. Innovative and unique practices among the programs surveyed are identified, andrecommendations are provided to initiate mechanics curricula change.IntroductionThe civil engineering curriculum, as well as that of related disciplines such as mechanicalengineering, is based on a few fundamental courses in mechanics. Herein, the mechanicscourses are defined as Statics, Dynamics, Mechanics of Solids, Materials and Fluid Mechanics.These core courses have recently been subject to curricular changes to make concepts moreaccessible and integrated with later courses and the practice of civil engineering1,2,3. In line withcurrent trends, the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Villanova Universityrecognized that the mechanics courses could be
of courses taken by students during their first two years in the traditionalcurriculum reflects a traditional approach to learning mechanics in civil (CE) and mechanical(ME) engineering programs. Students took their first physics course, PH150Mechanics/Heat/Waves, in the traditional curriculum second semester freshman year in whichthey were introduced to basic particle kinematics and kinetics and force resolution. Firstsemester sophomore year, students gained an understanding of the behavior of simple structuresunder various loadings, and investigated stresses and deformations as they relate to the design ofsimple mechanisms and structures in CE205 Statics and Strengths. This 4 credit coursecombined topics from both Statics and Strength of
at Los Alamos National Laboratory. While at Los Alamos, he earned a Ph. D. in civil engineering from the University of New Mexico in 1988. He is currently working jointly with engineering faculty at University of California, San Diego to develop the Los Alamos/UCSD Engineering Institute with a research focus on Damage Prognosis. This initiative is also developing a formal, degree-granting educational program in the closely related areas of validated simulations and structural health monitoring.Peter Avitabile, University of Massachusetts-Lowell Peter Avitabile is an Associate Professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department and the Director of the Modal Analysis and Controls
adjunct faculty member at University of Texas, Austin. He has received numerous professional awards including a NASA Post-Doctorial Fellowship, ASEE Best Paper Awards, the ASME Most Innovative Curriculum Award, the Ernest L. Boyer - International Award for Excellence in Teach- ing, the US Air Force Academy Seiler Award for Excellence in Engineering Research and the Outstanding Academy Educator Award. He has published over 100 technical articles and generated approximately $3.5 million of research; all at institutions with no graduate program. His research includes development of innovative design methodologies and enhancement of engineering education. The design methodology re- search focuses on development and testing
2006-1321: A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE ENGINEERINGMECHANICS-STRENGTH OF MATERIALS COURSE IN THE ENGINEERING,AND ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS AT PENN STATELucas Passmore, Pennsylvania State UniversityAiman Kuzmar, Pennsylvania State University-Fayette Page 11.26.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 A Comparison Between the Engineering Mechanics-Strength of Materials Course in the Engineering, and Engineering Technology Programs at The Pennsylvania State UniversityAbstractStrength of materials is a critical and essential course for both engineering and engineeringtechnology students with a mechanical focus such as those in the mechanical
software was used along with a low-cost rapidprototyping system in a project in which high school students attempted to optimize the design ofa component subjected to well-defined loading and constraints.This project was conducted as part of Summer Ventures, a program in which talented highschool students from across North Carolina explore math and science-related careers at severalUniversity of North Carolina System campuses. This was the initial offering of engineering asan option for the students. Students selected three areas of participation. For three weeks, theyspent two hours per day in each of the selected areas. During the fourth and final week, theychose one of their three areas for more in-depth study.During the engineering portion of
AC 2008-2537: ASSESSING COGNITIVE REASONING AND LEARNING INMECHANICSChris Papadopoulos, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Chris Papadopoulos earned BS degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University, and a PhD in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Cornell University. He previously served on the faculty of Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where he is currently a research associate, grant writer, lecturer, and director of educational programs. His research interests include biomechanics, nonlinear structural mechanics, computational mechanics, engineering education, and engineering ethics. He is an active member of American Society for
curricula to providecornerstone design experience in the first year and capstone design experience in the final year.Between the first and final years much knowledge is acquired and analysis skills are honed, butthe amount of exposure to realistic design problems is variable, if not quite limited.3Elementary strength of materials is a core course in the engineering curriculum in which studentslearn how to analyze deformation, strain, and stress in simple structural members including bars,shafts, beams, and pressure vessels. It is typically taught at the sophomore level in baccalaureateand engineering technology (ET) programs as well as at community colleges. Traditionally thecourse is analysis based, although design problems of a very limited
AC 2008-2105: LEARNING STATICS – A FOUNDATIONAL APPROACHSridhar Condoor, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng.Sanjay Jayaram, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng.Lawrence Boyer, Saint Louis University Page 13.845.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Learning Statics – A Foundational ApproachStatics is a pivotal course, whose concepts serve as the building blocks for future courses inengineering, mechanics of solids and design in particular. There is a common disappointmentamong many educators in the students’ abilities to apply the concepts to design/analyze realsystems in the subsequent courses. The literature review also
inexpensive, hands-on projectsemphasizing introductory design and manufacturing in Statics and Dynamics (3 hrs lecture, 1 hrlab per week), a mainstream course in mechanical engineering (ME) and other related disciplinessuch as engineering mechanics, and civil & aerospace engineering. Some BSME programs inthe US offer labs associated with an introductory course in Statics and/or Dynamics, while othersroutinely do not. Within the BSME program at the University of St. Thomas, most coursespossess a significant lab component and emphasize applied aspects that complement the moretheoretically oriented material studied in lecture.1-2 Collectively, the projects described belowpromote the development of creative, hands-on prototyping skills in the context
