Conference Session

College Engineering K-12 Outreach III

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

William Carlsen; Robin Tallon; Phil Henning; Nicola Ferralis; Leanne Avery; Daniel Haworth; Elana Chapman

before starting. Clear documentation of the people who havebeen interviewed, the length of the interview, and notes on the circumstances of theinterview together with a reference to the tape are important for citation purposes and forkeeping track of pseudonyms. Document and artifact analysisDocuments include the formal (letters, public e-mails, press releases, grant proposals,school district newsletters, etc.) and informal (shared personal e-mails, handwritten notes,writing on the blackboard, and other less permanent material) written material thatsurrounds and infuses a project. Artifacts include the devices such as computers orscanners, material for “hands-on” activities, the lab space at a university that is beingtoured by middle

Conference Session

K-12 Poster Session

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

William Carlsen; Robin Tallon; Phil Henning; Leanne Avery; Angela Lueking; Daniel Haworth; Elana Chapman

are Page 10.995.5talking about the waste and how it helps the evierment. You cost one boes not work write. The web was so cool butyou need games to play on it.” Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education“14 i think it was all good some could be better. 13 i think it was cool. 1 i looked like someone oure age made it.But great info.”The quotes support the qualitative data collected regarding the students experience of thewebpages. They enjoyed the sites, and they seemed to agree

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Thomas Matthews; Perry Heedley

MethodologyThe design team methodology adopted here closely parallels that used successfully by theauthors while working at several different semiconductor companies, and has been adapted to theuniversity environment. It involves a multiple phase process, with reviews by peers and advisorsat strategic points during the IC development to insure success by identifying issues andcorrecting potential problems as they occur. This is particularly important for student designteams, which lack the experience of professional engineering teams and are therefore more proneto errors. Presentations are given by each student for their individual circuit block, with theentire team as well as faculty and industry advisors in attendance. These reviews typically occurat

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Tia Sharpe; Robert Maher; James Peterson; James Becker; Bradford Towle

questionnaires, student performance with oral and writtencommunication, and peer review of course materials and grading policies. Page 10.447.10 Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education (Excerpt from "ECEBot Assembly Guide"…) Soldering Step 1: Attach the 32-pin Socket (Back of Board) First, hold the board with the front side up and oriented so that you can read the printed silk screen labels from top to bottom, like in the next figure. Now turn the board over

Conference Session

Assessment Issues in 1st-Yr Engineering

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Eric Soulsby

of experience in teachingFreshman courses lamented the inability of many current students to manipulate even simplealgebraic expressions, such as Ohm’s Law (V = IR), or the Ideal Gas Law (PV = nRT), andrelated how this lack of ability has hindered teaching the conceptual ideas represented by theseequations.The question became one of whether the University should make an effort to write a “new andimproved” Q-course Readiness test with questions aimed at evaluating students’ abilities inquantitative reasoning. The Committee immediately realized this process would be fraught withdifficulties. What would be the areas of coverage of the new exam? How would the test beconstructed and delivered? How would it be graded, and by what standard would it

Conference Session

Engineering in High School

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Jessica Harwood; Al Rudnitsky

because they had developed many curiosities over the course of theunit. Many students designed their own projectiles with fins of all different shapes and sizes;two groups tried to test the precision of the system; and one student worked on trying to apply aformula to predicting the length of the launch.At the Campus School on the second to last day, I mixed the students up into groups of four withstudents from different research groups. The goal that the students had was to look at their dataand graphs and write down a hypothesis for each of the variables to help them with their Page 10.873.7consequential task. This activity was very

Conference Session

K-12 Poster Session

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Jessica Harwood; Al Rudnitsky

because they had developed many curiosities over the course of theunit. Many students designed their own projectiles with fins of all different shapes and sizes;two groups tried to test the precision of the system; and one student worked on trying to apply aformula to predicting the length of the launch.At the Campus School on the second to last day, I mixed the students up into groups of four withstudents from different research groups. The goal that the students had was to look at their dataand graphs and write down a hypothesis for each of the variables to help them with their Page 10.874.7consequential task. This activity was very

Conference Session

Teaching Software Engineering Process

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Mark Sebern

development organization. First, PSP training courses provide insight into theprocess performance of individual software engineers, before and after learning the PSPmethods. The “before” data reflects the existing processes of these practitioners, while the“after” data suggests the type of improvement that the PSP can produce. Second, TSP teamsgather data on their own performance as part of their normal development process, and some ofthis data has been published in summary form2.As outlined in Humphrey’s original text6, students in a traditional PSP training course write tenrelatively small programs, while using a series of defined software processes that buildincrementally up to the full PSP. Data on size and development time by program, for a

Conference Session

Inservice Teacher Engineering Education

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Erin Cejka; Chris Rogers

lasting three hours. Each session wasfocused around a main design challenge. The sessions began with a brief lecture describing thebuilding and programming concepts that would be useful for that day’s challenge. Then thechallenge was be introduced and discussed by the group. When the group felt comfortable withthe objectives, the participants would break off into pairs or individually to begin their design.The participants were given full control over the design and how they wished to make their finalproject. They had access to extra LEGO pieces, computers, the internet, and were encouraged toask questions to their peers or the instructor. At the end of each session there was a design circlewere the participants presented and discussed their

Conference Session

Multidisciplinary Design

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Richard Schultz; Arnold Johnson