) Benchmark: Sentence(s) Answer Sankey Diagram 2 Final Exam: Multiple Choice & Sentences Answer 3 Policy Goals and Impacts Sentence(s) Answer (Sustainability Analysis) Earth-Sun Interaction Sentence(s) Answer 33.2. Final exams: energy-sun interactionAnother method used to assess the learning outcomes of the Energy Systems & Sustainabilitycourse and to help determine student
, VOP.Introduction“Customer experience is critically important; it is broken, and fixing it can be veryprofitable. Corporations removed major quality defects in the 80’s, re-engineered businessprocesses in the 90’s, and now it’s time to take on the next big challenge for corporateAmerica: Customer Experience”1.Six sigma has garnered recognition in the manufacturing sector, its applications in theservice industry are not yet well documented2, the nature of services and the wayscustomers tend to evaluate service quality face important challenges for six sigma3, due toservice quality is a function4 of differing customer perceptions over time5.Service Quality can be defined from two perspectives: operational is the operation’sassessment of how well the service
campusDr. Patrick Cunningham, Rose-Hulman Institute of TechnologyDr. Douglas Karl Faust, Seattle Central College PhD in Physics, professor of Mathematics, physics, astronomy and computer science.Dr. Trevor Scott Harding, California Polytechnic State University Dr. Trevor S. Harding is Professor of Materials Engineering at California Polytechnic State University where he teaches courses in materials design, biomedical materials, and life cycle analysis. He has pre- sented his research on engineering ethics to several universities and to the American Bar Association. He Page 26.1323.1 serves as Associate Editor of
Paper ID #12057Reflections on Experiences of a Successful STEM Scholarship Program forUnderrepresented GroupsDr. Sedig Salem Agili, Pennsylvania State University, Harrisburg Sedig S. Agili received his BS, MS, and Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Marquette University in 1986, 1989, and 1996, respectively. Currently he is a Professor of Electrical Engineer- ing teaching and conducting research in signal integrity of high-speed electrical interconnects, electronic communications, and fiber optic communications. He has authored numerous research articles which have been published in reputable peer refereed
and then discusswhy the correct response is correct and the distractors (incorrect responses) are not. 16iv. Minute Papers, Direct Paraphrasing, Application Cards, and Lecture SummariesThese are examples of individual approaches. In minute papers or clearest/muddiest point, theinstructor should stop two minutes before the class period ends and ask students to write mainpoint(s) of the lecture and the “muddiest” or least clear point(s). Collect the papers and useresponses to plan the next lecture. In direct paraphrasing, the students should write a definitionin their own words. In application cards, students should provide a specific real-worldapplication for the topic covered in class; and finally in lecture summaries, students shouldwrite
), Engineering (E), Mathematics (M), and Science (S). Currently, Dr. Kappers is the fulltime Direc- tor of the Rothwell Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence Worldwide Campus (CTLE – W) for Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. In addition, she holds Adjunct Assistant Professor status in the College of Arts and Sciences, Worldwide Campus, teaching RSCH 202 – Introduction to Research, and in the College of Engineering, Daytona Beach Campus, teaching CS120 – Introduction to Computing in Aviation. Both positions allow her to stay focused upon real-life educational and classroom issues while designing training that explores technology utilization that is based upon structured learning prin- ciples and practices. She is an
(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. Page 26.1385.12References1. Schreiner, L.A., & Pattengale, J (Eds.). (2000). Visible solutions for invisible students: Helping sophomores succeed. Monograph Series No. 31. Columbia: National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina.2. Gump, S.E. (2007). Classroom research in a general education course: Exploring implications through an investigation of the sophomore slump. The Journal of General Education, 56: 105-125.3. Graunke, S.S., & Woosley, S.A. (2005). An exploration of
ended. Ideally, the community will create new ways towork together, and will continue to share and develop their expertise.AcknowledgmentsThis work is supported by the National Science Foundation: DUE 1125457.References1. Beach, A. L., Henderson, C. & Finkelstein, N. Facilitating Change in Undergraduate STEM Education. Change Mag. High. Learn. 44, 52–59 (2012).2. Dempster, J. A., Benfield, G. & Francis, R. An academic development model for fostering innovation and sharing in curriculum design. Innov. Educ. Teach. Improv. 49, 135–147 (2012).3. Duderstadt, J. J. Engineering for a Changing World. (University of Michigan, 2008).4. Byers, T., Seelig, T., Sheppard, S. & Weilerstein, P. Entrepreneurship: Its Role in
grant DUE-1140554.The opinions, findings, and conclusions do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation or the author’s institution. Page 26.1438.13References1. Borrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014). Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal Of Engineering Education, 103(2), 220-252.2. Felder, R. M., Brent, R., Prince, M. J. (2011). Effective instructional development strategies. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 89–122.3. Brownell, S., & Tanner, K. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training
Engineering, 2005. Educating the engineer of 2020: adapting engineering education to thenew century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.[2] Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, 2005. Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington,DC: National Academies Press. Page 26.259.18[3] Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy, 2006. Rising above the gathering storm: energizing andemploying America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.[4] Sheppard, S., S. Gilmartin, H. L. Chen, K. Donaldson, G. Lichtenstein, E. Özgür, M. Lande, and G. Toye., 2010.Exploring the engineering
