practicing professionals in industrywhere problems are posed, but solutions are not. The program controls the process withoutimposing solutions by exposing students to proven tools and techniques of effective problemsolving. The solution to these problems require students to be creative and innovate as theyapply knowledge gained from previous courses and experiences. Furthermore, these activitiesextend them beyond course material covered in traditional courses. To accomplish this, severalintegrating experiences in required coursework that are focused on developing student problemsolving skills have been developed. The program qualifies these as integrating experiences asfollows. 1. The activity must involve solving an open ended problem. 2. The
professions because of the gap between real-world scenarios and scale of the dataused within the classrooms. Diverse and non-standard software interfaces to sensors compoundthis problem significantly. Our goal is to document and make available data from a large varietyof real-world sensors to engineering students through the iPhone and iPod Touch. Our projectaddresses this problem by implementing a middleware framework in the application server and aclient on iPhone to facilitate access to sensor data.The primary research questions that this paper will address are: (1) How can sensor data beincorporated into current engineering learning environments effectively? (2) What are theproblems of utilizing large-scale data within the scope of an engineering
, andthen build to scale physical models of them. This project is intended to augment the ways thatstructural engineering is traditionally taught.BackgroundThis project was inspired by work done at Princeton University and other schools in whichphysical models of structures have been used to provide examples of exemplary works ofstructural engineering and to demonstrate engineering principles. At Princeton, for example,models of structures have been used either for museum display or previously built models areused for structural experiments.1 Here we instead sought to examine how a student designingand building a model for loading, experimentation, and display could provide an opportunity fora different type of learning experience.This project was
educational games and simulations. The followingparagraphs briefly review what is known in these areas of inquiry and relate them to simulationexercises in general and our work in particular.Behavioral theory is based on the belief that we learn that certain behaviors are good (or bad)based on the rewards, and/or punishments we receive for repeated actions; in other words desiredbehavior is repeated until it is learned.1 Skinner (1976) suggests that students learn better whenthey are forced to practice certain actions until they reach mastery.2 The behavioral theory oflearning became a key part of the early design of technological teaching aids (includingsimulation) for the military because of the ability to ask the user to repeat tasks multiple
significant studies1,2 concerning senior engineering capstone experiences have beenconducted in North America since the 1990's. The study by Todd et al.1 was conducted in 1995and included a array of 360 responses from engineering departments. There are many interestingfindings in the report, including the small number of programs with interdepartmental seniordesign courses and that a significant number of capstone experiences were individual rather thanteam projects. The authors suggested two “areas of improvement in engineering education,”including and increased practice of teamwork and involving industry in order to give studentspreparation for “real-world engineering practice.” There is little doubt that this study impactedengineering programs to
electricalbehavior of high frequency components. Four parameters were selected to isolate and runsimulations to determine their influence on the resonant frequency: the cross sectional radius,helix radius, helix pitch, and the number of turns. Each parameter was altered and tested bycomparing the increase and decrease of the selected parameter to a control. The control waschosen from the parameters that MIT utilized and then three larger increments and three smallerincrements of the parameter were run comparing each alteration to determine the overall effect ofthe isolated parameter on the resonant frequency. Figure 1 illustrates the simulation setup and thetopology drawn in Ansoft HFSS and the simulated dependence of the resonant frequency of thehelix coil
controlled by a computer for data capturevia the IEEE-488 general purpose interface bus (GPIB) or through Ethernet ports utilizing theVXI-11 protocol.1 This has ushered in an era of remote instrument control for virtual laboratoriesas the World-Wide-Web (WWW) and WWW-capable instruments have become ubiquitous.While web-based remote instrumentation control has been investigated for over a decade, theseenvironments have generally centered on Java server software, PHP Hypertext Processor (PHP)server scripts, or direct control via LabView.1-4 Previous LabView implementations of remoteelectronic measurements require users to download either a ~100 megabyte LabView plug-in ora specific Java Runtime Engine,5 in addition to having a compliant browser.6
