responded.The inaugural Mentoring Program occurred during the fall 2010 semester, the first timeFundamentals was taught, with 48 students in two sections. The fall 2010 MP was a learningexperience for the faculty as well as for the students. The students contacted their mentors viaemail with specific questions three times during the semester. There was a four-week intervalbetween emails.The first email served essentially as an ice-breaker: 1. Introduce yourself as a student in Civil Engineering Fundamentals. 2. Ask your Mentor the following questions. a. How did you choose engineering as your undergraduate major in college? b. Do you find that you undergraduate engineering education prepared you
interactive discussion. Avariety of activities helps maintain interest and allows for differing modes of assessment.Assessment in the course consists of a combination of Pass or Fail (PF) checks balancedwith fully graded work. The PF category includes: a) study guide question responsesassociated with required readings, videos or lecture notes, b) reflective writing inresponse to a specific prompt, and c) completion of steps associated with a mini-experiment or mini-project. PF assessment facilitates instructor time-management, whileproviding sufficient incentive for students to participate. The instructor can apply a strictor more lenient quality control filter on submitted work, as appropriate. Failed work canbe returned to students with feedback on
). Introduction to Electrical Engineering. Prentice Hall.5. Vahid, F. (2006). Digital Design. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated.6. Brown, S. & Vranesic, Z. (2009). Fundamentals of Digital Logic with VHDL Design. McGraw Hill Higher Education.7. Wakerly, J. F. (2006). Digital Design: Principles and Practices. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.8. Givone, D. D. (2003). Digital Principles and Design. McGraw Hill.9. Marcovitz, A. B. (2008). Introduction to Logic and Computer Design. McGraw Hill Higher Education.10. Hwang, E. O. Digital Logic and Microprocessor Design with VHDL. Toronto: Thomson, 2006.11. Herman, G. L., Zilles, C., & Loui, M. C. (2011). Flip-flops in students' conceptions of state. IEEE Transactions
shown in Appendix A. An example of what an Assessment Bar Chart may look like is shown inAppendix B. The author chose to assess seven categories that he considered important inthis study. Likert scale analysis was carried out and mode values have been plotted onthe x-axis. Referring to the bar chart shown in Appendix B, one can draw these conclusions. None of the characteristics observed scored the maximum possible likert scalescore of 5. We should also point out the fact that none of the characteristics observedscored the minimum possible likert scale score of 1. A likert scale score of 4 was recorded for the following: • Providing Feedback to Students • Course Objectives, Skills and
Page 25.987.8grade they deserve.However, if you do grade simply on instructor intuition, we offer a cautionary note. If we hadnot spent one semester relying solely on the grade sheet, our instructor intuition would have notmatured. As a result, we probably would have had an abundance of grades in the middle of thegrading spectrum. Without the cut sheet as a reference to fall back to, the assessment of studentlearning may tend to become diluted placing everyone in the C+-to-B+ range.So the summation of our experience regarding first term instructor grading comes down to twopoints. First, trust your intuition but be aware that grades tend to pile up in the B/C range if thatis all you do. Second, balance your intuition off of a cut sheet or
asSLO 3 and SLO 11 in the figures) are listed below respectively: 1. Student learning outcome c (SLO 3) a. Carries out design process (such as concept generation, modeling, evaluation, iteration) to satisfy project requirements for thermal and/or mechanical systems. Page 25.222.4 b. Works within realistic constraints, (such as economical, environmental, social, political, manufacturability, health and safety, ethical, and sustainability) in realizing systems. c. Builds prototypes that meet design specifications. 2
‘Why is B wrong?’ Make it a classroom wide discussion to correct misunderstandings and reaffirms the answer. • A picture is worth a thousand words. Show histograms from the individual vote and the post discussion vote together especially when they show great improvement. The first time the students see the effectiveness of their discussions, they will be amazed and motivated to continue in peer discussion. [1][10]4.2 Pitfalls to Avoid Based on the experiences presented in this paper, the following recommendations aresuggested: • Because the concept quizzes were only graded based on participation, it was tough to avoid students who would “just click in” to get credit rather than spend time really
