; materials, and concrete durability. His interests also include: contemporary issues of engineering education in general, and those of the Middle East and the Arab Gulf States in particular. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 How Engineering Design Learning May be Improved: Thoughts, Practices, and RecommendationsAbstract: Design is considered by most to be the central activity of engineering. Also, it isknown that engineering programs should graduate engineers who can design effectively to meetsocial and environmental needs. Though the role and perception of design across a wide range ofeducational institutions have improved markedly in recent years; however, both
solutions obtained using hand calculation.Lab-2: In this lab, the main contents include graphical visualization for some real data. Manydatasets are publically available from sites such as kaggle.com and data.gov. Graphicalvisualization ranges from simple graphics such as histogram, boxplot, and scatterplot toadvanced graphics such as PCA projection plots, trellis plots, maps, etc. Students need to exploresome real data using graphics to explore and discover information from the real data.Take-home project: Students were used some simulation examples relevant to the real world.Topics for recommendation include (a) gambling games; (b) biological evolution; (c) finance; (d)social network; (e) forensic science; etc. Depending on the students
Control (MAC) addresses, and Terminal Control Protocol (TCP)IP are discussed. The OSI seven layer model is introduced, as well as the differences between theOpen System Interconnection (OSI) model and TCP IP. The basics of wireless versus opencommunications and how this relates to the project are all part of the pre-lab lecture.Figure 1 The Internet of Things (IoT) lab activity connects the students phone “A” to theArduino “B”. Includes public domain images.One example used in class is an electric smoker. The smoker is an IoT device. The user startsand stops the smoker, and sets the temperature from his/her cellphone. The IoT device reportsthe temperature of the meat, and the on off status of the heating element. This is represented inthe lab by
Paper ID #23640Multidisciplinary Modules on Sensors and Machine LearningAbhinav Dixit, Arizona State University I am a PhD student at School of Electrical, Computer and Energy Engineering at Arizona State University. My research interest includes early detection of neurological diseases through irregularities in speech. I also work as a Research Assistant at SenSIP Center, ECEE at ASU. I am currently involved in developed of JDSP HTML5, an interactive DSP software developed in HTML5.Mr. Uday Shankar Shanthamallu, Arizona State University ”I received my B.S degree in Electronics and Communications from the National
, Integrating Intellect and theCreation of Bioethics.” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9(1): 25-51, 1999.[2] T.L. Beauchamp and J.F. Childress. Principles of Biomedical Ethics: Seventh Edition. NewYork: Oxford University Press, 2013.[3] D. Callahan. Bioethics and Policy: Hastings Center Bioethics Briefings.https://www.thehastingscenter.org/briefingbook/bioethics-and-policy-a-history/, 2018.[4] P. Singer, Animal Liberation. New York: Random House, Inc, 1975.[5] T. Regan, The Case of Animal Rights. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.[6] B. Rollin, Science and Ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.[7] J.B. Callicott, “Whither Conservation Ethics?” Conservation Biology 4(1):15-20, 1990.[8] O.C. Ferrell and L. Ferrell
, Puerto Rico, 2013.[13] S. C. Silverstein, J. Dubner, J. Miller, S. Glied, and J. D. Loike, “Teachers Participationin Research Programs Improves Their Students Achievement in Science,” Science, vol. 326, no.5951, pp. 440–442, 2009.[14] A. E. Landis, C. D. Schunn, M. C. Rothermel, S. Shrake, and B. Niblick. “Developmentof a High School Engineering Research Program: Findings from a Research Experience forTeachers (RET) Site,” presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver,BC, 2011.[15] S. S. Klein-Gardner and A. C. Spolarich. “Impacts of the Vanderbilt University ResearchExperience for Teachers Program 2008 - 2010: Analysis of Student Surveys RegardingMotivational Impact,” presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference &
IUCEE (Indo-universal consortium of engineering education) in 2017.Prof. Vinit Kishor AghamMr. Vediya Sitaram Raghuvanshi, R. C. Patel Institute of Technology, ShirpurProf. Jayantrao Bhaurao Patil, R. C. Patel Institute of Technology, Shirpur Jayantrao B. Patil is working as the Principal at the R. C. Patel institute of Technology, Shirpur, India and holds appointment as a Professor in the Department of Computer Engineering. He is also serving as a Dean, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Member of Senate, Member of Academic Council, and Chairman of Board of Studies in Computer Engineering & Information Technology at the North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon, India. Jayantrao’s research interests include Web
