) providing energy for the future, (2) restoring andimproving urban infrastructure, (3) improving the environment, (4) improving healthcare, (5)improving education through personalized learning, and (6) securing personal and organizationalinformation more so than when they began the course (tables 3 and 4). However, significantdifferences between time points were not observed given our small sample size. Tables 1 and 2are broken up by gender to show the comparison of men and women’s interest in topics withinaerospace, while tables 3 and 4 reflect the knowledge all students of both genders felt they hadbefore and after the class.Table 1: Women’s reported interest in application of aerospace engineering at Time 1. Note: N=3 Provide en
informed videos, as well as comparingevaluations between evaluator categories. Faculty were generally of the opinion that studentwork that included TRAC input performed worse in the Analysis category (p<0.05). Graduatestudent evaluators agreed that the TRAC-informed videos were of a higher quality in thecommunication and visual aid categories (p<0.05), which may reflect a generational gap in theexpectations of audio-visual content. Faculty evaluations also exhibit a wider spread than that ofthe graduate student evaluations. A general trend (although not statistically significant, p>0.1)can be seen with faculty evaluations decreasing with higher Bloom’s Achievement levels. This issomewhat expected, as faculty are frequently subject to
of Danish and American students. This understanding fact made the first contacts very formal and reflected by writing long, very formal e-mails. This turned out to have a negative effect on the efficiency of communication and project progress. It should later turn out, that this assumption of having to stay formal was false and the visit of DTU students at PURDUE changed totally the students’ assumptions of cultural differences between the teams. As the project progressed, the cultural differences did seem to merge into a “universal culture”, with the aim of succeeding with the
to learn more about ground level air quality 4.32 ±0.77 This demo activity was a good use of class time 4.71 ±0.57 I benefited from this demo activity 4.57 ±0.66The remaining two questions asked students their perspective on the impact and quality of thedemonstration. Students provided ranked responses, No Impact (1) to High Impact (5), to thequestion on “What impact has this activity had on your understanding of inversion in theatmosphere,” resulting with an average and standard deviation of 4.23±0.75. Six of the 31 studentsdid respond “Neutral (3)” for this question, reflecting that they were not influenced in eitherdirection. For the
projects was also unable to provide the necessary time andfocus.Therefore at the end of academic year 2015, to better manage these increasingly large and diverseprojects, the discipline-specific course directors proposed several changes that resulted in theformation of XE401/402 from CS, EE, and IT 401/402. The development of the XE401/402sequence included several changes, including development of a hybrid “agile-waterfall” designprocess, a focus on reflection within the design process, and these faculty and stakeholder roles.This paper focuses on the implementation of the roles.Faculty model influences role assignmentThe faculty model at West Point includes a relatively large proportion of transient members.Approximately half our faculty consists
required for reproducible measurements,some students expressed frustration about the amount physical labor required to collect enoughwater to pump through the wetland, as well as the time required to measure water quality tests intriplicate on top of operating a wetland with a six to twelve hour retention time. The students whowere working solo on the project wished that they had a teammate to help with the physical laborand/or the measuring of the many water samples. They also reflected that a teammate would havebeen helpful when making decisions by acting as a sounding board. Students also wished for moredocumentation on procedures and practices.The summer students suggested that the extra programs such as journal club or university
methodologies. Upon further investigation, it also became clear that ourtenure and promotion guidelines varied significantly from one academic unit to another; somevaluing the quantity of work at the expense of quality, and others valuing grants received overthe impact of the scholarship. This structural variability was reflected also by the thoughtvariance among our senior leadership. The consequence was friction, misinformation, andfrustration at many levels of the university. In response, we read and then discussed ErnestBoyer’s model of scholarship [5]—the scholarships of discovery, application, integration, andteaching—with each group (i.e. organizational “top” and organizational “bottom”) individually.Outcomes to date include more open
Belonged More in this Whole Engineering Group:’ Achieving Individual Diversity,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 103–115, 2007.[5] D. M. Masters, A. S., & McNair, L. D., & Riley, “Identifying Practices of Inclusion in Maker and Hacker Spaces with Diverse Participation,” in 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.[6] V. Wilczynski, “Academic Maker Spaces and Engineering Design,” in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2015.[7] J. Walther, N. Sochacka, and N. Kellam, “Quality in interpretive engineering education research: Reflections on an example study,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 102, no. 4, pp. 626–659, 2013.[8] N. Kellam and A. Cirell, “Quality Considerations in Qualitative Inquiry