at Michigan State University strives for its graduates toacquire the abilities and attributes listed below by integrating the knowledge and skills acquiredin a diverse set of courses, through the culture of the program, and the attitude of the programfaculty. a. Apply the knowledge of basic mathematics, science, and engineering b. Design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret data c. Design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability d. Function on multidisciplinary teams e. Identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f. Understand
Section Conference. 2. Elzarka, H., Suckarieh, G., and Uwakweh, B. (2002) “Redesigning the Senior Construction Management Capstone Courses at the University of Cincinnati,” ASC Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference. 3. Catalano, G. (2004) “Senior Capstone Design and Ethics: A Bridge to the Professional World,” Science and Engineering Ethics, 10, 2. 4. Mills, T., and Beliveau, Y. (1999) “Vertically Integrating a Capstone Experience: A Case Study for a New Strategy,” Journal of Construction Education, 3, 3. 5. Padmanabhan, G., and Katti, D. (2002) “Using Community-Based Projects in Civil Engineering Capstone Courses,” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Director (GD) 3. Graduate Coordinator (GC) B. Icebreaker Activity – to be determined C. Overview of the learning objectives -“Why am I at Orientation?” D. Overview of Orientation – “What will we be doing today?” - Material: printed schedules II. Introduction to the department: will last approximately an hour A. GD – What students need to accomplish (i.e. department learning objectives) B. GC and Current Students (CS) – discuss the major milestones - Material: printed handout C. Activity: Build you timeline - Material: paper, markers, etc. III. Overview of research Community and Professionalism: will last approximately an hour
, New Jersey, U.S.A.: Prentice Hall.3) Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York, NY, U.S.A.: David McKay Co. Inc.4) Dziegielewski, B., Kiefer, J. C., Opitz, E. M., Lantz, G. L., Porter, G. A., (2000). Commercial and Industrial End Uses of Water. Washington, DC: American Water Works Association.5) Oertel, H., Prandtl, L. (2004). Prandtl’s Essentials of Fluid Mechanics. Boehle, M., Mayes, K., (Eds.). New York, NY: Springer.6) Calvert, J. B. (2003). Turbines. In Tech Index, University of Denver. Retrieved from http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/fluids/turbine.htm#Refs
(b) Use activity-based guided-inquiry curricular materials (c) Use a learning cycle beginning with predictions (d) Emphasize conceptual understanding (e) Let the physical world be the authority (f) Evaluate student understanding (g) Make appropriate use of technology (h) Begin with the specific and move to the generalIdentifying Critical engineering Concepts and Misconceptions Misconceptions related to heat, energy and temperature are widely recognized in the literature(Carlton, 2000; Jasien and Oberem, 2002; Thomas et al., 1995; Sozbilir, 2003). This study focuses onfour targeted concept areas related to heat transfer that were
of a statistical test ofsignificance.The first desired outcome was for students to understand the definition of sustainabledevelopment, the concept of life cycle stages, and the steps and environmental processesincluded in life cycle assessments (Fink’s “foundational knowledge”6). Comparison of thebefore and after survey results (Figure 1, Appendix question 1) indicates a significant increase in Before After a. I can define the term "product life cycle". b. I can list most of the stages in the life cycle of a product that I use every day (e.g., something in my backpack or home). c. I can define the term
the laboratory notebooks. The notebooks are intended to contain allideas and notes over the course of the project and provide evidence of the models that studentteams use as well as their model progression and the strategies that they consider. This source iscomplemented by the written assignments and the experimental records from the virtuallaboratory database. These latter sources serve to confirm, explain or expand upon the notebookcontent.“Think-Aloud” Protocol AnalysisTwo teams, labeled Team A and Team B, were observed and audio recorded for the completeduration of the project, which represents 15.3 and 9.5 hours of recorded work, respectively.During this time, students were instructed to verbalize their thoughts but were not encouraged
