shown in Figure 4; thisis a key holder made of several assembled parts that would be screwed into a wall. Teams forthis course typically consisted of four members. In the fall 2012 semester, one team (out of nine)documented the use of the Mold Design tool to assist in the manufacturability of their product. Afill analysis of a part from that group’s project is shown in Figure 5. Over the course of threesemesters, no students have taken the opportunity to create tooling in lieu of their standardENTC 380 project. Page 23.38.5 Figure 2. Autodesk Mold Design Tool Fill Simulation of Phone Cover a. b
., 1996, Systems Engineering: An Approach to Information-Based Design, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Page 23.194.109 Sage, A. P., and Armstrong Jr., J. E., 2000, Introduction to Systems Engineering, Wiley and Sons.10 Nicholls, M. G., Cargill, B. J., & Dhir, K. S. (2004). Using OR for diagnosis and facilitation in change programmes: a university application. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(5), 440-452.11 de Figueiredo, J. N., Barrientos, M., & Angel, M. (2011). A decision support methodology for increasing school efficiency in Bolivia's low‐income communities. International Transactions in
descriptions, tentative schedule andcamp execution steps. The major parts of the camp were a) the recruitment and enrollmentprocess, b) STEM subjects, c) the camp schedule, d) STEM presentations, e) notebook/posterpreparation and competition, f) a field trip, and g) supporting educational camp components. Recruitment and Enrollment: The camp advertisement used traditional and onlinesources, upon finalizing the program contract with the sponsoring agency in April 2012.Extensive recruitment activities included camp flyer and email notice distribution to parents,school officials, and Educational Service Centers (Regions 1 and 2), local school presentations,customized descriptions of camp details to parents/students/school officials via emails and
design project determined by the faculty or students. The faculty expects a high levelof student performances as project managers, engineering designers, and technical professionals.3.2. Desired learning outcomesDesired learning outcome are defined based on ABET student outcomes. There are a number ofABET outcomes associated with the design course sequence as follows:The IRE students are required to apply engineering principals to achieve the best solutions thatmeet desire needs of their project (Outcome A). The students must design and conductexperiments to gain required knowledge of their project or to prove that their solution meet theneeds of project. (Outcome B). These experiments usually involve using modern engineeringtools and techniques
] −V (2)where V̂1, V ̂2 and V ̂3 are the unit vectors for the preceding z-axis, the current x-axis, and the nextz-axis respectively. Next, the scalar c is found in (3). Page 23.97.8 a [b] = [V]−1 [P3 − P1 ] (3) cThe point that describes the x axis is then computed in (4) ̂3 P2 = P3 + cV (4)where P3is the
freshman German Mechanical Engineers with an exposure to the concept ofengineering design, and sometimes the necessity to work with other disciplines. Exampleprojects included: “Heavy Transport with a Flexible Airship Transportation System”;“Construction of a Modular Coffee Machine System for Restaurants of Various Sizes”; Design Page 23.826.3of a Very Large Bar-B-Que Grill (the winning design was actually constructed and usedsuccessfully); “The Use of Water Absorption on Zeolites for Cooling”; “An Automatic HairCleaning Apparatus”; “Continuous Preparation of French Fries”; and “An Un-Manned Systemfor Destruction of Illegal Poppy Plants”.Based on the
2. Energy in the United States, Wikipedia,, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States 3. Engineering Future Chemical Engineers: Incorporation of Process Intensification Concepts into the Undergraduate Curriculum http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0837409 4. Wu, B., et. al. Promoting Awareness of Industrial Energy Efficiency and Waste reduction in University Students Population, Proceedings of ASEE Annual conference and Exhibition, 2007. 5. Foundation for Global Sustainability, Do You Know What Sustainability Mean?, http://www.korrnet.org/fgs/edu/index.html 6. Robert A. Frosch, “Sustainability Engineering (editorial)”, The Bridge 29:1, Spring 1999 7. UN
Engineering.Cambridge, MA: Academic Press Professional.10. Quintana, C., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2003). A Framework for Understanding the Development of Educational Software. In Jacko, J.A., & Sears, A. (Eds.), The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, (823- 834). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.11. Nielsen, J. (1992). Finding Usability Problems through Heursitic Evaluation. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 373-380.12. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering.Cambridge, MA: Academic Press Professional.13. Bernstein, B. L. (2011). Managing barriers and building supports in science and engineering doctoral programs: Conceptual underpinnings for a new online training program for women