workas a reflection of themselves. For example, Wynita, a third-year robotics engineering student,described how the makerspace allows her to create. In the makerspace environment, I don’t feel like I’m being pushed to do something. I’m working on this. I’m going to do it my way. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. This is going to be me. This is going to be my own work.It appeared that more time in the makerspace for these participants to create their own projectsfostered more autonomy and confidence. The makerspace also represented an environmentwhere there was some flexibility for trial and error. Although Winnie noted that female makers,including herself, felt self-imposed pressure to maintain perfection, she also acknowledged
around, battling robots), without a human-centeredresearch narrative to show engineers serving humanity [6-11]. By integrating the open endedhuman-centered story, a wider diversity of students can be engaged about how engineers can usetheir skills to create items to help society. A second major outcome/deliverable are studentscreating fully documented engineering design reports covering background research, human-centered design, societal needs, technical specifications of their design, costs analysis, solidmodel drawings, and reflection on their functional prototypes. The third majoroutcome/deliverable is students have to give a 15 minute presentation on their final functionalprototype, with all students in the team contributing in the
reflects both the traditionalmechanism analysis and synthesis methods together with the best industry practices, e.g.,Rockwell Automation, Procter & Gamble. The mechatronic mechanism design process was implemented, and a slider crank wasbuilt to accomplish a prescribed task. This process was used in Mechanical Engineering SeniorCapstone Design during the fall 2018 semester. Seven design teams, with four students in eachteam, created four-bar mechanism applications using this mechatronic process, first creating aMatLab Simulink virtual prototype of the complete system, and then building a workingprototype with LabVIEW and the NI myRIO. The 7 four-bar mechanisms were: robot gripper,quick return, pick and place, windshield wiper, landing
Explanation Essays and Analysis (3 weeks) The third essay written by the student reflects student’s selection and causal explanationof a pattern in a brief essay. After that, the essays are being divided in groups of ten anddistributed to students.Comprehensive Moon Phases Assessment - Revised (CMPA-R) The Comprehensive Moon Phases Assessment - Revised (CMPA-R) post assessmentincludes 31 questions with a multiple-choice format, available free for students in the project. Itis an online assessment that takes up around 30 minutes to be completed. It can be takenoptionally, but it is suggested for teachers to take both pre- and post-test. Also, students areadvised to take the pretest so that teachers can see their weak areas and progress
significant misconceptions as reflected by the observation that only 37% of the studentscorrectly categorized the relevant keywords. Although not as pronounced, students also seem tostruggle with micro-scale structure concepts with only 50% of the students correctly categorizingthe relevant keywords.(a) (b)(c) (d)(e) (f)Figure 5. Analyses of student responses to the solid mechanics related keywords questions.Since the second given question had multiple correct answers, the students’ answers showed theirin-depth understanding and the connection between mechanics, materials, and processing. Allstudents who participated
and organize focus group interviews withunderrepresented students conducting undergraduate research in general. The objective is to assessthe process of attaining their research position. In this regard, focus group interviews will beutilized to facilitate collective reflection and dialogue by providing students opportunities toopenly discuss their learning experiences with fellow peers.Resultantly, Phase 3 of this long-term project involves developing communication channels withfaculty in the school of engineering who have underrepresented minorities conducting researchunder their supervision in order to assist each other in identifying and recruiting more students.REFERENCES[1] Russell, S. H. (2006). Evaluation of NSF support for
International Conference on Web and Open Access to Learning (ICWOAL), 2014.[3] E. D. Lindsay and J. R. Morgan, “Passing our students while we fail upwards: Reflections on the inaugural year of CSU Engineering,” in 45th Annual SEFI Conference, Terceira, Portugal, 2017.[4] J. R. Morgan, E. D. Lindsay and K. Sevilla, “A "MetroGnome" as a tool for supporting self- directed learning,” in 2017 Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference, Sydney, Australia, 2017.[5] M. van den Bogaard, C. Howlin, E. Lindsay and J. Morgan, “Patterns Of Student's Curriculum Engagement In An On-demand Online Curriculum,” in 46th SEFI Conference, Copenhagen, 2018.