byElectrical Engineering and Physics majors.We first introduced “Equations in Words” in our courses as part of homework or in-classproblem packets. We showed students an example of an equation in words to clarify theexpectation that they were not to do a literal translation symbol by symbol but that they had tothink about the physical meaning of the equation. A typical “Equations in Words” problem fromthe Waves unit in Classical Physics II is shown below: Consider the following equation: ∆L = 𝑛 + 1 2 𝜆 n = 0, 1, 2, 3, … a) This equation applies to: b) The variables and their units are: ΔL n λ c) Explain the equation in your own words: d) Draw
Figures 1-a and 1-b. The student will distinguish how changes in geometry, in this case represented by theincrease in the angle β, produce an increase in the reactions and the internal forces of the system(Figures 1-a and 1-b). Note that shear in the beam undergoes an increase in the order of 5 timesand the flexural moment in the order of 3 times due to changes in the angle.While the course presents methods ofanalysis, it is also introducing designconcepts implicit in it. The studentwill understand the importance oftaking into account the geometry of thesystems to perform an efficient design.The instructor will provide and showthe students the graphic resultsobtained with the program.Problems 1-a and 1-b can be extendedto study issues related
Page 25.876.930 rad/sec, so the combined open-loop transfer function has the form: V(s) 30A = U(s) (s + b)(s + 30) Figure 12: Open-loop Bode plot of the LEGO NXT motorThe take-home section of the experiment allows students to see the behavior of the PI and PIDcontrols that they created in the previous part of the experiment. They are able to apply conceptslearned in class to see the frequency response of different systems and use the frequencyresponse to create a Bode plot from which they are able to derive a transfer function for thesystem. The main difficulty for the students in this section is
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
, no. 4, pp. 375-386, 2007.[3] B. E. Carruthers and P. A. Clingan, "Use of FLUENT Software in a First-Year Microfluidic Course," in ASEE Annual Conference, Vancouver, Canada, 2011.[4] J. Gurlitt and A. Renkl, "Prior Knowledge Activation: How Different Concept Mapping Tasks Lead to Substantial Difference in Cognitive Processes, Learning Outcomes, and Precieved Self-Efficacy," Instructional Science, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 417-433, 2010.[5] W. C. Cole, "Graphical Applications: Analysis and Manufacturing," Engineering Design Graphics Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 43-49, 1999.[6] N. Fang, G. A. Stewardson and M. Lubke, "Work in Progress - An Innovative Instructional Model for Improving Manufacturing Engineering Education," in Fronteirs
indicatethat they copy homework assignments 16.8% of the time). Table 1 - Comparison of student attitudes about academic integrity Question Response1 USA INTL N % N % p Sig. Diff a) Time 335 46.6 69 68.1 0.00 Yes b) Material difficulty 335 42.1 69 46.4 0.26 No When you cheat, MOST OFTEN it is c) Opportunity 335 3.9 69 4.3 0.44 No because of
levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.11. a. Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute leadership. b. Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.12. a. Remove barriers that rob the hourly paid worker of his right to pride in workmanship. The responsibility of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers to quality. b. Remove barriers that rob people in management and engineering of their right to pride in workmanship. This means, inter alia, abolishment of the
B is on a journey j to thhe main landd but is stuckk on an islannd.Tinker Bell B has also run r out of piixie dust so she s must finnd a way to uuse her tinkeering talents todesign a way to get across a the waater (fabric) to the mainlland (a chairr). You and a few friendss (agroup of three) have been asked to t help Tink ker Bell by uusing some “found” objects to createe away to geet Tinker Beell across thee water. Tw wo chairs havve been setupp for you, onne is the islaandwhere Tiinker Bell is stuck and th he other is th he mainland which is whhere Tinker B
