Practices for Team-Based Assistive Design CoursesDue to the increasing number of studies highlighting the benefits assistive technology and otherreal-world biomedical application courses, more of these course types have begun to emerge. Asa result, there is a need for best practices and standardization of such courses. Goldberg andPearlman discuss best practices for team-based assistive technology design courses in a surveypaper. They identify and encourage the use of eight best practices: 1. Identifying a client through a reliable clinical partner; 2. Allowing for transparency between the instructors, the client, and the team(s); 3. Establishing multi-disciplinary teams; 4. Using a process-oriented vs. solution-oriented product
. SIAM review, 167–256, 2003.[3] T. Finin, Social networking on the semantic web. J. Learning organization, 418-435, 2005.[4] N. Lin, Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge University Press,New York, NY, 2001.[5] R. Burt, R, Social Capital: Theory and Research. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,2001.[6] M. Kilduff, and W. Tsai, Social Networks and Organizations, Sage Publications, London,2003.[7] N. Moolenaar, A. Daly and P. Sleegers, “Ties with potential: social network structure andinnovation in Dutch elementary schools,” European Association for Research in Learning andInstruction (EARLI), Amsterdam, August 25-29, 2009[8] S. Moore, Finders and Keepers: Helping New Teachers Survive and Thrive in Our Schools
Engineers: the Problem and Its Solution,” in Aerospace Meeting and Exhibit , 1995. [3] J. Colwell, “Professional Skills for the New Economy : Their Place in Graduate Education in Engineering and Engineering Technology,” in Annual Conference & Exposition American Society for Engineering Education , 2010. [4] National Academy of Engineering, U. S., The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in The New Century . Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004. [5] National Academy of Engineering, U. S., Educating The Engineer Of 2020: Adapting
, 2005.[8] I. De Los Rios-Carmenado, F. Rodriguez Lopez, and C. Perez Garcia, “PromotingProfessional Project Management Skills in Engineering Higher Education: Project-BasedLearning (PBL) Strategy,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol 31(1B), pp. 184-198, 2015.[9] K. Bougot-Robin, J. Paget, S.C. Atkins, and J.B. Edel, “Optimization and Design of anAbsorbance Spectrometer Controlled Using a Raspberry Pi To Improve Analytical Skills,”Journal of Chemical Education, pp. 1232-1240, Mar. 2016.[10] T.D. Giorgio and S.P. Brophy, “Challenge-Based Learning in Biomedical Engineering: ALegacy Cycle for Biotechnology,” Proceedings of the American Society for EngineeringEducation Annual Conference & Exposition, 2001.[11] J. Yao and S
Advanced Manufacturing Center, 2014, “New Paltz Celebrates Opening of MakerBot Innovation Center” [Online]. Available: http://www.newpaltz.edu/3d/makerbot.html.[4] Wilczynski, V., 2015, “Academic Makerspaces and Engineering Design,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–18.[5] Barrett, T. W., Pizzico, M. C., Levy, B., and Nagel, R. L., 2015, “A Review of University Maker Spaces A Review of University Maker Spaces Introduction,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–16.[6] Bashyam, S., Kuhn, J., and Seepersad, C. C., 2015, “A 3D Printing Vending Machine and Its Impact on the Democratization of 3D Printing on a College Campus,” Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers
. Italso varied with time within institutions.This research can only show the required course pathway variations among institutions with FYEmatriculation models. To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of each of the coursepathways, further investigations can be conducted using student data. Reid, et al. [8] introduces ataxonomy which classifies introductory to engineering courses (classified as general engineeringin this paper). Moreover, future studies can use taxonomies like this to investigate FYE pathwaysbased on their course content and not only the course titles. V. REFERENCES[1] M. K. Orr, C. E. Brawner, S. M. Lord, M. W. Ohland, R. A. Layton, and R. A. Long, "Engineering
appropriate furniture. The objects were limited to 2’ x 1’ in size. ● Puzzles – each team had to contribute an easy and a hard puzzle, of which only one was selected to be used in the escape room. One of the committees (explained below) decided on which puzzles from each group would be used for the escape room ● 3D printed object – each team had to 3D print a small piece(s) that could be used in their puzzle or fabricated objectA jigsaw method was utilized to further split the class into escape room committees. Each teamcontributed one student to each committee. The purpose of the committees was to help connectthe escape room pieces together and included the following: ● Narrative –responsible for writing the story behind the escape