further reflects on these findings and discusses further avenues foranalysis, theorization, and research. To demonstrate the value of diversity in the research team,we each present our individual, unedited thoughts, followed by concluding remarks by the firstauthor.Second AuthorFor me, these findings resonate strongly with my understanding of a) gender and feminist theoryand b) the experiences of under-represented minorities in STEM fields. First, while avoidinggender essentialism, the data presented in this study reflect theories that emphasize the ways thatwomen are socialized in different ways than men. Women are often socialized to look outward,beyond themselves, in order to fulfill expectations that they be both social and nurturing
-Flip.utah.edu). Dr. Furse’s research has led to the development of a system to locate intermittent electrical wiring faults, and she is a founder of LiveWire Innovation. Her research also includes development of antennas to communicate with medical implants, and methods to predict statistical variability in bioelectromagnetic applications. Dr. Furse is a Fellow of the IEEE and the National Academy of Inventors. She has received numerous teaching and research awards including the Harriett B. Rigas Medal for Excellence in Teaching.Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss, University of Utah Donna Harp Ziegenfuss, is an Associate Librarian in Graduate and Undergraduate Services in the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah. She
Intentionally ReflectiveKolb +Bloom (IRK+B) model developed by one of the workshop coordinators, Amy Bradshaw[5]. A concrete takeaway from these efforts were two clearly differentiated set of competencies,namely, task specific competencies that make a learner competitive today and meta-competenciesthat enables a learner to adapt to future needs. IRK+B provides an instructor with a conceptualframework to understand and evaluate (using Bloom’s taxonomy) where a learner is today andwhere he/she needs to be in future and thereby determine the scaffolds (using Kolb’s experientiallearning) a learner would need in attaining the goal. These experiences were foundational to the design a curriculum that embodies the need fora systemic development of
Engineers Without Borders, Germany(Ingenieure ohne Grenzen e.V.).LiteratureAllen, Deborah E.; Donham, Richard S.; Bernhardt, Stephen A. (2011): Problem-BasedLearning. In: New Directions for Teaching and Learning (128), S. 21–29.Belu, R.; Chiou, R.; Ciocal L.; Tseng, B. (2016): Incorporating Sustainability Concepts andGreen Design into Engineering and Technology Curricula. In: Journal of Education andLearning 10 (2), S. 93–102.Boyle, C. (2004): Considerations on educating engineers in sustainability. In: InternationalJournal of Sustainability in Higher Education 5 (2), S. 147–155.Buys, Laurie; Miller, Evonne; Buckley, Mathew; Jolly, Lesley (2013): The “Engineerswithout Borders” Challenge: Does it engage Australian and New Zealand students
8 0 0 0 16 learn makes me want to find out more. 7 I think what we are learning in 8 6 0 2 0 16 this course is important. 8 Understanding Engineering 4 7 3 1 1 16 Ethics is important to me. 9 In a class like this, I prefer 7 8 1 0 0 16 course material that arouses my curiosity, even if it is difficult to learn.Appendix B: Full post-surveysInstructor 1 # Question Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Total Agree Disagree 1
Paper ID #23008New Course Development and Assessment Tools in Automotive Lightweight-ing TechnologiesProf. Raghu Echempati P.E., Kettering University Professor Echempati is a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Kettering University, (Flint, Mich.). He is a member of ASME, ASEE, and SAE. He has published over 180 technical articles in various peer- reviewed journals and conference publications of repute. He taught at various universities world-wide as a Fulbright scholar, Erskine fellow, or as a visiting professor. He won several academic and technical awards and grants. c American Society for
Statistics to Engineers: An Innovative Pedagogical Experience," Journal of Statistics Education, vol. 3, no.1, 1995.[3] J. D. Petruccelli, B. Nandram, and, M. H. Chen, "Implementation of a modular laboratory and project-based statistics curriculum", in Proceedings of the Section on Statistical Education: American Statistical Association, 1995, pp. 165-170.[4] C.E. Marchetti, and S. K. Gupta, "Engineering Modules for Statistics Courses", ASEE Annual Conference, 2003.[5] C. Pong, and T. Le, "Development of hands -on experimentation experience for civil engineering design courses at San Francisco State University", ASEE Annual Conference, 2006.[6] M. Prudich, D. Ridg way, and V. Young, "Integration of
in the areas of data analysis, IT, and manufacturing. She received her PhD in Industrial Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh and her MS in Mechan- ical Engineering from Case Western while working for Delphi. She completed her postdoctoral studies in engineering education at the University of Pittsburgh.Ms. Lisa Marie Stabryla, University of Pittsburgh Lisa Stabryla is a mid-career PhD student, a 2017 National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) fellow, and an aspiring faculty member. In the Civil and Environmental Engineering Depart- ment at the University of Pittsburgh, she is pursuing research questions related to the sustainable design of nanomaterials. She is also enrolled in the teacher
