. His travels have taken him to Los Alamos where he worked on modeling the transient dynamic attributes of Kinetic Energy munitions during initial launch. Afterwards he was selected for the exchange scientist program and spent a summer working for DASA Aerospace in Wedel, Germany 1993. His initial research also made a major contribution to the M1A1 barrel reshape initiative that began in 1995. Shortly afterwards he was selected for a 1 year appointment to the United States Military Academy West Point where he taught Mathematics. Following these accomplishments he worked on the SADARM fire and forget projectile that was finally used in the second gulf war. Since that time, circa 2002, his studies have focused on
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Project Based Learning Curriculum for the Junior Year Based on Building a Laser Tag System Brad L. Hutchings and Stephen Schultz hutch@ee.byu.edu, schultz@ee.byu.edu Dept. of Electrical and Computer Eng. Brigham Young University1 IntroductionThis paper describes a Project Based Learning (PBL) curriculum 1 that spans the junior year of theElectrical and Computer Engineering Department. This curriculum consists of two, lock-stepsemesters. During fall semester all juniors (120+ students) enroll in three, four-credit-hour coreclasses: 1
range of practical and theoretical approaches. PBLinstructors embrace this diversity and foster an environment that is much more productive andcapable that a single program experience could offer. The PBL sequence will be describedincluding course content and project work that concurrently addresses the ABET 7 criteria forETAC and EAC accreditation. Lessons that have been learned will be shared for other schoolshoping to create a similar curricular experience.IntroductionProject Based Learning (PBL) 1 makes use of active learning techniques to create a studentdriven learning environment. The role of the instructor is to guide the students as they learnwhile doing project work. Projects are selected or screened to have real outcomes that
our BME program do not have a clear sense of the jobs or career trajectories available tothem upon graduation, and that many do not hold realistic expectations of what they can expectto do in an entry-level job.1 In Fall 2015, we piloted a set of reflection activities with our co-taught section of this BMEsuccess course (18 students, of which 15 consented to participate in the research study). Throughthese activities, students were encouraged to reflect on their choice of BME as a major, toarticulate their career and personal goals, and to identify actions they could take while in collegeto help achieve their personal and professional aspirations. By integrating regular reflection, weaimed to empower students to take ownership of their
. Through asystematic approach, we reviewed 89 apps and finally identified 12 educational app that promotecomputational thinking in the context of problem-solving. The apps and the computationalthinking competencies that each app promotes are listed in this study. For the field ofengineering education at large, the results of this study illuminate the following points: 1. Computational thinking is possible to observe and teach at the K-2 levels. 2. Educational media, especially apps, can be used to promote computational thinking competencies. The codebook can serve as a tool to review other educational media that promotecomputational thinking. In addition, the apps identified in this study can be integrated into bothformal and
1 1 1 Lisa Bosman , Brooke Mayer , and Patrick McNamara 1 Marquette University, Opus College of Engineering, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA {lisa.bosman, brooke.mayer, patrick.mcnamara}@marquette.eduAbstract: The purpose of this study was to respond to the following research question: How doesthe Kern Engineering Entrepreneurial Network (KEEN) framework build interest in technicaltopic areas, impact student learning outcomes, and develop the entrepreneurial mindset whenapplied to the engineering classroom? The KEEN framework was developed to combine theentrepreneurial mindset with engineering education to produce a more valuable, strategicallyprepared engineer, rather
before and after the in-class homework quizzes wereemployed was inconclusive, the anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that it does benefit studentunderstanding, and there is no question that the grading workload of the instructor is reduced,allowing more time to be spent on instruction where it has a positive impact.IntroductionEngineering students are expected to learn beyond class time by doing readings, homework, andprojects. Homework, in particular, is intended to improve student learning by giving them timeto practice and to learn on their own. A strength of homework is that it is practice distributed insmall doses over extended periods of days or weeks.1 Typically, homework is done to reinforcecourse material, cover additional material