residentialdwellings (See Figure 1). Its economic base is primarily from antique retail establishmentslocated within a community Historic District. The surrounding area has seen some growth withsubdivisions being developed to support the Elizabethtown urban area. No centralizedwastewater services exist, and the proliferation of on-site residential units, along with the Page 15.824.3existing base of older installations has limited the expansion of the retail establishments due toreluctance by the Health Department to permit new septic units in the “downtown” area. TheGlendale community lies within…miles of Valley Creek, which is one of the 39 segments listedin
underrepresented populations. She also teaches introductory engineering courses such as Problem Solving and Computer Programming, Statics, and Mechanics. Page 15.679.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Implementing an Inverted Classroom Model in Engineering Statics: Initial Results1. IntroductionThe “Inverted Classroom” is described by Lage et al. as an environment in which “eventsthat have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside theclassroom and vice versa”1. Typically, Inverted instruction requires students to completepreparatory activities and
begins with the development of declarative and procedural knowledge for boththese tools and specific domain knowledge8. As expertise develops a person‟s knowledgedevelops to an efficient level where their ability to fluently use knowledge for routine proceduresis demonstrated. An expert who has learned to use this knowledge adaptively will illustrate theirpotential for generating new ideas7. If we consider the knowledge for both must co-development,and the knowledge develops through a partially linear transition from declarative to strategic (oradaptive), then the Framework in Figure 1 could demonstrate a relationship that illustrates apathway for how students with various knowledge skills can develop their conceptualunderstanding of tools and
materials and new teaching strategies, thesustained support offers multiple opportunities for feedback and discussion as well asopportunities to be actively engaged in creating new knowledge, a model that addressesimportant learning principles5. We held 4 workshops, 1 in June 2007 and 3 in June 2008, andalso provided follow up support (see the Implementing at Diverse Sites section) and case studydevelopment opportunities (see the section entitled Case Studies). We developed materials tosupport wider recruitment efforts for the second year, including a brochure and website to thatprovide a short description of the project and the responsibilities of participants, and anapplication form and process for reviewing applications.A summary of the
textbook problems in which the data required to solve the problem is presentedunambiguously and in its entirety. There is ongoing debate about the effectiveness, orotherwise, of this traditional didactic teaching approach and Hargrove and Dahleh 1 believethat engineering educators must develop more innovative methods for learning in order toreplicate real-world problem solving. Indeed, many practitioners have supplemented theirlectures and tutorials with project-based and problem-based learning activities in an attempt toprovide variety and alternative learning mechanisms for students 2-6. Page 15.441.2The problem with this procedural approach to
-ordinator beforemeeting their teams to ensure a clear understanding of their responsibilities during the semesterincluding the assessment of student performance. The role of the mentors is not to providespecific technical guidance but to advise according to a timetable of activities (Table 1). Adiscussion is held with the module co-ordinator in the second week on developing informationresearch skills in order to find reliable and useful documents for the project. The next few weeksare spent on compiling the relevant information and developing a small number of alternativedesigns. Students must also consider the scale-up of the design for a specific situation, e.g. a graywater treatment system for a typical suburban house.Materials are located and
AC 2010-1879: WRMT CASE STUDY: GIS WITH RULE-BASED EXPERT SYSTEMAndrew Ernest, Western Kentucky UniversityJana Fattic, Western Kentucky UniversityNi-Bin Chang, University of Central FloridaShalini Chitrapu, Western Kentucky UniversityPaige Davenport, Western Kentucky University Page 15.1386.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 WRMT Case Study: GIS with Rule-based Expert System for Optimal Planning of Sensor Network in Drinking Water SystemsAbstractThis paper provides a case study in the application of the concepts of the WaterResource Management Technologies technology transfer concept presented at the2009 conference.The Technology Transfer Model[1
