomedical, mechanical, civil, environmental,naval, chemical, electrical, and computer engineering, as well as the
elementary level. Furtherinvestigations are needed to increase supported collaboration and resources available to K-12teachers to ensure effective and efficient engineering lessons that help prepare the nextgeneration of engineers.AcknowledgementsFunded by a grant under the federally funded Improving Teacher Quality (ITQ) State GrantsProgram, administered by the Ohio Board of Regents. Any opinions, findings, and conclusionsor recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the funding organizations.References[1] C. Cunningham and G. J. Kelly, “Framing engineering practices in elementary school classrooms | Engineering is Elementary,” Int. J. Eng. Educ. , vol. 33, no. 1B, pp