Conference Session

Engineering Physics & Physics Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yu Gong, Purdue University; Tugba Yuksel, Purdue University; Alejandra J. Magana, Purdue University; Lynn A. Bryan, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

reported from our participants related to coding and operational difficulties. Difficulties in coding the underlying model. A few students experienced difficultiesin programming the underlying model. One student complained: “It cost so much time doing the computer code and it should be more time learning it (quantum knowledge)” (Student CE_So_01). Difficulties in simulation tools without proper instruction. Other two studentscomplained about their difficulties in using simulation tools without proper instruction. Forexample, one student said: “I thought that was kind of annoying because I didn’t have enough knowledge to do the simulations sometimes or to understand what the simulation meant” (Student CE_So_01).A

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching Physics or Engineering Physics

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Radian Belu, Drexel University; Alexandru Belu, Case Western Reserve University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

visualization, animation and graphicfacilities of these software packages. The educators and students can take the advantages of themathematical power of symbolic computation so they can concentrate on applying principles of settingequations, instead of technical details of solving problems. Moreover, most undergraduate physicstextbooks were written before advanced computer algebra software became conventionally available.The conventional approach to a topic places emphasis on theory and formalism, devoting many Page 14.1147.2paragraphs to performing algebraic or calculus operations in deriving equations manually, and other thansome well known

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching Physics or Engineering Physics

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Radian Belu, Drexel University; Alexandru Belu, Case Western Research University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

Visualization and Animation TechniquesIII. Laboratory-based Computational Physics CourseThe formal prerequisites for this course have been college level physics and calculuslevel courses, but I have often been willing to waive some of the prerequisites if a studenthas had solid programming experience. Student taking the course are expected to have atleast some minimal knowledge, although the programming is not a formal prerequisite.Over the years, there have been a significant number of students who have taken thecourse without prior programming knowledge. Finally, they developed goodprogramming skills along the way, even though this lack entailed a somewhat steeplearning curve at the beginning of the course. An immediate question that I faced when

Conference Session

Technology in the Physics or Engineering Physics C

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Jonassen, University of Missouri

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

ReasoningHaving explicated the processes of causal reasoning, learners must be able to completelydescribe those relationships covariationally in terms of direction, probability, valency, duration,and responsiveness and mechanistically in terms of causal explication, conjunctions/disjunctions,and necessity/sufficiency. In this next section, I describe instructional methods for supportingthe learning of those causal attributes. There are three classes of methods that may be used toenhance causal learning: direct instruction that conveys causal relationships, exploring causalrelationships in simulations, and learner modeling of causal relationships. No direct comparisonsof these methods have been made.Conveying Causal RelationshipsA potentially effective

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching and Research in Physics or Engineering Physics II

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Varun Kumar Karingula, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis; Hazim A El-Mounayri, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis; Tamer M. Wasfy, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis; Hatem M Wasfy, Advanced Science and Automation Corp.; Jeanne Michele Peters, Advanced Science and Automation Corp.

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

interactive simulations. All the basic concepts of physics are covered through experiments, some of which are game based. So, it is both “fun” and educational. This approach offers clear advantages over traditional class room lectures, field training or training manuals.     1 – Learners can choose the time they want to learn. In this virtual physics lab, a student can have access anytime through networked computer. In classroom based training, an entire group of students has to attend classes in specific time in regular intervals. If student misses the class for any reason, it will be very difficult for him/her to cover the concept which was covered in the class on that day.   2 – Learners can learn at their own optimum

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching Physics or Engineering Physics

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Adrian Ieta, State University of New York, Oswego; Rachid Manseur, State University of New York, Oswego; Thomas Doyle, McMaster University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

effectivenessof e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system.” Computers & Education 51 (2008): 864-873.6. Eschenbach, E. A. and Cashman, E. M. “Teaming in Freshman Design Using a Studio TeachingApproach and Blackboard®.” Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering EducationAnnual Conference & Exposition, Session 3153, 2004.7. Waters, C. “Let Blackboard Tracking Ease the Pain of Assessing Outcome I.” Proceedings of the 2007American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Session AC 1052, 2007.8. Van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., and Simons, P. R. J. “The nature, reception,and use of online peer feedback in higher education.” Computers & Education 51 (2008): 1804-1817.9