, and for the highest profit total.Because students are supposed to have had no prior training in Python or PYroMat, a sampleRankine cycle code (Appendix B) is provided for the students to use as a baseline for modification.Figure 1 shows a sample output of the code. Instructors monitoring the lab should be prepared tooffer a basic level of mentoring with the language. As PYroMat is used to automate the propertyretrieval process, students are able to rapidly swap out components, adjusting the limits of theirsimulated cycle. We recommend that students be given three weeks to investigate the assignment.Faculty office hours in a computer lab should be scheduled to provide assistance with Python. Weallow student groups to self-select but recommend
using multiple sensors. Each team collectedreadings from their own sensor unit as the magnetic source was moved about the space betweenthe sensors. The data collected from each team was distributed so that all teams had a copy ofthe combined data set. A MATLAB program was used for post-processing the multipoint dataso that the combined results from all the sensors could be viewed for analysis, as shown inFigure 5.Figure 4: Student Lab Team photo of Hardware Sensor configuration for Multipoint Experiment (Sensors located at positions A,B, C, and D).Figure 5: MATLAB software interface for Multipoint post-analysis.The effectiveness of the lab tool was assessed from the student lab reports. Students are requiredto use a Lab Report template (shown
, often within hours of first exposure to theapplication8. This rapid generation of creative artifacts, coupled with sound samples rooted inmodern musical genres such as R&B, dubstep, hip-hop and electronica, provides enhanced levelsof student engagement and social esteem.Through observational studies of EarSketch in classrooms, it is clear that engagement in project-based STEM and STEAM curriculum holds some hidden challenges. Specifically, studentengagement, in this case meaning active participation in curricular activities, tells only part of thestory. While a majority of students in a class may be productively participating, researchersobserved that some students fixated on artistic expression without necessarily engaging insubstantial
of the shear stress must occur somewhere on the boundary. Consider a cylindrical or prismatic bar of constant cross section which is twisted and heldin equilibrium by twisting moments applied at its ends. The bar is considered to be composed ofan isotropic material possessing the idealized stress-strain relationship for an elastic, perfectlyplastic material shown in Figure 1. Increasing torque causes the material to pass from the elasticregion (line AB, Figure 1) into the perfectly plastic range (line BC, Figure 1). After a point in thecross section reaches the yield stress in shear (point B), this maximum shearing stress remains aconstant value k as increasing torque causes an increase in the plastic region of the bar
hiredto help run the study group. In these arrangements, the faculty-lead facilitated study groups forStatics and Thermodynamics have one faculty and two TAs, and each FSG is a weekly studysession open to all students who want to be involved in small peer group learning environment,get help for their homework, and improve their understanding of course materials. TAs arerecommended by the teaching faculty in the related subject areas, and those chosen all havepreviously completed the course with an earned grade of B+ and above.The paper presents our findings in running the faculty driven peer FSGs for Statics andThermodynamics. Of all eligible students who registered for these courses, more than 20% of thestudents participated in the FSGs. Post
studies.ReferencesChen, B. DeNoyelles, A., Thompson, K., Sugar, A. & Vargas, J. (2014). Discussion Rubrics.In K. Thompson and B. Chen (Eds.), Teaching Online Pedagogical Repository. Orlando, FL:University of Central Florida Center for Distributed Learning. Retrieved March 24, 2017 fromhttps://topr.online.ucf.edu/index.php?title=Discussion_Rubrics&oldid=3649Chiou, R., & Tseng, T. B., & Ertekin, Y., & Carr, M. E. (2013, June), A Graduate EngineeringTechnology Online Course in Sustainable and Green Manufacturing Paper presented at 2013ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. https://peer.asee.org/19064Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Goodrich, T., Carteaux, B., & Tuzun, H. (2002).Empowerment design work: Building
curriculum.II. WHERE IN THE CURRICULUM AND WHYAs per the Tec/Abet guidelines, the undergraduate technology programs, approximately 2/3rd ofcourses are program related technical courses. A typical curriculum of Electrical or Electronic andComputer Engineering Technology has following tracks: a) Circuits b) Digital design c) Programming d) Sensing, Acquisition and Signal Processing e) Energy f) Electronics g) Communication h) Control i) Embedded SystemEach track has the room for 2 or 3 of the 3 credit courses. Let us also look at the typical offering ofcourses in the telecommunication track: a) Analog communication b) Digital communication c) Wireless communication d) Fiber optic communication e) Laser communication f
