. Page 10.793.4 “Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education” Table 1. Survey QuestionsQualitative Assessment 1. What is your major? 2. What is the name of your capstone project? 3. Did your project span 1 or 2 semesters? 4. Which of the following describes your project? (Circle one or more) a. Curriculum-based industrial design project b. Cross functional design team that may include non-engineering team members c. National competitions (SAE challenges, DOE challenges, etc.) d. Decision Analysis e
sufficient time for extensive, hands-on work. Theintroduction of engineering practice into these courses would be very limited. Forexample, students can be given assignments which require them to study professionalstandards.Laboratory experiments are often combined into specific laboratory courses wherestudents tend to be given detailed, step-by-step instructions on how to use the laboratoryequipment and calculate the results. This approach is not the best way to learn thematerial, since (a) the lecture and the lab are not presented at similar times and (b) it doesnot accurately reflect the reality of professional engineering practice. Further, thelaboratory experiments used in these courses often are intended simply to illustratefundamental
, MA, 1993.22. Bucciarelli, L., Designing Engineers, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.23. Chi, M. T. H., “Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of verbal data: A Practical Guide,” Journal of the Learning Sciences Vol. 6 No. 3, 1997, pp. 271-315.24. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J., “Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview,” in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, Sage Publications, 1994.25. Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P., “Chapter 2: Concepts and Coding,” in Making Sense of Qualitative Data, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, 1996.26. Dick, B., “Grounded theory: a thumbnail sketch,” 2002, http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/grounded.html, (November 24, 2004).27. Atman, C. J. and Bursic, K. M
Winston8. Baker, E. H, Paulson, S. K., 2004, Experiential Exercises in Organization Theory and Design, Thomson Learning9. Films for Humanities & Science website http://www.films.com10. Oakley, B., R.M. Felder, R. Brent, and I. Elhajj. "Turning Student Groups into Effective Teams." Journal of Student Centered Learning. Vol. 2, No. 1, 2004, pp 9 –34BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATIONZBIGNIEW J. PASEKDr. Pasek is the operations manager and an assistant research scientist in the NSF Engineering Research Center forReconfigurable Manufacturing Systems, College of Engineering, University of Michigan. His research interestsinclude systems engineering, manufacturing automation, global product development, and informal technologyeducation. He is a member of
Program Evaluation Aligned With the CDIO Standards Doris R. Brodeur and Edward F. Crawley Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAbstractThe CDIO Initiative is a collaboration of engineering programs at universities in morethan eight countries in North America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia.Collaborators have developed a set of twelve standards that characterize CDIO programsand provide the basis for program evaluation. This standards-based program evaluationextends the evaluative criteria of ABET's EC2000 and other outcomes-based approaches.Evidence of overall program value is collected from multiple sources, using bothquantitative and qualitative methods. Evidence and results
Session 1510 STEPing into the Classroom: An Alternative Capstone Experience Karen C. Davis, Megan L. Perkey, Nicholas B. Harth, Nathan Dees Electrical & Computer Engineering and Computer Science Department University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH 45221-0030This paper describes the experiences of three Electrical Engineering seniors who chose analternative to a traditional capstone design project; they applied their undergraduateengineering education in high school math and science classrooms as NSF STEPFellows. Project STEP: Science and Technology Enhancement Program is sponsored bythe
Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education”experiences [1]. Beginning with the 2003-04 academic year, the College of Engineering createdthree different tracks for first-year engineering students, depending on their major. Students whohad elected to major in Aerospace, Civil, Industrial, or Mechanical Engineering were assigned toTrack A. Students who had elected to major in Computer or Electrical Engineering wereassigned to Track B. Students who had elected to major in Biomedical, Chemical, or PetroleumEngineering were assigned to Track C. Content of the two first-year engineering courses in eachtrack was modified to reflect the goals of faculty members in