. Edward J. Coyle, Georgia Institute of Technology Edward J. Coyle is the John B. Peatman Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineer- ing, directs the Arbutus Center for the Integration of Research and Education, and is the founder of the Vertically-Integrated Projects (VIP) Program. He is a Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholar and was a co-recipient of both the National Academy of Engineering’s 2005 Bernard M. Gordon Award for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education and ASEE’s 1997 Chester F. Carlson Award. Dr. Coyle is a Fellow of the IEEE and his research interests include engineering education, wireless networks, and digital signal processing.Dr. Randal T. Abler, Georgia Institute of
Paper ID #22589Comparing Peer-to-Peer Written Comments and Teamwork Peer Evalua-tions.Dr. Catherine E. Brawner, Research Triangle Educational Consultants Catherine E. Brawner is President of Research Triangle Educational Consultants. She received her Ph.D.in Educational Research and Policy Analysis from NC State University in 1996. She also has an MBA from Indiana University (Bloomington) and a bachelor’s degree from Duke University. She specializes in evaluation and research in engineering education, computer science education, teacher education, and technology education. Dr. Brawner is a founding member and former
Course and Teacher Resource for Residential Building Codes and Above Code Construction MethodsSweller, J. (1988). “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.” Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.Tomek, S. (2011). “Developing a multicultural, cross-generational, and multidisciplinary team: an introduction for civil engineers.” Leadership Manage. Eng., 11, 191–196.Tucker, B. (2012). “The flipped classroom.” Education Next, 12(1), 82-83.Walther, J., Kellam, N., Sochacka, N., and Radcliffe, D. (2011). “Engineering Competence? An Interpretive Investigation of Engineering Students’ Professional Formation.” Journal of Engineering Education, 100(4), 703–740.
high school technology education and test scores for algebra 1 and geometry. History, 54(69.7), 71-7. 5. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P‐12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387. 6. Sheppard, S. D., Pellegrino, J. W., & Olds, B. M. (2008). On becoming a 21st century engineer. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 231-234. 7. National Academy of Engineering. (2008). Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12187. 8. Wilson‐Lopez, A., Mejia, J. A., Hasbún, I. M., & Kasun, G. S. (2016). Latina
, and Pacansky-Brock, Michelle. The Power of Choice: WhyOnline Classes Matter to Students. EdSurge, July 2017. [Online]. Available:https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-07-14-the-power-of-choice-why-online-classes-matter-to-students [Accessed Oct. 10, 2017]22. Kinney, L., & Liu, M., & Thornton, M. A. (2012, June), Faculty and Student Perceptions ofOnline Learning in Engineering Education Paper presented at 2012 ASEE Annual Conference &Exposition, San Antonio, Texas. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/21387. [AccessedNov. 7, 2017]23. Clinefelter, D. L. & Aslanian, C. B. Online college students 2016:Comprehensive data on demands and preferences. Louisville, KY. July 2016. The LearningHouse, Inc. 2016. [Online
reading assignment and randomly selected answers for the quiz.Figure 2. Representation of the percentage of student who either a) completed the readingassignment before taking the pre-class reading quiz; b) did not complete the reading assignmentbefore taking the pre-class reading quiz and used resources other than what was provided in thereading assignment to answer the quiz question.; c) did not complete the reading assignment andrandomly chose answers on the quiz. On the midterm for SS2, the average grade for the midterm exam was 71% and for thefinal, the average grade was 82%. For SS1, the average for the midterm was 60% and theaverage grade for the final was 45%.Figure 3. Comparison of the average grades from the midterms and finals
had significantly improved their scores on anachievement test, and another five who had actively participated in a metacognitive learningactivity via the Facebook discussions in the online social collaborative learning environment andhad also performed well in their tests. The following are the key findings from the study: (a)Instructional Scaffolding has eight elements in total, 1 - pre-engagement; 2 - shared goal; 3 -understanding of students’ prior knowledge; 4 - provide a variety of support; 5 - provideencouragement and praise; 6 - give feedback; 7 - provide supportive and positive responses; and8 - provide instructional support. (b) Elements to provide a variety of support and give feedbackcan interconnect, as in the ‘explanation and
. 3.9* 1.1 3.7 1.2 B. The professor made the subject interesting. 3.8* 1.1 3.5 1.3 C. This subject is a prerequisite to other courses in my major. 4.2* 1.0 4.1 1.1 D. I wanted to get a good grade in the class. 4.6 0.6 4.6 0.7Q2. Opportunities to actively participate in class helped me understand the 4.1* 0.9 3.6 1.2course material.Q3. It is clear to me how this course is related to my other courses. 4.1* 1.0 3.9 1.1NOTE: all questions have the same response options. (1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neither