semester, themajority of students in EDSGN 100 are introduced to engineering design through an 8-week longdesign challenge of the instructor’s choosing. During this challenge, instructors lead studentsthrough the problem definition, customer needs identification, concept generation, conceptselection, prototyping, and iteration phases crucial to engineering design. In the course’s currentform, these steps are further augmented by the inclusion of six educational modules (“World ClassEngineer,” “Professional Communication,” “Innovation Process,” “Making,” “Seeing the BigPicture,” and “Grand Challenges”). However, as the modules were created after the majority ofinstructors had established their preferred design project(s) for the first 8 weeks, the
incarnations of the course, more emphasis has been placed on the team-based design projects, as evidenced by 50% of the course grade being contributed by team work.Table 1. Common grading scheme adopted for all EDSGN 100 sections. Assessment of individual proficiency (50%) Assessment of team work (50%) 20%: In-class Assessments Introductory Design Project(s) to support 25%: 15%: CAE Activities and Assessments learning of design process 5%: Making Activities Client-sponsored Design Project to 25%: 10%: General Assignments
need both during and after their education.By incorporating modern technologies (in this case Arduino and 3D printing) these projects canbe a strong introduction of how students will be able to use their technical skills to overcomechallenges in the future.Acknowledgements We’d like to thank the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence at PennState for funding the equipment of the project. We’d also like to express our gratitude to all theinstructors for helping to run the project in Fall 2017, 2018, and Spring 2019 and our dedicatedmultimedia specialist for photography and videography.References[1] S. A. Ambrose, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. (1st;1; ed.) 2010.[2] W. J. McKeachie, M. D. Svinicki
work in the evaluation data collected. It is important,however, that all sites function under the same framework (i.e. cross-camp collaboration, finalpresentations, etc).AcknowledgementsThis work is sponsored by NASA under it’s 2015 Competitive Program for Science Museums,Planetariums and NASA Visitors Centers Plus Other Opportunities (CP4SMPVC+). We wouldlike to thank the Principal Investigator Darlene Koenig for her leadership and exceptionalmanagement. We would also like to thank all the museums/science centers who have helpedexecute this program at their venues. Lastly, we would like to thank all the high school teachersand students who provided their valuable feedback as the IMEET camp participants.References[1] Basalyga, S. (2003
Recommendations for Increasing Engagement among Women in STEM.,” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations \& Research, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 92–97, 2017.[6] J. Bond, Y. Wang, C. S. Sankar, P. Raju, and Q. Le, “Female and minority students benefit from use of multimedia case studies,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 343–359, 2014.[7] P. et al Bell, Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. The National Academy Press, 2009.[8] D. Kilgore, C. J. Atman, K. Yasuhara, T. J. Barker, and A. Morozov, “Considering Context: A Study of First- Year Engineering Students,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 321–334, 2007.[9] T. J. Puccinelli, M. E. Fitzpatrick, and G
array. (e) A Digital Image Processing unit uses algorithm(s) to process the image. (f) A processed image is generated.There are many methods and procedures for digital image processing. Some common imageprocessing operations include blurring, zooming, edge detection, face recognition, cropping, andmirroring.Digital image processing starts with how all humans visualize the world. We can categorizeimage processing in two parts, analog image processing and digital image processing. Analog Image Processing. Analog image processing deals with analog signals in a varying electrical signal. It takes place in a two dimensional analog signal. Traditional television image is an example of an analog image processing
, 31(1):21–32, 1961. [6] A. Collins. Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. Sawyer, editor, Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, pages 47–60. Cambridge University Press, 2006. [7] D. Jackson. Software Abstractions: Logic, Language and Analysis. MIT Press, 2012. [8] D. Jonassen, M. Davidson, M. Collins, J. Campbell, and B. B. Haag. Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 9, 1995. [9] S. Kumar and C. Wallace. Instruction in software project communication through guided inquiry and reflection. In Frontiers in Education (FIE). IEEE, 2014.[10] C. McDowell, L. Werner, H. E. Bullock, and J. Fernald. The impact of pair programming on student performance, perception