needs more than just knowing which equations and parameters to use. Miller (24) pointsout that industry expects to hire engineers who “can go beyond the numbers” with anunderstanding of the impact of the technical results.Another difference is how the results are communicated. In the classroom, the professorreceives the calculations on an engineering pad with the answer placed in a box. But in theworking world, e-mails are now a major form of communication. Figure B is an outline of thesedifferences in style, intent, and format between the classroom communications and e-mails.I found discussions in the literature on e-mail etiquette, structure, and audience. One Web pagearticle has a strong focus on what the reader needs to know (1). The co
Preparing Engineers for an Outsourced World—Strategies for Change Dr. Charles Pezeshki School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-2920 pezeshki@wsu.eduAbstractGlobal outsourcing has the potential to become the primary challenge facing youngengineers entering the job market today. As more jobs are shipped to subcontractorsoffshore, there will be a continued hollowing-out of intellectual property in the U.S., withthe brunt of that loss being borne demographically by new graduates.In this paper, industrial perspectives are presented that give
maximum) • 2.5 weeks – Phase 2 status report due (1 page maximum) • 2.5 weeks – Phase 2 report due (5 pages maximum)The following guidelines were provided for the reports: A. Introduction: What hypotheses are you testing? What questions are you going to answer? Why? Page 10.1118.2 Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education B. Methods: Fully describe your model. What assumptions have you made? Based upon what? Include illustrations and all model parameters. C. Results
Conference and Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society of Engineering EducationBibliography1. J.E. Spear, A Problem-Solving Process, . Professional Safety, Apr2002, Vol. 47 Issue 4, p25-312. B. Goldsmith, Innovative Problem Solving, AFP Exchange, Jul/Aug2001, Vol. 21 Issue 4, p783. L. Burton, Thinking Things Through, Oxford, England: Blackwell.4. R. Rockland, Use of Problem Solving Skills in an Introductory Microprocessor Course, 1999 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Charlotte, NC, June 19995. R. Rockland, Teaching Problem Solving Techniques in a Circuits Analysis Course, 2001 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Albuquerque, NM, June 20016. A.R.Eide, R.D. Jenison, L.H. Mashaw, L.L. Northrup
Session 1313 NSF-REU Site Program in Membrane Applied Science and Technology Gerri L. Burke, William B. Krantz, Joel R. Fried Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH 45221-0012AbstractThe Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site program is one of the oldest and mostsuccessful NSF initiatives. Active research experience is an effective way to encourage qualifiedundergraduates to undertake graduate studies. This paper describes a
information. Ability to demonstrate technical knowledge in your academic discipline. Ability to use computer skills. Demonstrated ability to use decision-making skills. Ability to use problem-solving knowledge and skills. Ability to integrate theories learned in the classroom with actual “hands on” experiences. Opportunity to apply what was learned in the classroom. Knowledge about a specific academic discipline. Improved interest area as related to my academic discipline. Improve communication through: a. Oral skills. b. Listening skills. c. Writing skills. d. Using a variety of media to transmit ideas. Page
against terrorist attacks is anational priority. DCS security and survivability need increased attention. One of the Norwich University Electrical and Computer Engineering courses that addressthese issues is EE411 Microcomputer Based Applications. EE411 is designed to give computerand electrical engineering students a capstone DCS design experience applying concepts coveredin earlier courses. They are introduced to “SCADAville”, a municipal water system emulatormodeled after a typical municipal water distribution system. The concepts of safetyinstrumentation and networking are introduced using Allen Bradley Programmable LogicControllers (PLCs). Students come to understand the advantages and disadvantages of ladderlogic code for digital
=In+the+Issue&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3ASE+Articles&mid=1C925F3AE9A145FBBF6ECFDCE8FCC90D&AudID=950DD28A849F4569B1FB98BC2D434B2C&tier=4&id=112EC87DC16F46B8967C57E461C01EF7).4. Graulau-Santiago and J., S.J. Masten. 2000. Teaching Environmental Engineering to Non-EnvironmentalEngineers. 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference Session F1G.5. United States Military Academy. 2005. Graph taken from internal Operations and Registrar Division, Office ofthe Dean internal statistics web site.6. Halford, B. 2004. Engineering for Everyone. American Society for Engineering Education. Prism Magazine.14, 22-27.7. Leon, F., A. Armando, and F. Altamirano. 2002. The Environmental Sciences, A Necessity to Teaching