introduction to programming with C++. Theimplemented strategy blended pre-recorded online lectures and homework assignments, with oneweekly optional face-to-face meeting. The same instructor taught both the blended instructionand the traditional face-to-face lecture. The focus of this study was twofold: a) determinepotential negative impact of the blended format, and b) identify the major predictors of finalperformance in this course. A one-way ANOVA analysis indicated no statistically significantdifferences in final course score between the control and the treatment groups. The analysis of aproposed path analysis model showed that self-efficacy, perceived engagement and perceiveddifficulty are significant predictors of students’ final performance in
Fellowship Program on Teachers’ Conceptions and Use of Inquiry Science,” Proceedings of the 2003 National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting.11. Pelleg, B, Urias, D, Fontecchio, A. and Fromm, E. (2011) “A Report on a GK-12 Program: Engineering as a Contextual Vehicle for Math and Science Education.” Proceedings of the 2011 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Page 23.117.1312. Lyons, J., Addison, V. and Thompson, S. (2007). “GK-12 Engineering Workshop for Science and Math Teachers,” Proceedings of the 2007 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
activity/action done during the fieldwork session (students were required to focus on one particular/small activity/action) b) Identify Problem(s)/shortcoming(s) in the way the activity/action was done c) Suggestion(s) as to how the activity/action could be improved for the futureAnalytical ReasoningFor students of the PEEC camp, as well as those in the surveying course offered in a regularsemester at the university, the greatest challenge was the trigonometry calculations. In a regularsemester course also a huge effort had to be made by the faculty member and the teachingassistants to guide the students through such calculations. At the PEEC camp also, the graduatestudents and the faculty member made such huge effort. Without
main components: a) thestudent’s computing-related major program; b) the entrepreneurship minor; and c) the culminatingentrepreneurship practicum. The requirements of the student’s major program, of course, varydepending on the particular major. For example, the CSE major consists of required and electivecourses in a range of topics from software design principles and practices to algorithms, fromcomputer systems and architectures to computer networking, from AI to computer graphics andvideo game design; and a culminating capstone project course which may, for example, consist ofdesigning and implementing a set of web services to meet the requirements of a real client.The entrepreneurship minor, offered in the business school, specialized for
purpose of our next interview to elicit responses to questions that we have and navigate through the interview. For this next interview 1. Please find 4 pictures (although you may use as many as 6): a. One that represents something about you as a person b. One that represents something about you as a professional c. One that represents your (primary) discipline d. One that represents your cross-disciplinary work 2. Make sure the pictures are in JPEG format. 3. Email your pictures to – [project email] no later than [date]. In the subject line include your name (Last name, First name) and date (mm/dd/yy). (Note: the photos will be on a password protected system) Figure 1. Instructions provided to
park model, Technovation, 12: 161-175.4. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. and Feldman, M.P. (1994) R&D spillovers and innovative activity, Managerial and Decision Economics, 15: 131-138.5. Anselin, L., Varga, A. and Acs, Z. (1996) Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Paper presented at the Forty-Third North American Meeting of the Regional Science Association International, Washington DC, November.6. Eicher, T. S. (1996) Interaction between endogenous human capital and technological change, Review of Economic Studies, 63: 127-144.7. Feldman, M.P. and Florida, R. (1994) The geographical sources of innovation: technological infrastructure and
. He has been designing circuits and building prototypes since he was nine years old. His first software program was written when he was fifteen and has been selling worldwide ever since. Carmen is also very passionate about intelligent lighting and has been a Lighting Designer for eleven years. He has been the LD for countless productions ranging from theater to national rock concerts. Carmen has worked for Synaptics Incorporated and Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing so far and cannot wait to start a career in embedded systems! He can be contacted at cab2753@rit.edu. Page 23.1195.1Michael B
