- tional Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Huston, Texas Nov.13-19, 2015 • Butler, P. B., Tanbour, E., Rahman, S., and Smith, T. F., ”Virtual International Design Teams,” Proceedings of 2002 ASEE Midwest Section Meeting, Madison, WI, September 2002 Significant Other Publications • M. F. Alzoubi, E. Y. Tanbour and R. Al-Waked (2011), Compression and Hysteresis Curves of Nonlin- ear Polyurethane Foams under Different Densities, Strain Rates and Different Environmental Conditions, IMECE11 2011, Denver, Colorado, USA • E. Y. Tanbour (2011), Institutional Effectiveness, the Point Of View of Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), King Saud University, Feb 2011 • Emad Y. Tanbour, Rafat Al-Waked and
, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/01/29/ky-computer-code-as-foreign-language/22529629/10. Victor, B. (2012). Learnable Programming. Retrieved March, 7, 2014, from http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming11. Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.12. Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.13. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.14. Krashen, S. D. & Terrell, T. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. London: Prentice Hall Europe.15. Williams, J. (1999). Memory, Attention and Inductive Learning
localdevelopment: the contribution of engineers without borders from Italy and Colombia: towardsthe improvement of water quality in vulnerable communities. Systemic Practice and ActionResearch, 24(1), 45-66.Richards, L. G., & Gorman, M. E. (2004). Using case studies to teach engineering design andethics. In CD) Proceedings, 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Conference (Vol.52).Richards, J., Elby, A., Gupta, A. (2014) Characterizing a New Dimension of Change inAttending and Responding to the Substance of Student Thinking. In Polman, J. L., Kyza, E. A.,O’Neill, D. K., Tabak, I., Penuel, W. R., Jurow, A. S., O’Connor, K., Lee, T., and D’Amico, L.(Eds.). (2014). Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the
, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.Dörner, R., Göbel, S., Effelsberg, W., & Wiemeyer, J. (Eds.). (2016). Serious games: Foundations, concepts and practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40612-1Evans, J. S. B. (2009). How many dual-process theories do we need? One, two, or many?.Evans, J. S. B. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(10), 454-459.Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Hamari, J. ; Koivisto, J. ; Sarsa, H. (2014). Does Gamification Work? -- A Literature Review of
advice,feedback, and guidance on the issues teams faced in pursuing a path to commercialization.Course Evaluation and Feedback. Assessment of learning outcomes, course dynamics, andeffectiveness was achieved through anonymous pre- and post-course surveys of participants(Table 2). The survey included three short answer questions to determine role on the team, area(s)of expertise, and intention/history of attendance. Following the role identification questions wereten questions aimed at ranking knowledge gained from the course. Then, following the sameranking format, five questions aimed to determine participant enthusiasm over aspects of thecourse, such as excitement to network or to hear other teams present. The survey concluded witha final
tocommunicate with the Arduino is extremely easy to install because it is an Add On inMATLAB®. The code to set up the input and output channels is simpler to understand sostudents would hopefully not be frustrated by a bunch of pre-written code that seemedmysterious. The wiring would be simpler since students would not have to use a screwdriver tosecure wires into a terminal. The Arduino is significantly cheaper than the myDAQ so it wouldbe possible to purchase additional units, allowing students to work in groups of two rather thanthree.Bibliography1. M. J. Prince, “Does active learning work? A review of the research,” Journal of Engineering Education, 93: 223–231, 2004.2. S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt
, business opportunities and future directions; integrated 3Dscanning and 3D printing lab experiments.Textbook:Ian Gibson, David, W. Rosen, and Brent Stucker: Additive ManufacturingTechnologies: 3D Printing, Rapid Prototyping and Direct Digital Manufacturing, SecondEdition, Springer, 20151.Reference Book:C. K. Chua, K, F. Leong, and C. S. Lim, “Rapid Prototyping: Principles andApplications”, Third Edition, World Scientific, 20102.The contents of this course include recent advances in the Additive Manufacturing (AM)technologies that specializes in rapid prototyping of three-dimensional objects:Photopolymerization processes (Stereolithography (SL) Technology); Powder bed fusionprocesses (Selective Laser Sintering – SLS, Electron Beam Melting