Equilibrium; Sheppard and Tongue [1] Vector Mechanics for Engineers, Statics and Mechanics; Beer, Johnston, Mazurek, Cornwell, and Self [2] Engineering Mechanics: Statics; Meriam and Kraige [3] Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics; Costanzo, Plesha, and Gray [4] Engineering Statics; Condoor [5] Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics; Hibbeler [6] Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics; Bedford and Fowler [7] Engineering Mechanics: Statics; Riley and Sturges [8] Although textbooks vary somewhat in their descriptions, a multi-member object containingat least one multi-force member would be appropriate for analysis by the methods presented in aframes and machines section of a textbook
orientations to the issues.Given how frequently one or more of these are shared to set the stage for presenting diversitywork, perhaps these elements make up a collective normative context for our diversityunderstanding (Figure 1).Figure 1. A common diversity context including a pie chart representing representation numbers, a pipeline representing retention factors, and quote bubbles representing the voices of marginalized students from qualitative research or personal experience.Affordances and Limitations of Our Ordinary Diversity ContextOnce again, establishing a shared context is critical for productive conversation or work on anytopic, including diversity. In addition, this context may represent key components of a
measures consider how two coders agree in the same passageof text and then compares it to an expected percentage of agreement due to two randomallocations of codes. To determine Kappa, Pi, or Alpha, we would determine the value for eachcode comparing each pair of coders, as well as all three coders together and then combine thecode/coder pair specific values into an average across the board. Our large codebook (64 uniquecodes), made calculating Kappa, Pi, or Alpha difficult for two reasons (1) we often used a uniquecode only once in a transcript and (2) determining 4*the number of unique codes in a transcript(three pairs plus the three coders together) required excessive effort without rewarding us withadditional insights. Instead, we considered
convergent parallel mixedmethod design, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data, simultaneously, to answer tworesearch questions 1) What trends are Program Officers seeing in the Broader Impacts criterionand 2) Which Broader Impacts statements are being addressed in Project Summaries submitted tothe National Science Foundation. The quantitative approach consisted of examining 82 awarded Project Summaries in theEEC division to obtain a quantifiable assessment of the extent to which PIs who applied to EECaddressed the Broader Impacts suggestions outlined in NSF’s Proposal and Award Policies andProcedures Guide. The qualitative approach involved interviews of four program officers from theEEC division regarding the trends in addressing
, 2017Re-engineering Bowling Green State University’s Construction Management Capstone AbstractAn internal review of Bowling Green State University’s Construction Management programrevealed shortcomings which were inconsistent with the University’s aim for high studentengagement. After interviewing faculty and industry partners, analyzing students’ historicalperformance on a third-party skills test, and reviewing student feedback, instructional methodswere revised for the capstone course. Revised instruction methods focused on lectures anddiscussions, problem based learning assignments, and testing and were intended to 1) betterprepare students for their transition to industry, 2) instill life
led to multimediacourse resources supplanting paper books for some engineering courses. Additionally, very littleinformation is available to answer a fundamental question about a textbook’s utility or necessity,namely how many students read their textbooks for engineering courses or any college course?Over more than four decades research shows a majority of students ignore textbook reading [1-6].For example, one study used pop quizzes to measure reading compliance and observed decreasefrom 80% in the early 1980s to about 20% between 1993 and 1997, which precedes the availabilityof handheld electronic devices [5]. While reading quizzes offer one incentive to read a textbookbefore class, web-based technologies can quickly and easily tracks
Recap tended to be more open-ended than multiple-choice quizzeson the LMS and sometimes focused on student opinions (e.g., “If you had to choose between abi-parabolic transfer and a Hohmann transfer, which would you choose? Why?”).Recap, a new application developed by Swivl, is currently in beta version. Responding to Recapassignments can be accessed through a webpage or an app for iOS and Android. Currently, thewebpage version is the only method to access the teacher interface seen below in Figure 1. Figure 1. Teacher Interface for RecapStudents log in with an email address and join the class through a 7-digit pin number. They thensee the available assignments to complete as shown in Figure 2. Students click on the
objects,theories of flight and physics of energy. The instructions are followed with hands on activities orfield trips that can enhance the student experiences.Every year, while this institute helps to recruit 1-2 students from the pool of 25-30 participantsfor the engineering and science programs, it also helps to support the few undergraduate studentsas mentoring counselors in summer as a form of retention. The impact of instructing engineeringphysics at early stages on performance in the college is strong and could be systematized withexpanding such instruction to include additional engineering physics.IntroductionDevising techniques to recruit, retain, educate and graduate students in less established or lessknown disciplines that demand