Written Communication e,g 6 Project Management b,e 6,7 Visual Communication e,g 6 Math Skills b 3 Creative Problem Solving d 1,2 System Thinking d,e 4 Ethics and Professionalism a,i 8 Self-Learning h 5 Technology Skills a,f 1,2 Respect for diversity j 8
remove the husk and silk from an ear of corn. Thetwo problem statements are reproduced in Appendices A and B. The freshmen and sophomoresgenerated solutions to their problem statement for fifty minutes, while the seniors were giventwo hours.The students were asked to generate as many solutions as possible and to maximize the qualityand variety of their solutions. They spent the full time period generating solutions and werenotified when there was five minutes remaining. The solutions were analyzed using the ideationmetrics: quantity of non-redundant ideas, quality, novelty, and variety, which are detailed in thenext section. Regression analyses were completed to compare these metrics to the self-conceptsfrom the self-efficacy instrument.Of the
,students gave an average rating of 4.4 or above to the following: This course wassuccessful at helping me a) gain factual knowledge b) learn fundamental principles c)learn to apply course material d) learn how to use resources to answer questions and e)acquire an interest in learning more. The statement “overall I rate this course asexcellent” received an average 4.6 on the same scale. Student comments reflect theirsense that the course was well designed “The experiments we did in class were a greatway to see the theory we discussed come true”; “It was a great way to connect what wewere learning to the everyday life of cooking.”. The main criticism for the course wasthat it had no dedicated kitchen-laboratory space
Paper ID #8156Introduce Computer Engineering to Middle School Students through a Sci-ence ProjectDr. Suxia Cui, Prairie View A&M UniversityDr. Yonghui Wang, Prairie View A&M University Dr. Yonghui Wang earned a B.S. in technical physics from Xidian University at Xi’an, China in 1993; an M.S. in electrical engineering from Beijing Polytechnic University at Beijing, China in 1999; and a Ph.D. in computer engineering from Mississippi State University at Starkville in 2003. From 1993 to 1996, he was an Engineer with the 41st Electrical Research Institute at Bengbu, China. From July 1999 to December 1999, he worked as
large, multi-national oil company; and through personal contacts.With respondent permission, the interviews were tape recorded and transcribed. Detailed notes(and, occasionally verbatim quotes) were taken during interviews that were not recorded. Thethemes discussed below emerged from a focused coding procedure that coded interviews for thefollowing: (a) the extent to which LGBT issues were discussed in respondents’ engineeringworkplaces, (b) how these issues were discussed, and (c) the consequences of those discussions(or lack thereof) for LGBT respondents.Processes of DepoliticizationThe interviews covered a wide range of topics, from respondents’ education history, to theircoming out process in college, to their experiences with mentors, co
Sciences to the benefit of the EE program. Page 23.458.6Bibliography1. Ernst Weber and Frederik Nebeker. Evolution of Electrical Engineering: A Personal Perspective, 1994.2. John D. Ryder and Donald G. Fink. Engineers and Electrons: A Century of Electrical Progress, 1993.3. Robert B. Stone, Nancy Hubing, Timothy Philpot and James Schroetlin. “Strinking a Balance between Engineering Science and Engineering Design: Creation of an Interdisciplinary Engineering Program”, International Conference on Engineering Design, 2003.4. Alexandra E. Coso, R. Reid Bailey and Ellen Minzenmayer. “How to Approach an Interdisciplinary Engineering
Paper ID #7432ELECTRONIC PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCES FOR UN-DERGRADUATE STUDENTS: A NASA SPONSORED EXAMPLEDr. Jay R Porter P.E., Texas A&M University Jay R. Porter joined the Department of Engineering Technology and Industrial Distribution at Texas A&M University in 1998 and is currently the Program Director for the Electronics Program. He received the BS degree in electrical engineering (1987), the MS degree in physics (1989), and the Ph.D. in electrical engineering (1993) from Texas A&M University. His areas of interest in research and education include product development, analog/RF electronics
, “Product Development In The Curriculum: One Clean-Sheet Approach,” 1996 ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition, Washington, DC, United States, 1996.4. W. Birmingham, B. Allison, J. Dupree, “Entrepreneurship via Multidisciplinary Product Development,” 2007ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, HI, United States, 2007.5. L. Carlson, J. Sullivan, “Exploring Entrepreneurship through Product Development: A Hands-On Approach,”2002 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2002.6. J. Porter, J. Morgan, W. Zhan, G. Wright, “Product and System Development: Creating A New Focus for anElectronics Engineering Technology Program,” 2012 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio, TX,United States, 2012.7. J. Porter, J
