Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Jason Moore; Mitchell A. Thornton; Ronald W. Skeith

the next: In laboratory experiments 0, 1, and 3 students become familiar with the designtools. Experiment 0 is quite simply a tutorial out of the back of student’s textbooks [1],and there is no design work required on their part. Experiment 1 is an exercise designedto teach the students how to use the schematic capture tool including such things as thedifferent synthesis option available. Experiment 3 teaches them how to use the LPMmodules. This is very important since we emphasize design reuse and hierarchy. In experiment 2 students are given the schematic below and are asked toimplement the 2×8 multiplier in one VHDL entity. The students are also given awaveform to test their circuitry and a “golden” waveform to compare

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Lance C. Perez; Jerald L. Varner; Michael F. Anderson

the same manner as traditionalhomework assignments. Each laboratory assignment requires a brief written report that consistsof responses to questions posed in the laboratory protocol, concise discussions of the results, andprintouts of the oscilloscope and spectrum analyzer displays. Students typically write the reportas they are performing the laboratory and submit it via email. A formal laboratory report is notrequired. Each laboratory experiment is designed to take approximately 90 minutes. Thislaboratory does not have a teaching assistant and students have 24-hour access to the laboratoryvia electronic locks. The laboratory stations are assigned on a first come, first served basis andthey may not be reserved.Laboratory ExperimentsThere

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Julia Morse; Jung Oh

, and Instructional Delivery Innovations Introduction Laboratory Development Course Design and Development Curriculum Development Instructional Delivery Innovations f. Summary of Student Advising and Mentoring Activities g. List of Teaching Awards and Recognition h. Externally Funded Assistance for Teaching Activities i. Industry Outreach Impact on Classroom Teaching Figure 1. Sample teaching portfolio contents in promotion and tenure document. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Midwest Section

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Jung Oh

theseassignments become enjoyable course work and learning projects they are attached to in apersonal way. This project is one of my teaching strategy tools to respect a variety oflearning styles, to connect chemistry into our daily lives, and to engage students learningwith their own talents and insights.Introduction and ObjectivesOne of the seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education by Chickieringand Gamon’s is to respect diverse talents and ways of learning1. I have used theVARK(Visual, Aural, Read/Write, Kinesthetic) learning styles survey by Bonwell andFleming2 to recognize different leaning styles among my students and observedkinesthetic style as predominant learning style among engineering technology students asreported earlier3

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Christopher C. Ibeh; Marjorie Donovan; Oliver Hensley; James Otter

0 to 10 Difficulty 0 to 10 KNOWLEDGE ELEMENTS (EKEs) Laboratory Section Tensile Strength Testing 8.9 7.1 9.4 7.4 8.6 9.0 Impact Strength Test 9.0 6.7 8.4 7.2 8.1 7.9 Melt Flow Index 9.0 7.6 8.6 8.0 7.4 7.7 Torsional Test 3.9 2.4 3.2 3.8 4.0 3.4 Plastisol 2.4 1.6

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Steve Menhart

Transitioning a Microcontroller Course from Assembly Language to C Steve Menhart, Ph.D. Dept. of Engineering Technology University of Arkansas at Little Rock 2801 S. University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72204 AbstractThis paper describes improvements made to an integrated lecture and laboratory course dealingwith microcontrollers, taught in the Engineering Technology Department, at the University ofArkansas at Little Rock (UALR). This course initially used the Motorola 68HC11microcontroller, but currently uses the Motorola MC9S12DP256B

Collection

2004 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Norman D. Dennis

pretty plans than on real design”, no real data is available fordesign”, “our group was not technically prepared for the design”, or “the scope of the design wastoo big for one semester” were repeated every semester. The faculty, on the other hand saw, thecourse as one without ownership. Normally the faculty member assigned to the course viewed itas a teaching overload or service course which required significant preparation and did notcontribute materially to the generation of generate potential graduate students and detracted fromresearch. In short, the recurring problem with this course, independent of who taught is was thatstudents did not like it. They saw it a an exercise in learning how to produce pretty constructiondrawings rather than a