. TheMathematical Association of America has created a subcommittee on “Curriculum Renewalacross the First Two Years” (project CRAFTY) [1]. The MAA has also published a summary ofresults from the NSF-sponsored project [2] and two reports which focus on determining themathematical needs of partner disciplines [3]. Several new directions have emerged, and themost relevant ones can be grouped into three areas: Calculus re-sequencing [4] [5], activelearning methods [2] [6] [7] [8], and applications from engineering & sciences [9] [10] [11] [12].This paper discusses a calculus redesign project that is in progress in the School of Engineeringand Applied Sciences at the University of Virginia. It will focus on the following questions: 1. How did the
the survey content focused on technicalskills, these responses were removed from the sample, leaving a total of 95 completed surveys.The distribution of respondents by transportation agency type is summarized in Table 1. Not allquestions were completed by all respondents. For cases of missing data or where respondentswere unsure, those particular entries were removed from the analysis, although the otherquestions for which valid responses were obtained were included in final analysis.Table 1 – Summary of State-of-the-Practice Survey Respondents Agency Type Number of Responses Percent of Total State DOT 17 17.9 Local Agency 23 24.2 National Company 16
, inquire about particular events, or simply reflect on why things happened the way they didin class. These are reflections-on-action. This collection of thinking about teaching can then beused to intentionally plan the next lesson, and begin the cycle again.For this paper, the Plan-Teach-Reflect-Apply Cycle that focuses on reflective teaching isextended to consider the larger Reflective Cycle of Course Development (Figure 1), and howreflection guided variations made in iterations of a senior level heat transfer course. Essentially,expanding the grain size of the cycle shifts from a lesson plan to a full course structure. Thus, thePlan stage references the teacher preparing and deciding on the course structure (content,routines, teaching methods
in an Introductory Circuits CourseIntroductionThere are increasingly frequent calls to incorporate reflection into engineering education. Muchof the focus has been on the use of reflection in teaching design.1, 2 However, there have alsobeen efforts to incorporate reflective practices into courses which are not specifically focused ondesign. If we are able to incorporate reflection into what “the students learn engineering tobe”3—meaning, the engineering science courses which make up the vast majority of mostundergraduate curricula—reflection is expected to contribute to learning outcomes and students’development of metacognitive and social skills.4Because exams are generally used for formative assessment, they are rarely also leveraged as
the assignment was graded for theformat). They were not told which assignments were going to be graded so they assumed eachassignment was likely to be graded. Students were expected to improve on using the structured layout by getting feedbackfrom the instructor on homework and exams. Assessment of this method was done in threedifferent ways: 1. Handwritten homework 2. Exams 3. Feedback from students Feedback from students was collected three times: 3.1. Anonymous feedback collection on Moodle in the first weeks of the semester. 3.2. Small group instructional diagnosis (SGID) in the middle of the semester. 3.3. Final anonymous feedback collection
. Freshman Fall Cr Junior Fall CrCMST103 Computing Principles 3 CMST383 Prog & Data Struct Studio 6CMST135 Web Fundamentals 3 MATH205 General Calc & Linear Alg 3CMST183 Computer Sys Studio I 1 ENGL200 Expository Writing II 3CMST100 College Algebra 3 Humanities/Social Science elective 3EDCEP111 University Experience 1 Junior SpringENGL100 Expository Writing I 3 CMST385 Systm & Database Studio 6 Freshman Spring STAT325 Intro to Statistics
either the summer orfall semester. In this college, the high school grade point average (HSGPA) was determined to bethe best predictor of graduating within six years. The HSGPA is a weighted GPA determined bythe admissions office. It uses a scale that ranges from zero to five and it gives extra quality pointsfor students who take advanced level coursework (see Table 1). For a reference point, theaverage HSGPA of students who had graduated from engineering was 3.81.Table 1. Number of Quality Points Added to HSGPA for Advanced-Level Courses Course Type Quality Point Advanced Placement 1.0 International Baccalaureate 1.0 Dual Enrollment 1.0 AICE 1.0 Honors
liberty to check as many as applied to them. Table 1shows the available reasons and the relationship of this reason to the Social Cognitive Theory orthe Expectancy-Value Theory. Table 1. Available Reasons for Majoring in Engineering and Relationship to Framing TheoriesReasons Social Cognitive Theory Expectancy-Value theoryParent(s) recommended it Social SupportOthers (teachers, friends etc.) Social Supportrecommended itHeard engineering provides Outcome Expectation Valuegood job opportunitiesKnow an engineer Social SupportResearched what engineers do Intrinsic Interest Valueand think I'd like doing thatGood at Math and Science