severaldays, the power generation curve from the solar panels under smoggy conditions remained“smooth”.Table 7 lists the peak and average power output for each converter type, as well as the total dailyenergy generated under smoggy conditions. From the data, it is evident that the smog diddecrease the power generated from the solar panels but not to the same extent as that of shadingthe panels. This is because even with the smog, diffuse and reflected irradiance were able toreach the solar panels. Table 7: Power and energy output with smoggy conditions Converter Weather Avg. temp (°C) Peak power (W) Avg. power (W) Total energy (J) AP Systems Smog 17 2083 1127
the EPA pollutionprevention website [6].The delivery of P2 and E3 engineering extension services has made adoption of manyoperational aspects of the program achievable for businesses of varied size. These programs helpincrease awareness of the local environment and help businesses understand how running a moreenvironmentally sustainable business can save them money. Through the programs offered byENMRN, businesses have become more open to adopting other Best Practices (e.g. Lean), andalso serve as strong referral to their peers, reflecting the grassroots impact these programs canhave on the environment.P2 and E3 programENMRN is focused on assisting small and medium-sized businesses to adopt operationalprocesses that are both economical and
solving problems that do not requirelibrary use [2]. Even though most colleges require humanities and language arts courses forundergraduates in science and engineering programs, these students typically seek helpdifferently than those in liberal arts majors. They typically don’t use the library beyond itstraditional purpose of a place to study. They may be unaware of library services and resourcesand are not known to ask for help in using library resources or completing research assignments[2]. Their confidence and competence in being technologically savvy makes them morereluctant to fully utilize library services [3].Carroll, et. al. [4] hypothesized that engineering and science students low usage of the librarydoesn’t reflect on their lack of
. Over the course of this semester, the fellowwill participate in activities that prepare him or her for teaching the following semester, such asmeeting regularly with the teaching mentor, completing structured reflections on theobservations, developing course materials (homework assignments or exams), grading, orholding office hours, etc. In the second semester, the fellow teaches or co-teaches anundergraduate course, taking on significant instructional responsibility for the course. A formalobservation and critique of the fellow’s teaching by the teaching mentor and a PFMF peer isrequired.3) Evidence-Based Professional Development3A. Core Competency ModelThe PFMF program incorporates a professional development model built on core competencies
the video lectures wererecorded in the media lab at the University’s Center for Teaching and Learning and were uploadedto the Panopto platform. The links to the videos were then posted on the class website.At the end of each experimental module in ECE-1212 and regardless of the teaching style used,each group was asked to share their design and performance analysis. All responses were collectedin one shared document such that each team could view other teams’ designs and results. I thenled a reflective debriefing class session to highlight the differences between the different designs,the discrepancies between results, and the factors that may have affected circuit behavior.ECE-1563 Given the feedback from ECE-1212 on the flipped classroom, I
infacilitating communication between stakeholders and for helping to achieve many importantgoals of the project. These personnel include Mr. Daniel Sullivan, the STEM-NSF Grant ProjectManager, Ms. Elaine Young, the NSF Grant Coordinator, Ms. Eileen Swiatkowski, SeniorGrants Specialist, and Ms. Kathryn Strang, Director of Compliance, Assessment and Research.The authors also wish to gratefully acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation(NSF), through the Division of Undergraduate Education DUE), which made this effort possibleunder DUE-1601487. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.The authors
supported by the faculty as a good learning experiencein Intellectual Property management. The fact that this activity was initiated by the students reflects thesense of ownership developed by the students and their confidence in the long-term value of the design. 12The overall student experience was very positive with all participants recommending the introduction ofsuch projects in the regular instruction process. Students gained not only the skills, but the appreciationfor the skills needed to work together in a group to succeed in a project that encompassed manydisciplines. Student comment: “I believe projects such as this should be run