student success.References[1] R. M. Marra, K. A. Rodgers, D. Shen, B. Bogue, “Leaving Engineering: A Multi-Year Single Institution Study,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 6-27, 2012.[2] T. A. Litzinger, L. R. Lattuca, R. G. Hadgraft, W. C. Newstetter, “Engineering Education and the Development of Expertise,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 123-150, 2011.[3] R. M. Felder, K. D. Forrest, L. Baker-Ward, E. Dietz, P. H. Mohr, “A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention: I. Success and Failure in the Introductory Course,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 15-21, 1993.[4] R. Suresh, “The Relationship Between Barrier Courses and Persistence in Engineering,” Journal of College Student Retention, pp
, < https://engineeringunleashed.com/Mindset- Matters/Framework.aspx>.2. Lichtenstein, G. and Zappe, S. E. Defining and assessing entrepreneurial mindset: Ingredients for success. VentureWell Blog, Retrieved Mar. 14, 2018, .3. Li, Q., Harichandran, R., Carnasciali, M., Erdil, N. & Nocito-Gobel, J., (2016). Development of an instrument to measure the entrepreneurial mindset of engineering students. Proceedings, 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. New Orleans, LA.4. Li, Q., Harichandran, R., Carnasciali, M., Erdil, N. & Nocito-Gobel, J., (2018). A Validation Study on the Measurement of Engineering Undergraduate Students’ Entrepreneurial Mindset using Confirmatory Factor Analysis, under preparation.5. Thompson, B
area, unless “beams” is explicitlyincluded as a keyword. This limitation of the OPL search function is the motivating factor formany of our keyword suggestions.Six facets (or sub-sets) for keyword list creation are suggested below, and summarized inAppendix B: 1. Taxonomical positionSince an instructor cannot search by subject, chapter, or section, we suggest including theseexplicitly in the keywords. 2. Common alternate or closely-associated termsSince some terms we have used in the taxonomical structure have well-known alternate orclosely-associated expressions (e.g. “space mechanics”, “orbital mechanics” and “Kepler’slaws”), these should be included as keywords. This is especially helpful because of the lack ofcross-referencing in the
varying air and water flowrates as well as air pressureand their interdependence.The STAR student developed a research project involving building an educational learningmodule. The main learning outcomes were related directly to the ABET [10] criteria a and b, asshe demonstrated abilities in the areas of mathematics, science and engineering . Also the studentdemonstrated comprehensive skills related to criteria c and d, specifically designing a system andits components for “a broadly defined engineering problem”. She also conducted tests andmeasurements; she analyzed and interpreted experimental data and she applied her results toresults to improve the developed module. She gained new knowledge in the area of mechanicaldesign, being able to
workshop (possiblydue to an iceberg effect, which is discussed in the Findings section below). 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lesscomfortable Nochange MorecomfortableFigure 6. Phase I: Change in Rhino Comfort Level after Training in Modules 5 and 6; N = 9.Phase II testing was carried out for college-targeting high-school students who participated in aone-week-long summer design immersion workshop hosted by Rensselaer. These studentsranged in age from 15 to 18 and worked on open-ended design projects in groups of 3 to 4members. Group CAD output was analyzed according to a rubric designed by Krauss thatassessed command, strategic, and epistemic CAD knowledge as demonstrated by each team’sfinalized CAD models. (See Appendix B for the
Education, 2018 Innovation in the Risk Management course to improve undergraduate university students’ skills for multidisciplinary and participatory workAbstractThe ability to work in multidisciplinary teams and communicate solutions efficiently is oneof the main requirements asked for by employers and international accreditation committeesto engineering graduates around the world. However, traditionally the curricular contents ofeach professional career related to the construction sector, emphasizes the application of itsspecific knowledge in an isolated manner.This is a reality in Peru as well. Engineering students are neither trained to work in teams norin multidisciplinary projects. This hinders
Student Engagement: An Empirical Student of MOOC Videos.” Proceedings of L@S 2014, Atlanta Georgia, March 4-6, 2014[29] L. Lagerstrom, P. Johanes, U. Ponsukcharoen “The Myth of the Six Minute Rule: Student Engagement with Online Videos.” Proceedings of the 122 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Seattle, Washington, June 14-17, 2015.[30] R. Berg, A. Brand, J. Grant, J. Kirk, T. Zimmerman. “Leveraging Recorded Mini-Lectures to Increase Student Learning.” Course Design 14:2, 5-8, 2014.[31] N. Geri, A. Winer, B. Zaks. “Challenging the six-minute myth of online video lectures: Can interactivity explain the attention span of learners?” Online J. of Applied Knowledge Management. 5:1, 101-111, 2017.[32] D