instructionalmodules for use in existing courses.Four core chemical engineering courses are targeted: fluid flow operations, heattransfer operations, mass transfer operations, and chemical reactor design. Overthe three-year CCLI project, activities/modules will be developed andincorporated into each of these courses, with each activity/module focusing on aparticular element from the process intensification spectrum and designed to alsoenhance vertical concept integration. This poster presentation will focus on theactivities and modules developed in Year 1.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe chemical industry faces numerous challenges in the coming years due todecreasing availability of raw material and energy resources. Thus, existingprocesses must operate in an
! ∀ # ∃ ∃%&& ∋ ( # # ∀ ( # ! )!∗! ) ( # ) + ,−.& ! + ∃ /!+∃0 1 2 3 + !2 /3 +! 1 ∃ /4+ ∃1 2 , !+∃04+ ∃ 2 / 1 5 6 7 ∀ 8
• Resource • Environmental Analyst Manager Consultant • Operations • Sustainability Manager Consultant • Project ManagerBased on these job descriptions, a draft of program learning outcomes (PLOs) wasdeveloped. These PLOs were circulated among a group of professionals involved in localsustainability initiatives (http://sustainsd.wordpress.com/) to ensure that the learningoutcomes are consistent with the employer requirements. With their help, the programlearning outcomes were finalized.Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs):Upon completion of the MS program, graduates from sustainability management will beable to:• PLO # 1
insubjects with STEM components (c) promote the interaction between the engineeringfaculty at Gannon University and the K-12 school students through activities whichdeliver critical STEM components.Recently, the ECE department at Gannon University, Erie, PA organized twoEngineering Day events in its system integration laboratory. The laboratoryaccommodated nearly 105 high school students in six hour-long sessions with up to 20students in each session. During each session, the students worked on a traffic signalcontrol circuit. The project activities comprised the following steps (1) complete thedesign of the circuit (2) test the operation of the circuit. Two ECE faculty members andsixteen ECE students currently enrolled in the undergraduate ECE
experience with the world, and views cognitive conflict as astimulus for learning.3 In addition, a social constructivist perspective views the socialinteractions and cultural context in which learning occurs as critical.4 Based on theseperspectives, it is believed that learning is facilitated when students (1) are engaged in solvingreal-world problems, (2) use existing knowledge as a foundation for new knowledge, (3) areimmersed in a community centered classroom culture, and (4) are prompted to usemetacognative skills and strategies.5 The course architecture is designed to match the teachingmodel of Kolb,6,7 and encourage the development of intellectual growth as modeled by Perry, inwhich students’ view of knowledge ascends from dualism, to
. In 1999, as a response to ABET’s EC2000 criterion, a list of specific competencieswas defined in the Chemical Engineering Program at Brigham Young University that, whentaken together, constituted each Program Outcome. When the competencies were firstdeveloped, it became clear that the level of mastery expected from students varied fromcompetency to competency. Exposure to the material was all that was required for somecompetencies. For others, it was our expectation that students should not graduate withoutdemonstrating a specified level of mastery. The expected level of mastery is intimatelyconnected to the types of practices, assessment, and feedback associated with a givencompetency. Consequently, a mastery level of 0, 1, 2, or 3 was
‖ course (ETCE 1121) is an introduction to the basic constructionmethods and operations typically employed on engineering projects. It is listed as a 3-credit hourcourse with two 75-minute lectures each week. Topics include basic construction and civilengineering technology, identification and selection of construction equipment and techniques,and an overview of the components and processes used in construction regarding concrete, steel,and wood-framed structures. Course Learning Objectives are noted in Table 1. Consistent with the Course Learning Objectives noted in Table 2, ―Construction Materials‖(ETCE 1122) is sequentially a follow-on course to ―Construction Methods‖ and studies thehistory, physical properties, behavior, and application of
-reflect upon the process of creating scholarly ideas and communicating them to others intheir field. REACH Activities that support the tenet of Intentionality include monthly REACHseminars. The outcomes of the seminar focus on three main areas: (1) peer mentoring throughdiscussion of daily activities, coursework, research, and other topics, (2) a professionaldevelopment component focused on skill development and strategies that enhance their careerdevelopment, (3) feedback back from REACH PIs on options.Multiple relationships, the second tenet of the REACH Scholars’ multiple apprenticeship model,focuses on student engagement with numerous intellectual mentors. In addition to the student –advisor relationship, central to the graduate education