environment where the size of theprogram requires dedicated staff to manage it. Software tools may be nice to have for SoftwareEngineering projects but are not as “must-have” as supplies and equipment for UTDesignprojects are. .The two senior design programs raises some interesting questions that will have to be dealt with.Among them is academic credit for major degree requirements through properly structuredinternships with some faculty involvement (other universities have already done so, e.g. [9]).References:1. Wong, W.E., “Industry Involvement in an Undergraduate Software Engineering Project Course: Everybody Wins”, Proc. of the 2013 ASEE Annual Conference (2013).2. S. Howe, L. Rosenbauer, S. Poulos, “2015 Capstone Design Survey: Initial
facilitate ongoing research on retention. Ms. Bego is a registered professional mechanical engineer in New York State.Dr. Patricia A. Ralston, University of Louisville Dr. Patricia A. S. Ralston is Professor and Chair of the Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the University of Louisville. She received her B.S., MEng, and PhD degrees in chemical engineering from the University of Louisville. Dr. Ralston teaches undergraduate engineering mathematics and is currently involved in educational research on the effective use of technology in engineering education, the incorpo- ration of critical thinking in undergraduate engineering education, and retention of engineering students. She leads a research group whose
research 1. Its questions are tailored to identify students’ implicit assumptions in aspecific field and may be applied both pre- and post-instruction. There is no currently existing CIfor networking and telecommunications. Our initial results seem to suggest that the developmentof a CI for this field would be very useful. However, we would like this CI to be applicable to adiverse set of students, with respect to both their culture and their educational level(undergraduate and graduate). At the moment, the development of such a CI is still in an earlystage.In summary, this study expands the breadth of knowledge on student preconceptions in STEMby including the subject of QoS in telecommunications, identifying some of thepreconception(s
; Defense 0.21 0.00 & 0.05 & 0.99 0.27 9.82 3.78 0.37 0.34 Busines 0.02 & 0.00 & s studies 0.15 0.59 0.44 7.82 0.10 0.65 0.51 0.6 0.00 & Arts 0.02 0.00 & 0.01 & 0.1 0.10 0.99 0.11 0.19 0.16 0.0 & 0.1 0.0 & 0.1 Table 5: Choices of areas based on academic performance (CGPA) Area N CGPA Mean CGPA Std Deviation Arts
sword," Current directions in psychological science, vol. 7, pp. 67-72, 1998.[3] R. Moreno, "Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia," Instructional science, vol. 32, pp. 99-113, 2004.[4] E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham, "Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel," Psychological science, vol. 1, pp. 240-246, 1990.[5] S. H. Song and J. M. Keller, "Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation," Educational technology research and development, vol. 49, pp. 5-22, 2001.[6] S. J. Ashford, R. Blatt, and D. V. Walle, "Reflections on the
Training in Optics and Photonics, 2009.[8] J. D. Wheadon and N. Duval-Couetil, “Analyzing the expected learning outcomes of entrepreneurship business plan development activities using Bloom’s taxonomy,” in Proceedings of the ASEE 2013 Conference, 2013.[9] R. L. Pimmel, “Student learning of criterion 3 (a)-(k) outcomes with short instructional modules and the relationship to Bloom’s taxonomy,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 351–359, 2003.[10] W. Hussain, M. F. Addas, and F. Mak, “Quality improvement with automated engineering program evaluations using performance indicators based on Bloom’s 3 domains,” in 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2016, pp. 1–9.[11] S. M. Brookhart and
Arkansas. She received her Ph.D, M.S., and B.S. in civil engineering from Texas A&M University. Her research interests include geotechnical engineering, and the use of 3d printed models to aid learning in K-12 and college classrooms.Dr. Jyotishka Datta, University of Arkansas Jyotishka Datta is an Assistant Professor of Statistics at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville since August 2016. He was an NSF postdoctoral fellow at Duke University and Statistical and Applied Math- ematical Sciences Institute (SAMSI) working with Dr. David B. Dunson (Statistical Science) and Dr. Sandeep S. Dave (School of Medicine). He received my Ph.D. in Statistics from Purdue University in 2014 under the guidance of Prof
] Darwish, H., & Van Dyk, L. (2016). The Industrial Engineering Identity: From Historic Skills to Modern Values, Duties, and Roles. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 27(3), 50-63. [2] Ozis, F., Pektas, A. O., Akca, M., & DeVoss, D. A. (2017). How to Shape Attitudes Towards STEM Careers: The Search for the Most Impactful Extracurricular Clubs (RTP). Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Columbus, OH. [3] Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing Engineering Education in P‐12 Classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387. [4] Carr, R. L., Bennett, L. D., & Strobel, J. (2012). Engineering in the K