as the early 2000’s.4 College sustainabilitymeasures, such as financial ratios, student retention rate, admissions to applications ratio,and tuition rates by year are metrics that could then be used for reporting to accreditationboards. Later on, 5identified the metrics related to student affairs: student housing, facilitywork orders, engagement, and retention. However, these studies focuses only onperformance metric identification for higher education that cater to university officialsother than program leads. Furthermore, a recent dissertation identified metrics pertainingto organizational change in higher education, but the dashboard metrics identifiedfocused on program justification, such as student completion rates, and the
lastingstories that provide a preliminary direction necessary to guide an expansive and meaningfuldesign effort –those that gets at the heart of a mesmerizing story.AcknowledgmentsThanks to the imagination, innovation and disciplined work of all the students in ME 236 atStanford University. We would also like to remember the wisdom of Professor Cliff Nass, whoinspired the course, and to the generous campus affiliate – REVS, which made the class possible. Page 26.326.13References1. Doody, S. Why we need storytellers at the heart of product development. UX Magazine. 655, April, 2011.2. Karanian, B. Patterson, C. and Sansbury, T. Students Redefine
assigned book. I also tried to get notes from a classmate to see what concepts are emphasized • Follow up with Professor and got class notes. • Usually nothing, I hope I can learn it the next lecture. A very bad habit, I do admit. I intend to now review it over with a classmate, and do readings that may cover the topics I missed in class. • Look at the corresponding sections in the book(s) that I missed, and Google anything I’m unsure about. • I generally ask the professor what I miss. Then I go home and review the material. If I am confused with any of the material then I’ll come back and ask questions. • Watch topic on You Tube and work through problems on my own
on how to leverage information and communication technology to connect students from different social, cultural and academic background.Prof. James R. Morrison, KAIST, ISysE James R. Morrison (S’97-M’00) received the B.S. in Mathematics and the B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Maryland at College Park, USA. He received the M.S. and Ph.D., both in Electrical and Computer Engineering, from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA. From 2000 to 2005, he was with the Fab Operations Engineering Department, IBM Corporation, Burling- ton, VT, USA. He is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Industrial and Systems En- gineering at KAIST, South Korea. His research interests
where affordances for conceptualunderstanding are designed into the course and not only left to the student to attain in future oncethey have reached mathematical maturity through procedural struggle.References [1] Pisa 2012 results in focus. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf, 2012. [2] E. Bergqvist. Types of reasoning required in university exams in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26(4):348–370, 2007. [3] B. S. Edwards and M.B. Ward. Surprises from mathematics education research: Students (mis) use of mathematical definitions. The Mathematical Association of America [Monthly 111], 2004. [4] P. Winkelman. Perceptions of mathematics in engineering. European Journal of Engineering
. Course4 Course Category Proposed OEOE Proposed OEOE Proposed OEOE Proposed OEOE Course Number Certification(s
, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103-120. 2. Kiefer, S. and Kuchnicki, S. (2013). Project-based learning: Teaching engineering design not tinkering. 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, June 23-26, 2013. 3. Yadav, A., Subedi, D., Lundeberg, M. A., & Bunting, C. F. (2011). Problem-based Learning: Influence on students' learning in an electrical engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 253-280. 4. Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education Next, 12(1), 82-83. 5. A.W. Chickering and Z.F. Gamson, “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.” AAHE Bulletin, 39: 3-7, 1987. 6. Baillie, C., & Fitzgerald, G. (2010). Motivation and
students’ comprehension. All 3D models shown in this paper aremade with CAD Software SOLIDWORKS6 and the rest of sketches are made with MicrosoftWord’s built-in drawing tools.References1 R. Budynas and J. K. Nisbett, “Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design”, 10th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2014.2 R. L. Mott, "Machine Elements in Mechanical Design", Prentice Hall; 5th ed., 2013.3 R. L. Norton, Machine Design: An Integrated Approach, 5 th ed, Prentice Hall, 2013.4 How to animate GIFs with Microsoft GIF Animator, http://gwanderson.server101.com/Computer101/gifAnimate.htm5 Wang, S-L., “Free Body Diagrams of Gear Trains,” in CD Proceedings of 2008 ASEE Zone 1 Conference, West Point, NY, March 28-29, 2008.6 SolidWorks, http
has occurred to document such reasonsthere are at least two significant studies that help inform program developers. The first was Scottet al.’s 2004 report30 investigating motivations of students in business, engineering and educationprofessional doctorate programs. More recently Wellington & Sikes31 addressed the sameresearch question. Notably, the latter researchers observed, as did Humphrey & McCarthy32 in1999, that doctoral students “no longer form a homogeneous population” (p.725). Among themotivations were: renewal, personal satisfactions e.g., overcoming challenges, becoming excep-tional, a differentiator from the MBAs, work demands, the flexibility of such programs, i.e., aperceived difference from what some perceived as
teamworking. Medical education, 40(2), 150-157. 5. De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & education, 46(3), 249-264. 6. Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & education, 46(3), 223-234.