ATI SC scores and RTOP scores.Correspondingly, no significant relationship existed between average ATI TC scores and overallRTOP scores. However, we did observe significant shifts in attitudes towards student-centeredpractices through pre- and post-ATI scores comparison. A discussion of the implications of thesefindings is presented.Background & PurposeThe traditional lecture format, or teacher-focused/content-oriented instruction, is the primaryteaching method used in undergraduate engineering education classrooms.1 Active learningtechniques, or student-centered instruction, involves pedagogical practices that directly engagestudent participation and activities in the classroom. Research has shown that student-centeredteaching strategies
the educationaland training activities at RELLIS. The System’s 11 universities, its agencies, and a communitycollege are collaborating on the campus to provide relevant academic and workforcedevelopment programs and to contain the cost of education.The collaborative nature of the RELLIS Campus, offering unique opportunities for students andfaculty, is shown in Figure 1. Students will be able to obtain academic credentials from multipleinstitutions in a manner that is seamless and transparent for the student. For example, studentswill be able to pursue a major from one institution within the System, a minor from another, acertificate from one of the agencies, and participate in applied research with industry, all at thesame location. In the
, and flexibility/mobility,accommodating many potential uses.In order to assess the occupancy and use of these informal spaces, and thus develop ameasure of student engagement within the building, SmithGroupJJR conducted a studyin late 2016.11 After observing 25 possible collaboration spaces over two weeks and atotal of 90 hours, the studies revealed the following conclusions: 1) informal learningspaces located near main circulation paths saw roughly twice the interaction level ofthose farther away (meaning more dialogue, less reading/laptop use); 2) spaces witha novelty artistic expression were used 85 percent more than those without; 3) spaceswith tables and fixed furniture saw both more use and interaction; 4) spaces providingtechnological
maymodify and improve the system, contribute new experiments to the pool, and make theimprovements available to the educational community.II. backgroundRemote engineering labs for electrical engineering and other engineering disciplines are not new andhave been widely discussed in the literature and at previous ASEE conferences.[1-6] Typicalinstallations take advantage of the remote access capabilities of modern test and measurementequipment, combining them with software to manage student access, and a breadboard for thecircuitry. Nedic et al[7] compare remote EE labs using real hardware with labs based upon simulationtools, such as Labview© from National Instruments.[8] They reach no conclusion about whichmethod for creating off-site laboratory
robot. A proof-of-conceptarchitecture and implementation using an Android tablet app is presented. Finally, the alternativetechnologies and potential next steps for future enhancement are discussed.IntroductionThe NAO robot [1], created by SoftBank Robotics (formerly Aldebaran Robotics), is a humanoidrobot with a rich set of features, including a vision system, text-to-speech system, speech andfacial recognition, touch sensors on its head, hands, and feet, and 25 degrees of freedom to moveits head, arms, and legs. It can be programmed using a drag-and-drop GUI software packagecalled Choregraphe [2], or via the Python or C++ programming languages using softwaredevelopment kits (SDKs) provided by SoftBank. The SDKs permit a software developer
, itneeds a comprehensive dialysis of the forms and mechanisms of the internal qualityassurance in engineering education within American colleges and universities.2. Literature Review2.1. Research StatusSince the establishment of engineering education accreditation system, the research topicsgenerally include accreditation organization, accreditation standards, accreditation procedures,accreditation effectiveness, and comparative study.1 However, some scholars have alsopointed out the shortcomings of the existing researches, for instance, the research content isnot systematic, the research method is relatively simple, and the researches lack specificperspective.2.1.1. Research on Stakeholders of Quality AssuranceWith the in-depth development of
: “1. Learning appropriate goals, 2. Scaffoldsthat support both student and teacher learning, 3. Frequent opportunities for formative self-assessment and revision, and 4. Social organizations that promote participation and result in asense of agency” (p. 273). When successfully implemented, PBL is reported to increasestudents’ interest in and motivation for studying content (Blumenfeld et al., 1991) in addition topromoting collaboration with peers, providing experiences in which students engage in authenticdiscipline-specific practice, and offering students latitude to develop their own models andrepresentations of content (Krajcik & Shin, 2014).Given the aforementioned benefits of the open-ended, student-centered nature of PBL, PBL