b 200 µ m 100 µ m Figure 3: a) Single-phase mixing device b) droplet-generating device.There are three experiments in the electrokinetics section. One experiment examines the effectof buffer pH and microbead surface charge on its electrokinetic mobility, one observeselectrokinetic flow profiles with varying device material, and the last one separates food dyesusing electrophoresis14-15. For the first experiment, students use devices where the channels andbottom are all made of PDMS. This means that the devices must be bonded to PDMS-coatedglass slides, not just plain glass, which allows for easier analysis as the channel is formed fromone material. The students then study
, and the program does not require scholarships or subsidies for itto operate and grow. For both the German and US students, the added cost of spending theBSME senior year abroad instead of at home is approximately US$3,400 — which includes the Page 25.896.4cost of two transatlantic round-trip tickets!The standard study plans for US and German students are shown in Appendices A and B,respectively. In the case of the US student, it assumes no advance placement credits, transfercredits, or prior German language instruction. It also assumes that the student waits until his orher 6th semester to start learning German, which is that last opportunity
different groups (competition vs. non-competition) were not statistically different (p-value = 0.07); however, the range was muchsmaller for the year in which the competition project was used, indicating that the students’learning experiences were similar for that year.Table 1. Grade results for class projects. Results are grouped by instructor and broken out intosemesters in which there was a competition-based project and not. Instructor A Instructor B Non- Non- Competition Competition Competition Competition n 43 20 82
faculty workload. The CM faculty workload for the last twosemesters is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1: CM Faculty Mentor Workload (2 Semesters) Faculty ID No. of Projects No. of Students A 4 10 B 1 3 C 3 7 D 3 8 E 2 6 F 1 3 G 3 9 H 2 6 Total
capricious, and the evaluations then may be seen as invalid or not helpful. Page 25.590.3Table 2: Specific course outcomes for the first semester of Integrated Product and ProcessDesign 1. Describe and apply the steps of the concept development phase on the design process, including: a. Establish a project objective statement as a framework for the project. b. Identify customer needs, develop target specifications that assure meeting the needs, and determine test criteria and procedures to determine whether the specifications are met. c. Generate multiple concepts for meeting the design
experiences of the author, some characteristics that can promote a topic’sutilization in the EFFECTs methodology include: (a) a basic familiarity of the topic by students,(b) topics and concepts for which hands-on learning activities can be developed, (c) the existenceof fundamental principles, equations, or laws that can be taught to students such that they canapply this information to refine their estimate of the answer to the driving question, and (d) atopic that is somehow interesting, immediate, or relevant to students such that it will capturetheir attention and enthusiasm. In this regard, Solar Power was selected for the development ofthe materials, resources, and activities that support the EFFECTs methodology. The handoutssupplied to
inferences, andcorrectly and efficiently solving problems.According to the International Reading Association, levels of literacy can be described as threelevels [2]: (a) Basic literacy – the ability to decode, recognize, and comprehend printed signs,symbols, and words; (b) Proficient Literacy – the ability to extend ideas, make inferences, drawconclusions; and (c) Advanced Literacy – the ability to use language to solve problems and toextent cognitive development. If we would take a closer look at the proficient and advancedliteracy, we would see the perfect overlaps between the skills that engineering faculty strives toteach in problem-solving and that are defined in levels of literacy. Research has shown thatproviding students with explicit
in one sector ofthe economy technological innovation will ensure that an equal number of jobs (and hopefullymore) will be created elsewhere. It is with the challenge to this last view that this paper isprimarily concerned.Supporting dataCurrent data seemingly supports this axiom but it is often difficult to interpret. Some data revealsgeneral shortages: for example in 2011 the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) reported that40% of companies had difficulties recruiting people with science, technology, engineering, andmaths skills. But it did not say at what level these skills were wanted [14].Other data reveals specific shortages [12(b), 15]. A striking example of a specific shortage is thatbeing experienced by the resurging nuclear