Coalition. 1998 FIE Conference, Session T1D.2. Sheppard S. et al., Examples of Freshman Design Education. Int. J. Engng Ed. Vol. 13 (4), p. 248-261, 1997.3. Cardella ME. et al., Students with Differing Design Processes as Freshmen: Care Studies on Change. Int. J. EngngEd. Vol. 24 (2), p. 246-259, 2008.4. Borrego M. et al., Team Effectiveness theory from industrial and organizational psychology applied toengineering student project teams – A review. Journal of Engineering Education, 102 (4), p. 472-512, 2013.5. Adapted from BP Challenge: Encouraging hands-on learning, Fill It Up. Available at:http://www.starters.co.nz/bpchallenge-index.html.
acknowledge a limitation of our analysis. We recognize that such groupgrade-setting meetings are very likely not the norm for courses in the calculus sequence,in other courses that serve as pre-requisites for engineering, or in engineering courses. Inthis sense, we would not expect our findings to generalize to the specific ways in whichstudents are “weeded out” at other institutions. At the same time, we believe that ourstrategy of analyzing practical dilemmas of grading and sorting, whether this work iscarried out individually or in groups, is a potentially productive one in understandingideological aspects of success and failure.Bibliography1. Meyer, M., & Marx, S. (2014). Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why
ranks. The participants worked on acollaborative team project(s) to implement teaching innovations at a Midwestern large research-intensive, predominantly white institution (PWI). The project durations ranged from one to threeyears for sustainable implementation of teaching innovations. The semi-structured interviewscovered the participant’s previous teaching experience prior to joining the SIIP community, adescription of their current role in the community including what did and did not work well, anda description of their vision for the community in the future. Consistent with phenomenologicalresearch, the interviews were evaluated holistically to allow essential themes of the experience toemerge.Preliminary results of the phenomenological
, 137–152 (2000).13. Eccles, J. S. et al. in Achievement and achievement motivation 76–146 (1983). doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa850214. Eccles, J. S. & Wigfield, A. Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals. Annu. Rev. Psychol 53, 109–32 (2002).15. Wigfield, A. & Cambria, J. Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review 30, 1–35 (2010).16. Eccles, J. S., O’Neill, S. a & Wigfield, A. Ability self-perceptions and subject task values in adolescents and children. What do children need to flourish Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development 237–249 (2005). doi:10.1007/0-387-23823-9_1517
? 2) One 67 1.95 0.44 0.67 3) Two 9 4) Three or more 4 Will one of your jobs likely 1) Yes 53 lead to an engineering 2) No 1.47 0.25 0.50 47 position? Average hours per week 1) None 18 spent on your job(s)? 2) Less than 10 5 3) More than 10 less than
project and do all the work; complete only your part, hoping there are no consequences; stop working and blame team members; talk to teacher or advisor; call a team meeting and resolve issues. The remaining questions were evaluated using a Likert scale (strongly disagree/disagree/neutral/agree/strongly agree): 6. In my previous experience, my team was responsible for determining the goals and outcome of the project. 7. On average, I have had a lot of responsibility on my team(s). 8. My ideas were respected and used by my team(s). 9. The workload was evenly distributed across all group members. 10. I know what to do to make sure all my teammates do their part to make a project a success. 11. I can accomplish more as a team rather than
material is based upon work supported by the Research Experiences for Teachers Programunder National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1300779. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
for the difficulties they mightface professionally and personally in the future. It has also been criticized for insufficient 1 This study is supported by the “Re-development of Cornerstone Curriculum in Civil Engineering for Futures Thinking”, sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, under Grant no. MOST 104-2511-S-032-003.curricular opportunities to involve students in design, experiences for teamwork andcommunication, and knowledge and awareness of fields outside engineering.4, 11 Among the key elements called for in engineering education reform, threeoverwhelmingly stand out: (a) softening the