University of Washington and the Making Academic Change Happenpractitioners from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. The origin of our partnership occurredin the mid-2000’s when one individual from MACH and one individual from CERSE metthrough a different national project, and subsequently maintained a loose professionalconnection. When NSF encouraged MACH to submit a proposal focused on supporting changefor the RED program, MACH contacted CERSE and a joint proposal resulted. These first stagesof developing the partnership brought to light the expertise contributed by both groups: MACHas experts in change strategies, and CERSE as experts in qualitative research. Our initialexperiences suggested that we would work semi-collaboratively, with major
level of the learner.Cognition and Instruction, I, 451-463.14. Palincsar, A, S., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (1999). Designing collaborative contexts: Lessons fromthree research programs. In A. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on PeerLearning (pp. 151-177). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 15. King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A.King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87-115). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.16. King, A. (1992). Faciliating elaborative learning through guided student-generatedquestioning. Educational Psychologist, 27, 111-126.17. Swan, M., & Pead, D
.[10]. P. Chu, FPGA Design by VHDL Examples: MicroBlaze MCS SoC edition, Wiley & Sons, 2017.[11]. P. Chu, FPGA Design by SystemVerilog Examples: MicroBlaze MCS SoC edition, Wiley & Sons, to be published in September 2018.[12]. J. Corbet, A. Rubini, and G. Kroah-Hartman, Linux Device Drivers: Where the Kernel Meets the Hardware, O'Reilly Media, 2005.[13]. Digilent, Arty FPGA Board Reference Manual, Digilent, 2017.[14]. S. Monk, Programming Arduino: Getting Started with Sketches, McGraw-Hill, 2011.[15]. R. Sass and A. G. Schmidt, Embedded Systems Design with Platform FPGAs: Principles and Practices, Morgan Kaufmann, 2010.[16]. S. Sheppard, et al., Educating Engineers: Designing for the Future of the Field. Jossey
experiences focused on improving retention and graduation rate.Dr. Hossein Rahemi, Vaughn College of Aeronautics & Technology Dr. Hossein Rahemi is a professor and department chair of Engineering and Technology at Vaughn Col- lege of Aeronautics & Technology. He is the author of two books, Vaughn College Journal of Engineering and Technology (VCJET), numerous conference papers in the areas of solid mechanics, computational mechanics, vibration analysis, fracture mechanics and reliability analysis. He is also a principle investi- gator for the NSF S-STEM grant and the HIS-STEM grant and a student adviser for a number of technical papers in the areas of mechanics, robotics and industrial automation.Dr. Yougashwar
struggling students. These efforts help build the CEE Department as a place wherepositive change is happening and coupled with the research group’s efforts to disseminateknowledge, will lead the transformation of the College of Engineering.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underIUSE/PFE:RED Grant No. 1632053. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References 1. C.S. Slater, T.R. Chandrupatla, R.A. Dusseau, J. L. Schmalzel, (1996). “Development of multifunctional laboratories in a new engineering school,” ASEE Annual Conference and
Why is it Important for Your Building Project?” WorldBuild 365.3. Castro, G. and Poulos, S. J. (1977). “Factors Affecting Liquefaction and Cyclic Mobility”. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol 103, No. GT6, pp 501-516.4. Hooke, Harry. Rochester Institute of Technology (2011), “Use of Soil Behavior Demonstrations to Increase Student Engagement in a Soil Mechanics Course.” American Society of Engineering Education.5. Caverly, R., Fulmer, H., Santhanam, S., Singh, P., O’Brien, J., Jones, G., Char, E., Mercede, F., Weinsten, R., and Yost, J. (2010). “Project-based Freshman Engineering Experience: The Core Course,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.6. Li, J. and
Education MinorityScience and Engineering Improvement Program under Grant No. P120A140051. Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Education.References[1] US Census Bureau, 2016 Census Data for Kern County.[2] US Census Bureau, 2017 Estimated Census Data Nationwide.[3] California Department of Education, Data and Statistics website. Data for Kern High School District.[4] N. Gorgievski and et al., "Tablet PC: A Preliminary Report on a Tool for Teaching Calculus," The International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 95-102, 2005.[5] C. Lysy, C. A. Romney, J. P. Paniagua
classroom strategy to foster social responsibility," Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 373-380, 2006.[9] K. Meyers and B. Mertz, "A large scale analysis of first-year engineering student essays on engineering interests," in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Washington, D.C., 2011.[10] J. H. Pryor, K. Eagan, L. P. Blake, S. Hurtado, J. Berdan and M. Case, "The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2012.," Cooperative Institutional Research Program at the Higher Education, Los Angeles, 2012.[11] N. A. o. Engineering, "Changing the conversation: Messages for improving public understanding of engineering," National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2008.[12] G. Hein and A. Kemppainen, "First-year