impact the ways these teachers address the frameworks in their classrooms. Previousresearch in this area has shown that perceptions about engineering and technology can changepositively after preservice teachers took on their own design projects1. Little, however, is knownabout the design processes that teachers use in such projects. Additionally, there is a significantlack of research in this area regarding inservice teachers. Knowing more about these processes,as well as effective methods of supporting teachers during the learning process, will help toinform teacher education efforts.This paper outlines a research project aimed at developing an understanding of the designprocess of inservice teachers. This project focuses on twelve
engineering computational methods, which was especially designed to provide engineeringmajors with a rigorous introduction to analytical and numerical methods. Students obtaining a B.S. degree in Bioengineering are required to take seven core courses inBioengineering. To enhance knowledge in one area of Bioengineering, students select one ofthree emphasis areas or tracks: (a) Cellular and Molecular Engineering; (b) Bioinstrumentation,Imaging and Optics; and (c) Biomaterials and Biomechanics.A unique future of the Rice BIOE undergraduate curriculum is the opportunities for our studentsto participate in undergraduate research. Some of the major benefits of undergraduate studentsinvolving in an independent research project are: 1) to experience the joy
Session 1526 Spreadsheets to Promote Interactive Engagement in Semiconductor Device Courses R. Venkatasubramanian and B. J. Skromme* Department of Electrical Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-5706AbstractThe development and initial implementation of a prototype “virtual laboratory” based onMicrosoft Excel spreadsheets with associated Visual Basic for Applications modules isdescribed for use in semiconductor device courses for engineering undergraduates. Thespreadsheets use graphical methods to illustrate quantities
(2001).[19] D. R. Brodeur, P. W. Young, and K. B. Blair, Problem-based learning in aerospace engineering education. Proceedings of the 2002 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Session 2202. Albuquerque, NM (2002).[20] R. U. Goulet, and J. Owino, Experiential problem based learning in the Mechanics of Materials Laboratory. Proceedings of the 2002 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Session 2666. Albuquerque, NM (2002).[21] W. L. Tse and W. L. Chen, Application of problem-based learning in an engineering course, International Journal of Engineering Education, Volume 19, Number 5 (2003).[22] T. A. Litzinger, and D. E. Richards, Thermal science education in 2010. 2000 Mechanical Engineering Education Conference, Drivers
Education. 86(2):75-91.10. Brown, B. Sr. and Brown, B. Jr. (1997). “Problem-Based Education (PROBE): Learning for a lifetime of Page 10.892.11 Change,” Proceedings, ASEE National Conference, Milwaukee, WI, http://www.asee.org/conferences/search/, accessed March 30, 2001. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright. 2005, American Society for Engineering Education11. Havener, A. and Dull, C. (1998). “An Information Resource Web-Page for a Freshman Problem Based Learning Engineering Course,” Proceedings, ASEE National Conference, Seattle, WA
© 2005, American Society of Engineering EducationStep 3. Measure out 10 mL of Bromothymol Blue pH indicator using your graduated cylinder. Carefully pour this into your electrophoresis tray. Record this amount on your Results Page.Step 4. Using your graduated cylinder, measure out the amount of NaCl solution and E-pure H2O that corresponds to your group. Carefully pour this into your electrophoresis tray. Record these amounts on your Results Page. Group A 10 mL NaCl 0 mL E-pure H2O Group B 7 mL NaCl 3 mL E-pure H2O Group C 5 mL NaCl 5 mL E-pure H2O Group D 3 mL NaCl
across ethnic group. 2003. AERA Presentation paper.Greene, B. A. & DeBacker, T. K. (2004). Gender and orientations toward the future: links to motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 16(2), 91-120.Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect, Psychological Review, 94, 319-340.Hackett, G. (1997) Promise and problems in theory and research on women’s career development: comment on Lucas (1997), Richie et al. (1997), McCracken and Weitzman (1997), Rainey and Borders (1997) and Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta (1997). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 184-8.Higgins, et.al. (1985). Self-concept discrepancy theory: A psychological model for distinguishing among