Conference, June 14, 2014,Indianapolis, IN, USA. 3. Next Generation Science Standards, http://www.nextgenscience.org/implementation, accessed on 12/10/2014. 4. F. C. Berry, P. S. DiPiazza and S. L. Sauer, “The future of electrical and computer engineering education," IEEETransaction on Education, Vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 467-476, 2003. 5. G. Gross, G.T. Heydt, P. Sauer P. and V. Vittal, “Some reflections on the status and trends in power engineeringeducation, IERE Workshop: The next generation of power engineers and researchers”, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,10 Oct. 2003. 6. G. Joós, “Training Future Power Engineers”, IEEE Power and Energy, Jan./Feb. 2005, pp 38-47. 7. D. Ray, and F. Wayno, “Collaboration to Facilitate Research and Education in a
learning and oftenchange their approach to studying for the class. Continued frequent exams let the student knowif the changes to their study habits are working or not. Since they are guided in ‘best practices’,the later exams often show a marked improvement, reinforcing the value of structured practiceand learning.The second step is grading appeals. Rather than providing a detailed breakdown of a student’serrors, minimal marking is used. Students are graded on the 0% or 100% scale. They mustreview their work (with the help of detailed solutions), identify their errors, identify the type oferror (conceptual or minor), and in the case of minor errors, rework the problem to obtain the80% credit on the rubric. This structured reflection allows
was supported with funding from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authorsand do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] Arendale, D. (1997). SI (SI): Review of research concerning the effectiveness of SI from theUniversity of Missouri-Kansas City and other institutions from across the United States.[2] Dawson, P., van der Meer, J., Skalicky, J., & Cowley, K. (2014). “On the effectiveness of SI: Asystematic review of SI and peer-assisted study sessions literature between 2001 and 2010” Review ofEducational Research, 84 (4), 609–639.[3] Scott Steinbrink, Karinna M. Vernaza, Barry J. Brinkman
was above 4.0/5.0 across all topics in both manufacturingexcellence session and manufacturing quality excellence session [25]. That being said, averagescore for the non-destructive evaluation (NDE) module in Manufacturing Quality Excellencesession was slightly lower (approximately 3.75/5.0) than those for other modules. The lowerscore for NDE could be explained due to the larger amount and more technical nature of thelearning materials as reflected in the participant’s open-ended comments. In overall, the higherthan target (3.5/5.0) course evaluation scores demonstrated that the professional developmentsessions were able to meet course objectives in terms of renewing/enhancing participants’ HVMskills set.5. ConclusionsThe National Science
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology under GrantNo.1001814551. Any opinions, findings or conclusions expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Transportation.The authors are greatly thankful to the students who participated in this study.References[1] Federal Highway Administration. (2009). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (Issue May).[2] National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse. (2017). 2017 National Work Zone Fatal Crashes and Fatalities. Retrieved from https://www.workzonesafety.org/crash- information/work-zone-fatal-crashes-fatalities/#national[3] Brame, C., (2007). Active learning
specific system. Cache simulation tools provide support for diverse configurations ofthe system and help to capture the real world scenarios to ensure that the system performs at anoptimal level.We surveyed cache simulation studies to better understand the needs for cache simulation. Then,we designed numerous scenarios using different cache configuration and sizes to reflect thescalability. Keeping the focus on achieving maximum performance, cache associativity is alsoobserved and extensively studied to verify the gains in performance were made possible. Varioustypes of cache associativity were examined and their benefits and limitations are summarized. Wealso studies that the relationship between cache associativity and cache coherency. One
2019 Class 6 5 4Mean 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Questions #1 to #10Figure 7: Student Responses Comparison between 2018 Class and 2019 ClassAssessment Results:Based on the survey results presented in Table 7 and Figure 7, we have made a few keyobservations: Most students felt that the course project was a valuable experience. Majority concurred that the course project helped their understanding of the RC circuit responses and the 555 timer. However, a few students from the 2019 class noted that they would hope to have more lecture time to cover the 555 timer functionalities, as reflected
steps to address it by improving thesyllabus of their existing courses and adding new courses to their curriculum. In the currentpaper, author recommended introduction to the concept and calculations of four ECMs inEngineering Thermodynamics course. In addition, the author provided a step-by-step proceduremanual for a field trip to the university central utility plant, which is available in manyuniversities across the U.S. A paper-based SET survey was conducted to capture students’attitude regarding self-efficacy using a Likert-type scale from 1 to 5. Based on the SEToutcomes, “My overall knowledge of the subject matter has increased” received a 4.27 out of 5which reflects the effectiveness of the implemented teaching methods discussed