foundation engineering, unsaturated soil mechanics, geoenvironmental engineering, advanced soil mechanics, and soil dynamics. His expertise is in innovative levee testing and protection, bio-mediated ground improvement, sustainable infrastructure and geo-environmental area. He has been PI of more than fourteen major research grants from federal and state agencies with total funding amounts of $3.6 Million. Dr. Li is the author or co-author of more than 87 peer-reviewed published articles. He got numerous faculty excellence award and Richard S. Ladd Standards Development Award from ASTM.Dr. Jianjun Yin, Jackson State University Jianjun Yin, Ph.D, is Professor of Education in the Department of Elementary and Early Childhood
opposing preferences, or “balanced” within thedimension. For our study, we look at each dimension separately in correlations withperformance, self-efficacy, perceptions/attitudes, and problem solving strategies as we believethat this will allow us to understand if one dimension is more influential, and, if so, in whatrespect(s).The second study instrument, surveys, are typically Likert-type questions (on a scale from 1 to 5,strongly disagree to strongly agree, respectively), with some multiple choice, true / false, andoccasionally a short open response question. Questions are designed to evaluate student self-efficacy with respect to specific problems and concepts, attitudes, and problem-solvingstrategies.The surveys are administered after
improved their academic performance by 52%. The same research showed that thestudents were also significantly more engaged because of the content included in the course.These are substantial indicators of improvement. If this is level of improvement could be seenby all students using online or digital content, the results would show substantial progressthus making the research significant.These are main theoretical concepts that have been implemented into the IEDT curriculumbased on the literature review.3. Methodology3.1 The ProcessThis information was obtained using action research which is a specific variation ofEvaluation Research. McMillan and Schumacher21 state” Evaluation Research focuses on aparticular practice at a given site(s). The
work as an ME working at DOE Labs (Sandia/PNNL) over thelast 11 years. Never needed to use my PE stamp, etc.Pedagogy ImplicationsPrior to the study emphasis was placed on the identification and retrieval of standards.Influenced from industry responses and student work the curriculum has shifted to emphasize abroader understanding of standards and standardization. When presenting information tostudents emphasis is put on the understanding of why standards exist, how they are created andpotential avenues for finding or locating relevant standards outside of academia.Students in the course directly work with industry sponsors and are instructed by the facultymember to seek advice from their industry contact regarding the appropriate standard(s
EHWIC 3 EHWIC 2 EHWIC 1 EHWIC 0 S L MODE
university-level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology 2007;32(1):21-40.7. Van Dijk, L. A., Van Der Berg, G. C., & Van Keulen, H., Interactive lectures in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education 2001;26(1):15-28.8. Silliman, S. E., and McWilliams, L. H., Observations on benefits/limitations of an audience response system. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings 2004.9. Hake R. R., Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 1998;66(1):64-74.10. Knight J.K., and Wood W.B., Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education
Engineering (ICCAE), 2010 The 2nd International Conference on, vol.3, no., Page 26.1768.9 pp.356,359.[8] Koding | Say goodbye to your localhost and code in the cloud. Retrieved February 2, 2015, from https://koding.com/[9] Lifka, D., Foster, I., Mehringer, S., Parashar, M., Redfern, P., Stewart, C., & Tuecke, S. (2013). XSEDE cloud survey report. Technical report, National Science Foundation, USA.[10] Lohmosavi, V., Nejad, A.F., Hosseini, E.M. 2013. E-learning ecosystem based on service-oriented cloud computing architecture. Information and Knowledge Technology (IKT), 2013 5th Conference on , vol., no., pp.24,29, 28
; Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a non partisan research and educational institute/think tank, whose mission is to formulate and promote public policies to advance innovation and productivity, internationally, in the US and the US States www.itif.org35 ©2009 HP Confidential ©2009 COUNTRIES ALL OVER THE WORLD ARE BETTING ON THEIR S&E TALENT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING DEGREES, 2004, AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL NEW DEGREES Notes: 1. 2003 for doctoral degrees in science and