LaboratoriesIntroductionCapstone courses in which students have an opportunity to practice engineering are an importantaspect of undergraduate engineering curriculum. In the last 20 years, capstone courses have beenintegrated into engineering curricula nationwide in response to ABET accreditation requirementsand feedback from industry.1 In addition to providing students the opportunity to practiceengineering, capstone courses facilitate the development of creative and critical thinking, whichare crucial in the practice of engineering. By design, these courses are the mechanism by whichstudents apply the core concepts that are critical to their discipline to solve an open-endedproblem. This type of activity should enable students to engage in a deeper level of
developed to rate the projects as described below. Ratings were determined from projectdescriptions, reviews of project demonstrations, and project documentation. The six factors usedto rate projects were: 1. The technological readiness level (TRL)11, originally developed by the Department of Defense and NASA to determine how ready a new technology is to be deployed. Nine readiness levels are used to classify technology from proof of basic principles (1) to sustained successful operation in the field (9). 2. A rating of system complexity was developed from general ideas of complexity in natural and manmade systems12, and work in industry that rates system complexity by the number of interconnections between subsystems13
results • Draw conclusions: how well did their model follow the textbook problemProject #1: ASTM Standard Tensile TestIn this project, students tested the basic tensile properties of the prototyped tensile test sample.The tensile samples tested were fabricated exactly according to the ASTM tensile samplerequirements. After fabrication, the samples were tested in a Tinius-Olsen testing machine asshown in Figure (1). Figure (1) ASTM Tensile TestProject #2: Direct Shear TestIn this project, students were asked to fabricate an ASTM Shear Test sample according to thestandard specifications. These samples were then tested by the students using the shear blockmade by Tinius-Olsen. Figure (2) shows the sample after
her presentation.The three ASEE lunch seminars during the fall 2009 semester each met their maximumregistration capacity of approximately 25 participants. The limited size of the lunch meetingsfacilitated interaction between the student participants and the speaker.At the September seminar, Dr. Michael Loui (Department of Electrical and ComputerEngineering, University of Illinois) spoke on the topic “Adventures in Research on EngineeringEducation” (see Figure 1). At the October seminar, Dr. Michael Hirschi (Assistant Dean forUndergraduate Programs, College of Engineering, University of Illinois) challenged studentswith the topic “Engineering Accreditation: What is it, what good is it?” At the December lunchseminar, Dr. Charles L. Tucker III
(Chamberlin & Moon, 2005; Lesh & Lamon, 1992).An MEA is a problem-solving task related to real world situations requiring documentation ofstudents’ thinking and procedures, not only a final product. In other words, it requires the“modeling” process itself as well as a “model” from students. The main characteristics of MEAsare: 1) Client-driven, open-ended, and realistic problems, 2) Designed based on multiple threadsrelated to a realistic context, 3) Address higher-order thinking skills, 4) Products are models andmodeling processes, and 5) Team work oriented (Lesh & Doerr, 2003; Lesh, Doerr, Carmona, &Hjalmarson, 2003; Lesh & Harel, 2003; Lesh & Zawojewski, 2007). Thus MEAs engagestudents in a real disciplinary community
Engineering, FPGA Engineer/ Technologist, FPAA Engineer/ Technologist, Mechanical Engineer/ Technologist Project 1 (2-3): Robotic Sensing, Control, and Communications Project 2 (2-3): Lunar Habitat Sensing, Control, and Communications
configurationquest. Each team consisted of 7 members. Team A consisted of 1 female and 6 male students andteam B consisted of 2 female and 5 male students. The teams worked in separate conferencerooms with seating arrangements as shown below in Figures 1 and 2. Labels S1 to S7 indicatestudents. These seating arrangements ensured students had a direct visual of each other and ashared work space between them. Informed consent was obtained from the students and theresearch team made it clear that the students’ participation was completely voluntary. Thesession was video recorded for later analysis and field notes were taken during the session. S4 S3 S3
attempts: 1) to address the well-publicizedchallenges of educating the current generation of American students with their short attentionspans, expectations of immediate rewards, and limited “hands-on” experience (vs. years of“fingers-on” experience with modern electronic devices), 2) to improve our graduates’professional skills as recommended by practicing engineers, and 3) to implement improvedpedagogical techniques via an overriding “design as knowledge” teaching philosophy1 that willteach through an emphasis on model-based design and product realization in a Student-drivenPedagogy of Integrated, Reinforced, Active Learning (SPIRAL) approach. That approach appliesBruner’s concept2 of a “‘spiral curriculum’ that turns back on itself at higher