student t-test does not indicate the reason(s) the alternativehypothesis must be accepted. It must be admitted, there could have been other factors involvedthan the present study reveals.Individual SuccessesMcGuire [1] reported several individual success stories. These stories highlight students whohad not learned how to study and learn until metacognition was introduced to them. Then, whenthese students understood how to succeed, they did so, sometimes spectacularly. Similar storieswere searched for in the present study.Criteria for defining success is subjective. For this section, a “success story” was defined as astudent earning a failing score on the first exam (before the lectures on metacognition) butearning a satisfactory (C or better
processing algorithmsand SDR waveforms required to perform Cognitive Radio (CR) experiments in real time. Inaddition to the 24 racks connected to USRP2’s, the testbed employs four racks dedicated tonetwork management and administration. An image server provides automated re-imagingcapabilities, a firewall, and a LDAP server provides security/authentication. A dedicated NFSserver is employed at the user plane in order to provide researchers a private directory to storescripts, programs, and test results. Many of the experiments and demos that have been producedthus far have exploited the remote capabilities of this COgnitive Radio NETwork (CORNET) [3]testbed, by employing custom web interfaces, and many of the administrative tasks can now beperformed
m-POGIL-based laboratory is tomove away from the more “cookbook” structured lab, where students are typically told stepwisewhat to do in order to collect certain data and to conclude the experimental work. Then, studentsperform the lab experiment within the groups by desirable criteria for the m-POGIL lab-activity.The key desirable criteria for the m-POGIL lab activity are: 1. Making agreements, roles, and responsibilities, as a team-contract, for the teamwork. 2. Requiring generating experimental goal(s) and producing the outcomes. 3. Promoting active decision-making within the group. 4. Evaluating the individual and group performance. 5. Encouraging students to develop questions/or problems for further
,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 74–100, 2015.[2] G. R. Pike and T. S. Killian, “Reported gains in student learning: Do academic disciplines make a difference?,” Research in Higher Education, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 429–454, 2001.[3] P. R. Pintrich, D. A. F. Smith, T. Garcia, and W. J. McKeachie, “Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ),” Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 801–813, Sep. 1993.[4] T. T. York, C. Gibson, and S. Rankin, “Defining and measuring academic success,” Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, vol. 20, no. 5, p. 2, 2015.[5] P. R. Pintrich, R. W. Marx, and R. A. Boyle, “Beyond Cold Conceptual Change
. For this reason, we argue that theELCOT can serve an important role in helping the field of Engineering Education take “a morenuanced approach to active learning” (Streveler & Menekse, 2017, p. 189). ReferencesFreeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415.Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.Resnick, L. B. (1999, June 16). Making America smarter. Education Week Century
improve the model, plans are in process to provide additional instructionand support specifically for PMs as a separate cohort. Additional evening class meetings areplanned just for the student PMs. Local alumni, whose primary job is project management, arebeing sought to serve as resources and mentors, and offer first-hand examples of effectivemanagement tools and techniques. A follow-up survey is planned after the changes have beenfully implemented.References1. Watkins, G., “Best Practices for Faculty Mentorship of Capstone Design Projects, Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia2. Howe, S., Poulos, S., & Rosenbauer, L., The 2015 Capstone Design Survey: Observations from the Front Lines, Proceedings
III and M. A. McDaniel, Make It Stick, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2014.[7] B. S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, New York: Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd, 1956.[8] M. Hill, M. Sharma and H. Johnston, "How online learning modules can improve the representational fluency and conceptual understanding of university physics students," European Journal of Physics, vol. 36, no. 4, p. 045019, 2015.[9] J. C. Moore, "Efficacy of Multimedia Learning Modules as Preparation for Lecture-Based Tutorials in Electromagnetism," Education Sciences, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 23, 2018.[10] D. S. Goodman, F. J. Rueckert and J. O'Brien, "Initial Steps Toward a study on the