leading the development and implementation of solid modeling conceptsin the CAD industry.Two institutions with different approaches in their graphics offerings are, institution A (Universityof Wisconsin - Waukesha) there is now a hybrid semester course where half of the course usesAutodesk’s AutoCAD, and the other half of the semester is done utilizing Autodesk’s Inventor.The other institution is B (Western Michigan University) which offers a semester course based oninstruction utilizing solid modeling packages, first Siemens’ NX and then Dessault Systemes’CATIA. The offerings at both institutions are for students that have already decided on engineeringor engineering technology programs, and both institutions are in a semester schedule. These
also made a B or A incalculus I and a B or A in physics I. Thirty percent of these same students earned a B or A incalculus II. Therefore, more than a well-founded background in math is needed before success instatics is certain.So why do students who are so successful in mathematics and physics struggle in statics?Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University suggest that developing an incorrect free-bodydiagram is a leading cause of low performance in statics (Steif and Hansen 2006). Free-bodydiagrams identify the particular system of forces that need to be analyzed, and if incorrect, thestudent will solve a “bogus” problem. One study suggests that wrong free-body diagrams resultfrom the practice of representing forces and moments as mathematic
tools like Jupyter Notebooks, which can combine text, live code, and other content. Several new professional development workshops for faculty, that focus on: o Writing and sequencing effective questions in an activity. o Identifying cultural bias, and making activities more culturally relevant. o Using patterns for activities and classroom facilitation.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by US National Science Foundation grants DUE-1044679 (CS-POGIL) and DUE-1626765 (IntroCS-POGIL), a grant from the AAC&U TIDESInstitute and the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, a Google CS4HS grant, andmultiple Google CS Engagement grants.References1. A.W. Boykin, P. Noguera
first model and a maximum of 31.6 MPa for the second model as shown in Figure 3. From these results, we can conclude that the width of legs in the second model was too small and should be increased for further stability. However, even though (a) (b) the first model experienced much smaller Figure 2. Boundary conditions simulating total weight of Von Mises stresses, it buckled more than the mounted plane onto the pole
not written to conform to the structure illustrated in Figure 3. a. Example: “Projects tend to be extremely overwhelming when viewed in the holistic sense, but when a plan of attack is proposed that breaks down the project into smaller tasks, the project becomes more conceivable and therefore more manageable.” – AME4163 student, Fall 2016 b. Regardless of a lesson expressed, the student fails to put the learning in the context of an experience and therefore is not a learning statement. 2. One point: Statements receive a rating of one point if the structure is present but the insight is trivial or obvious. a. Example: “Through
,debugging, and testing their design, it would have been quite challenging both logistically andtechnically for the whole class of 18 students to share one multiuser transmitter. Consequently,the students were split into 3 groups of 6 students, and each of the 3 groups was provided a singlemultiuser transmitter to share among the 6 students. Within each group of 6 students, the studentswere asked to form pairs, with each pair of students constituting a team. This partition is shown inFig. 3. Group A Group B Team #1-A Team #1-B Team #2-A Team #3-A Team #2-B Team #3-B
are also sometimes used in situations where feedback is beingcollected, such as the constructive criticism technique “I like… / I wish…” described by Tomand David Kelley in their book, Creative Confidence [10].The Open Sentences architecture involves a facilitator and a group of students that has beenorganized into pairs (person A and person B). The facilitator provides the opening to a sentence.A good open sentence fits these criteria: it is in the first person (an “I” sentence), it has manypossible completions, and it prompts personal reflection. To offer a real-life example from afirst-year engineering course centered on biomimetic design, an instructor might prepare studentsfor a new project with prompts such as “I am excited about