domains,” Educational Technology, May, 1991, pp. 24-33.20. TAMU, ACTION 2015: Education First Reallocation ($21M) and AMP (non-Research Roadmap) for FY 2012, Sept. 1, 201121. Ulrich, K. T. and Eppinger, S. D., “Product Design and Development,” 5th Edition, McGraw-Hill, Irwin, 2011.22. Untener, J., “Product Development in the Curriculum: One Clean-Sheet Approach,” 1996 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Washington, DC, United States, 1996.23. Zhan, W., Zoghi, B., and Fink, R., “A Course Project with a Focus on Product Development Process,” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2007
AndersenDr. Wayne B. Krause, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Dr. Wayne B. Krause is a semi-retired professor emeritus (mechanical engineering) at the S. D. School of Mines and Technology (SDSM&T). He currently teaches thermal science courses in the department. Dr. Krause has been involved in engineering education for over 35 years. Previously, he was head of the mechanical engineering department and later he was dean of one of the colleges at SDSM&T. Dr. Krause is a life member of ASME and a registered professional engineer in South Dakota. Dr. Krause obtained his doctoral degree from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and his BSME and MSME from SDSM&T
Engineers.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Ph.D., is education administrator of the EPICS Program at Purdue University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Jngineering and Ph.D. in Engineering Education all from Purdue University. She has served as a lecturer in Purdue’s School of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. Zoltowski’s academic and research interests include human-centered design learning and assessment, service-learning, ethical reasoning assessment, leadership, and assistive technology. Page 23.151.1 c American
Paper ID #6691Bringing Creativity into the Lab EnvironmentDr. Clifton B. Farnsworth, Brigham Young University Dr. Clifton Farnsworth received his B.S. and M.S. in Civil Engineering from Brigham Young University and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from the University of Utah. He worked as a geotechnical engineer for eight years with the Utah Department of Transportation, spent three years as an assistant professor of civil engineering at the University of Texas, Tyler, and has a current appointment as an assistant professor of construction management at Brigham Young University.Dr. Ronald W. Welch, The Citadel Dr. Ron
, many participants’ commented on the challenge of an engineering major inseveral ways, but in general they made it clear that the challenges they faced in majoring inengineering shaped their identity and how they saw others. Ava from HSI1 reported that, “…[B]ut every time I meet an engineer, they’re very passionate about challenges. The morechallenging a question, the better; like the more that they can think like out of the box, thebetter.” Michael from HBCU1 even faced some doubt, “…I thought about changing my majorseveral times. I probably think about changing my major every other week because it is hardand…it’s just hard. It’s difficult, you know.” Daniel from HBCU2 did not share Michael’sdoubt, he stated: I feel like I wanted to be
Paper ID #6178Development and Initial Validation of an Innovation AssessmentDr. Geoff Wright, Brigham Young University Dr. Geoffrey A. Wright is an assistant professor of Technology and Engineering Education in the College of Technology and Engineering at Brigham Young University.Mr. Paul T Skaggs, Brigham Young UniversityMr. Jacob Dean Wheadon, Purdue UniversityDr. Clifton B. Farnsworth, Brigham Young University Clifton Farnsworth received B.S. and M.S. degrees in civil engineering from Brigham Young University and a Ph.D. in civil engineering from the University of Utah. He worked as a geotechnical engineer for eight
- and post-Comm) were identical, asking students about their experiencewith and attitudes towards giving presentations. Survey 1 was administered before the studentsgave presentations in their communication course (Pre-Comm). In total, 62 engineering studentsparticipated in the pre-Comm survey. Survey 2 was administered after the student presentations(Post-Comm). In total, 15 engineering students participated in the post-Comm survey. SeeAppendix B for the full pre- and post-Comm surveys.Survey 3: Pre- Presentation IdolA “Pre-Presentation Idol Registration Survey” (Appendix C) was available for students tocomplete when they registered to participate in Idol, and 12 registrants completed this survey. Inthe spring of 2012, a total of 30 students