student use of the free-body diagram representation on their performance,” Edu. Research, vol. 1 (10), pp 505-511, 2010.[4] D. Rosengrant, A. Van Heuvelen, and E. Etkina, “Do students use and understand free-body diagrams?,” Phys. Review. Special Topics - Physics Education Research, vol. 5(1), 13p, 2009.[5] D. Rosengrant, A. Van Heuvelen, and E. Etkina, “Free-Body Diagrams: Necessary or Sufficient?,” in 2004 Physics Education Research Conference, Sacramento, California, August 4-5, J. Marx, P. Heron, S. Franklin, Eds. American Institute of Physics, 2005, pp 177-180.[6] P. Kohl, D. Rosengrant, and N. Finkelstein, “Strongly and weakly directed approaches to teaching multiple representation use
cases, faculty workingin the incubator become overloaded in their roles and reprioritize their commitments, causing them totemporarily or permanently abandon their SOTL projects. In these situations, we are often tempted topick up where the faculty member(s) left off and continue developing the grant proposal or publication.However, doing so would conflict with one of Meadows’ principles: Go for the good of the whole.Continuing to advance the project in absence of the faculty member(s) takes away from time we couldbe spending to help other faculty members develop, ultimately detracting from our efforts as a whole.Accordingly, we have developed skills in self-reflection to recognize when our interests conflict withthose of faculty, and in self
are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authorsacknowledge the students that participated in this effort and their work in termsof example images and data they provided for this paper. This material was included with thewritten permission of the students. Table I. Comparison of Fall 2017 and Fall 2018 student self-perceptions of learning as related to learning objectives (mean values are shown). Differential results are shown as mean (stdev). 2017 2017 2018 2018 Pre- Post- 2017 Pre- Post- 2018 Learning Objective
molecule, or a feedstock formany useful products. Molecular Synthesis of Plant-based Chemicals is a significantly moresustainable means to produce pharmaceuticals, industrial molecules, but there is a need to educateand train young minds in the methods, practices, and processes of MSPC. Clary sage, Salviasclarea, is an MSPC success story and a cautionary tale of the need to be aware of scientific trends.Clary sage oil contains the diterpene sclareol that is used to produce ambroxide that is areplacement for ambergris, an expensive and rare perfume ingredient. Around 120 family farms inNorth Carolina depend on Clary sage production, a success story that can be traced back toattempts to commercialize its production in the 1950’s in Washington state
78.69 7.80 3 12 81.25 14.44 8 70.25 17.87 7 82.43 12.71 10 80.50 11.36 16 79.13 14.96 4 13 85.54 3.93 10 75.80 12.02 9 78.00 15.12 11 79.36 6.69 16 82.94 7.39 5 13 77.00 10.72 10 71.70 13.03 8 78.88 10.30 10 79.70 9.07 16 78.94 8.31 6 13 78.00 12.39 9 75.11 6.97 8 71.13 18.05 8 73.75 12.45 13 77.92 12.72 Avg 80.53 10.77 74.48 11.38 77.44 12.87 76.93 10.55 78.75 10.50Notice in the following figure the scores for the lab reports were clustered in the band from 60 tothe upper 90’s
). Students use knowledge of MATLAB taught in the lectureportion of the course to design a game. Students choose one or more games from a provided listto design or invent their own. Each game carried a point value and students could exceed thepoint requirements for extra credit. Students then conducted two user interviews to determinerequirements for the game and created a team working agreement. Before coding began, studentscreated a flowchart, algorithm, or pseudocode draft. Students then coded their chosen game(s).Additionally, students created a project notebook including a project schedule, business plan,advertisement, and project pitch video. Software documentation was also prepared including auser manual. Students were given multiple class
level of learningin the field of electrical circuits and digital electronics and to develop essential employability skills.By giving students more opportunities to improve their employability skills, they will be betterprepared to enter the competitive work force and to compete with graduates from other prestigiousuniversities. AcknowledgementsThis paper was supported by a 4Pi Teaching Incentive proposal in the “Flipping Your Classroom"category, at Farmingdale State College, 2017.References1. Zappe S. , Leicht R. , Messner J., “Flipping the Classroom to Explore Active Learning in a Large UndergraduateCourse, ” Proceedings of the national ASSE Conference, Austin, Texas, 2009.2. Warter-Perez N., Dong J
Education Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, 2006.[3] E.T. Pascarella,, P.T. Terenzini, (Eds.). (2005). How College Affects Student: Volume 2 A Third Decade ofResearch: Volume 2 A Third Decade of Research.[4] D. Merino, “A Proposed Engineering Management Body of Knowledge (Embok)” Proceedings of the AmericanSociety of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Chicago, IL 2006.[5] S. Murray, and S. Raper, “Encouraging Lifelong Learning For Engineering Management Undergraduates.Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2007.[6] W. Davis, K. Bower, R. Welch, D. Furman, “Developing and Assessing Student’s Principled Leadership Skills:to achieve the Vision for Civil Engineers in 2025,” Proceedings of