Paper ID #19151Practitioner Experience Meets Graduate Academic Research: How Intersec-tions Guide the Work of Returning Engineering Ph.D. StudentsDr. Jaclyn K. Murray, University of Michigan Jaclyn K. Murray is a Research Fellow at the University of Michigan in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Her interests include creativity in design, student learning, and the integration of engineering design into secondary science courses.Dr. Shanna R. Daly, University of Michigan Shanna Daly is an Assistant Professor in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Michigan. She has a B.E. in Chemical Engineering from the
, June. https://peer.asee.org/2168119. Bowen, B. (2013) “Teachers in Industry: Measuring the Impact of a K-12 Teacher Internship Program,” 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA, June. https://peer.asee.org/2251920. Eison, J. (1990) “Confidence in the Classroom: Ten Maxims for New Teachers,” College Teaching, 38(1), 21- 25.Appendix A: TeachEngineering Site Pop-Up Survey1. How often do you teach curriculum from the TeachEngineering digital library in a classroom? a. Weekly b. Monthly c. 5-10 times a year d. 2-4 times a year e. Once a year f. Never2. Please tell us about any student benefits you see from using TeachEngineering curriculum.3. Do you anticipate that you will continue to use TeachEngineering
example proposed by Jacobs and Park (2009, p. 144) Category Location of Degree of Role of Example from Jacobs and Park (2009) learning planning facilitator A Off-the-job Unstructured Passive Study leave, educational leave B Off-the-job Unstructured Active (None provided) C Off-the-job Structured Passive Self-directed learning D Off-the-job Structured Active Web-based training, group-based classroom, corporate university E On-the-job Unstructured Passive Casual coaching, ad hoc mentoring, job
student outcomes withinan engineering competition. We specifically examined student discourse as related to the ABET(2013) technical outcomes including (outcome a) content knowledge, (outcome b)experimentation, (outcome c) design, outcome (e) problem solving, and outcome (k) use of tools.These outcomes are critical to becoming an engineer (Balascio, 2014). Our research questionsincluded:1. How do students describe their learning experiences within engineering competitions?2. What is the nature of their reflective discourse that revealed their learning?This paper is a work in progress has not yet been completed.Methods. The design for the study was qualitative. Qualitative methods provided the means tounderstand students’ learning using students
) and to provide more context around the participant’s access and experienceworking with computers growing up.Intake 1. Please tell me your major and how you came to choose that major. 2. Describe what programming is to you. (a) What does it mean to “be a programmer”? (b) Do you consider yourself a programmer? Why or why not? 3. Describe how programming is integrated into the curriculum in your major. (a) What did you learn from the curricular activities vs. on your own? 4. Tell me about the project you will be working on today. (a) Why did you choose to start it? (b) How long have you been working on it? (c) How often do you work on it? (d) When do you think it will be complete?Outtake 1. Think back
. BibliographyEast, S., Butts, J., Papa, M., & Shenoi, S. (2009). A Taxonomy of Attacks on the DNP3 Protocol. In C. Palmer & S. Shenoi (Eds.), Critical Infrastructure Protection III (Vol. 311, pp. 67–81). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3- 642-04798-5_5IEEE SA - 1815-2012 - IEEE Standard for Electric Power Systems Communications-Distributed Network Protocol (DNP3). (2016, September 25). Retrieved September 25, 2016, from https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/1815-2012.htmlIEEE Xplore Abstract Record. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6249320/Rawal, B. S., Karne, R. K., & Wijesinha, A. L. (2012). Split protocol
Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016- 17 Edition, Electrical and Electronics Engineers, on the Internet at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/architecture-and-engineering/electrical-and-electronics- engineers.htm (visited January 31, 2017)Douglas, K. A., & Mihalec-Adkins, B. P., & Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2014, June), Boys and Girls Engineering Identity Development in Early Elementary Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. https://peer.asee.org/20126Friday Institute for Educational Innovation (2012). Middle and High School STEM-Student Survey. Raleigh, NC: Author.Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental
assignmentthey want to complete, and a new page shows the questions similar to Figure 2. Students clickthe “Respond” button to record their response before proceeding to the next question. If studentsare unhappy with the first recorded response, they can re-record their response as many times asthey wish before submitting the assignment. (a) (b) Figure 2. Recap Student View (a) and Sample Question (b).At the end of the semester, students were asked to fill out a four-question survey. The questionsincluded “How much did the use of Recap help increase your understanding of the coursematerial?”, “For daily quizzes, what ratio of Recap quizzes to Canvas quizzes would youprefer?”, “Would you recommend other professors
about students’undergraduate degree and in the second part questions were asked about students’ perception oftheir knowledge of the topics covered in a two-semester course sequence offered at UTSA.The first part of the survey asked the following questions: Please circle the appropriate answers o I am: (a) undergraduate student (b) MS student (c) PhD student o My undergraduate degree was/is in: (a) mechanical engineering (b) Other degree (specify) ______________ o As an undergraduate student I took (a) no (b) one or (c) two thermodynamic courses. o If a graduate student, I received my undergraduate degree at (a) UTSA (b) Other institution (specify
-Nichols method.6 Design a PID controller using the proper Ziegler-Nichols method. For the simulation usethe step input. Nm 1 Va (s ) + Km N L J m La L (s) Kp 3 ( J m Ra Dm La ) 2 ( Dm Ra K b K m k m La ) _ s s k
, Society for Industrial and Ap-plied Mathematics, Tsuami Society International - Reviewer of Itnernational Journal of Science & Infor-matics (IJSI) and Precision Instrument and Mechanology (PIM).(iv) Conferences organized or related subjects None(e) Collaborators and other affiliationsW. He (University of Missouri-St. Louis), F. Lin (University of Maryland Eastern Shore), A. Chi (Uni-versity of Maryland Eastern Shore), B. Li (Institute of Mathematics, Chinese Academy of Science), H.Wang (Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics).Co-editors: NoneGraduate Students (co)-advised: 2Postdoctoral researchers mentored in the past five years: None c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017
…………………………………….(1)-9 I3 + 20 I2 – 9 I1 = 0………………………………..……(2)0 I3 – 9 I2 + 15 I1 = 0…………………………………..…..(3)In the Matrix notations:10 −9 0 𝐼𝐼3 100−9 20 −9 𝐼𝐼2 = 00 −9 15 𝐼𝐼1 0These set of equations are of the standard form; Ax = b A-1 Ax = A-1 b Ix = A-1 b x = A-1 bV.b.1. Solving with Matlab:miee.mA = [10 -9 0 ; -9 20 -9 ; 0 -9 15];b = [100 ; 0 ; 0];z = A^-1 *bMatlab Result:>> mieez= 22.4615 13.8462 8.3077 Figure 2: Schematic diagram for a series-parallel circuit with the
Annual Conference & Exposition. Presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA. 5. Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). Design heuristics in engineering concept generation. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 601. 6. Hay, L., McTeague, C., Duffy, A. H. B., Pidgeon, L. M., Vuletic, T., & Grealy, M. (2017). A Systematic Review of Protocol Studies on Conceptual Design Cognition. In J. S. Gero (Ed.), Design Computing and Cognition ’16 (pp. 135–153). Cham: Springer. 7. Gero, J. S. (2010). Generalizing design cognition research. DTRS, 8, 187-198
student control over time, place, path, or pace” (Wikipedia, 2016; MacMillian, 2017)”.The distribution of time between media and distribution of physical location are shown inFigure 1. A typical, lecture-based course is shown as point “A” at the lower left, and a fullydistance learning course is shown as point “B” in the upper right. A blended course balancesfeatures, usually having from 30-70% online content, and always having face-to-face interactionsbetween students and instructor (Knewton, 2016).Figure 1. Schematic of the physical aspects of blended learning. Modified from Knewton (2016)3.2 The Flipped ClassThe blended concept does not define a specific course approach; further features are required fora specific course design. This project
one or more subsystems ofthe Theremin to convert from a circuit diagram to a breadboard layout. Every subsystem wasassigned to each least two students so that there was more than one person who has studied eachportion of the schematic. Students were also assigned topics for a literature search in preparationfor writing a journal article on the project. + - A B C D E F G H I J + - 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6
safer and green industrial products. b. Identifying best practices in several industrial areas. c. Identifying and addressing safer life cycle practices based on valued alternatives. 2. Design for Manufacturability (DfM): Design for Manufacturability, also known as Design for Manufacturing is a principle that enables in efficient design and engineering of a product for facilitating cost efficient manufacturing processes. The design phase is given a high importance here to reduce an inherent reengineering cost after designs freeze stage. 3. Design for Assembly (DfA): Design for Assembly is based on engineering a product with an ease of assembly principle (simplification of a product) where, a