Engineering Education, Salt Lake City, UT.[2] Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (October 2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whosetime has come. Educational Researcher, Vol 33. No. 7, pp. 14-26.[3] Design-Based Research Collective. (2003 January/February 2003). Design-based research: An emergingparadigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher Vol. 32, No. 1. pp. 5-8.[4] Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003 January/February). The role of design in research: The integrative learning designframework. Educational Researcher Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 21-24.BiographiesHEIDI G. LOSHBAUGH is an Assistant Research Professor for the Center for the Advancement of EngineeringEducation at Colorado School of Mines. She holds a Doctorate, Master’s
. For more accurate location of pointfeatures, the user may check the box labeled “immediate” which will force a log entry at themoment the feature is noted rather than waiting for the log delay to elapse. The program canrecord up to four different kinds of point features in a single data logging session. These fourpoint features are referred to as A, B, C, and D on the configuration screen in Figure 1. Continuous features, on the other hand, are used to record features that persist over adistance or time (i.e. features which have length) but may change in some detail over that length.The software can record two types of continuous features in a single data logging session. Eachcontinuous feature type is implemented as a multiple-choice
chains–too many for the student to analyze in any depth. Students do best if theyfocus on a single supply chain that is crucial to success and that may be causing worries. Page 10.1163.4 Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering EducationStudents should be encouraged to avoid supply chains of trivial importance such as those forordering office supplies. B. "We don't have a supply chain" In a manufacturing environment, supply chains are usually easy to spot. Information andmoney flow in
-Sq R-Sq(adj) Mallows S A B T G T A 1 11.5 11.5 1743.4 0.62757 X 2 19.5 19.5 618.1 0.5984 X X 3 21.7 21.6 324.2 0.59052 X X X 4 22.8 22.8 165.9 0.58622 X X X X 5 23.7 23.7 37.5 0.5827 X X X X X 6 24 23.9 7 0.58185 X X X X X X Current 20.8 20.8 438.0 0.5936 X X XFindings and ConclusionThe study showed that the high school GPA for public school
conflicts later on and relieves stress for both the professor and the students.Along with a detailed syllabus there should be a detailed grading scheme. It is suggested thatgrading be criterion based, that is, directly related to the learning outcomes and with grades thatfit the normal scale: 90 and above, “A”, 80 and above, “B”, and so on. If course grading iscriterion based, and if the grade scale is made known at the beginning of the course, it is likelythat fewer grade related questions will be asked during the term. Fewer questions mean thatthere are fewer office visits, and fewer complaints. As with other items on the syllabus, thegrading scheme is a contract with the students. The professor must work hard to create examsand other graded
/educational expertise present in the teams. In 2005, the process wasmodified. First, the students who were not mechanical engineering majors were assigned to theprojects where their expertise would be of greatest benefit. Then each project was assigned onestudent with high quadrant C (interpersonal thinking) scores, one student with creative thinkingpreferences (quadrant D) and one student with organizational thinking preferences (quadrant B).The remaining slots were then filled with analytical thinkers (quadrant A), making sure that noteam had more than one member who avoids quadrant C thinking (to prevent teams wheremembers do not talk to each other). As much as was possible, the team assignments also tookthe students’ interest in particular
instructions in order to explore what happens when ladder logic is written invarious ways.2. Ladder Logic Tool Kit DesignThe ladder logic tool kit was developed using Macromedia Flash. This tool allows rapiddevelopment of graphics and animations, and includes a programming language calledActionScript, which facilitates development of interactive programs and interfaces. Flash filesare also quite small and can be embedded in HTML pages and accessed via the Web.The Toolkit contains three primary components: toolbox, program templates, and control system.Figure 1(a) shows a screen shot of a Toolkit for practicing basic ladder logic programming.Figure 1(b) shows a Toolkit for practicing timer instructions.The toolbox is on the left side of the window
of component i in the gaseous mixtureThe pure phase fugacity can be determined using an equation of state such as the van der Waalsequation. The van der Waals equation, shown below, is the simplest non-trivial equation ofstate, yet it provides a reasonable estimation of volumetric behavior of the vapor phase: v a P⋅vi P⋅vi (ln i − i + (Eqn 7) v ⋅b R⋅T ⋅v −1 −ln i R⋅T R⋅T R ⋅T aϕi = e i i