16 29 22 13 Report Requirements 1 13 21 41 29 5 Page 12.541.8Mid-term and final course evaluations for this class reflect that, though students find the coursechallenging, they indicate that these are courses where they see how the material relates to thepractice of civil engineering, and that these connections enhance their learning of the material.Table 3 shows the student’s responses to questions regarding course overall. Table 3: Results from Final Course Evaluation in Fall 2006
a necessity for the today’sundergraduate mechanical engineering programs. At Grand Valley State University (GVSU), westrive to keep our curriculum up to date, reflecting the demands of industry. We have thereforebegun the process of integrating the use of FEA tools throughout the curriculum, instead ofdelaying it until the senior year either for senior design or elective courses. This paper describesthe introduction of FEA to students in the first course of Statics and Solid Mechanics. The firstpriority of this course is to build the foundation for Mechanics. The challenge therefore was todetermine the content without compromising the priority. Keeping this in mind, 1-D Barelements and 2-D Truss elements are introduced in the course. These
Paper ID #16487Preliminary Analysis of Spatial Ability Improvement within an EngineeringMechanics Course: StaticsSteven David Wood, Utah State University - Engineering Education Steven Wood is a junior in the Civil Engineering program. After finishing his BS he plans on completing a MS in Civil Engineering. In addition to studies, he is a teacher’s assistant and he teaches a recitation class for the Statics course. His Interests in the field of engineering are public transportation, specifically in rapid and heavy rail systems. His research interests include spatial ability, learning styles, and gender differences in
(TCCIT), Committee on Faculty Development (CFD) and Excellence in Civil Engineering Education (ExCEEd) initiative. Dr. O’Neill is a licensed Professional Engineer in California, Florida, Nevada and Virginia. He is a civil engineering program evaluator for the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). He is an American Society of Civil Engineering Fellow (ASCE), a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), and Phi Kappa Phi National Honor Society.Dr. Ashraf Badir P.E., Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. Badir is an Associate Professor in the Environmental and Civil Engineering Department at the U.A. Whitaker College of Engineering in Florida Gulf Coast University. He holds a Master
andexpectations of women and URMs, also overlap with the attributes of more flexible thinkingenvisioned for the Engineer of 2020 2.ApproachOur funding was awarded on March 1 2007. Our group is roughly divided into three teams thatwork both independently and together on various tasks that are often inter-related:1- The engineering team (Jacobs, Valle, Lee) is primarily responsible for designing the problems and developing their solutions.2- The digital media team (Ashmore, Schrank/Thomas/Upton) works on programming and visual implementation of the computer simulations.3- The evaluation team (Newstetter, Harrell) works on clarifying the learning goals and conducting assessment.In addition, Prof. Rosser is in charge of the overall project goals
Paper ID #20475Knowledge Surveys in Engineering StaticsMr. Eric Davishahl, Whatcom Community College Eric Davishahl is faculty and engineering program coordinator at Whatcom Community College. He previously was faculty and department chair of the engineering department at Everett Community College. Eric has been a member of ASEE since 2001. He currently serves as vice chair of the Pacific Northwest Section and was the recipient of the 2008 Section Outstanding Teaching Award. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Knowledge Surveys in Engineering
earth and our sun? 10. Did you have any classes in HS which was related to nanoscience and were you instructed? 11. Have you taken any courses related to nanoscience in College? 12. Have you read any scientific facts about nanoscience? Elaborate on the program, such as News, self reading, TV programs 13. Do you a clear idea how nanoscience is related to courses of mechanics you will take at college? 14. Do you think mechanics of materials has any relation with nanotechnology? And if yes in what aspects? 15. Do you think will it more beneficial if we extends the mechanics of materials to nano-sized and multiscale analysis?The results are plotted in Figs. 2 and 3. As expected, and from the analysis of the results, one cansee that
Paper ID #7260Initial Development of the Engineering Genome Project–an Engineering On-tology with Multimedia Resources for Teaching and Learning EngineeringMechanicsDr. Edward J. Berger, University of Virginia Ed Berger is currently the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs in the School of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Virginia. He is also Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. He teaches mostly sophomore mechanics courses. Page 23.753.1
both introduce them to the engineering curriculumand to give them a positive encounter in the major, and c) the content of these courses forms thenecessary foundation for numerous follow on courses. However, research and other demands onfaculty may challenge a department’s ability to place appropriate faculty in these classes. Thispaper relates the evolution from teaching numerous sections of these classes, through theconsolidation into large classes and eventually the incorporation of very effective and efficientstudent-to-student mentoring in conjunction with the large section instruction.During the last fifty years the teaching of Elementary Engineering Mechanics courses at ouruniversity has continually evolved due to increasing enrollment
AC 2011-847: IDENTIFYING AND ADDRESSING STUDENT DIFFICUL-TIES IN ENGINEERING STATICSAndrea Brose, Hamburg University of Technology Andrea Brose earned her Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Colorado at Boulder. From 1999 to 2008 she was in the Department of Mathematics at UCLA where she taught undergraduate math, led and developed the mathematics teaching assistant and faculty training program, and contributed to other aspects of academic administration. Since 2009, she is involved in a project on ”Active Learning in Engineering Education” at Hamburg University of Technology.Christian H. Kautz, Hamburg University of Technology Christian H. Kautz received his doctorate degree from the University of
courses have onstudents’ perceptions of engineering. This paper presents the results of this evaluation,alongside student performance data, student response data and faculty observations.1. BackgroundStudies into acculturation of engineering students are rare, but studies of retention offer aglimpse into the aspects of engineering education that most impact students’ happinesswith their choice of major, and into the student characteristics and skills that mostinfluence persistence and success for students in engineering programs. It is generallyacknowledged that high math and science barriers in the first two years of undergraduatestudy contribute to attrition, but it is also argued that more creative students becomefrustrated by a lack of “big
Williams University and an Associate Professor and Director of the Civil Engineering Analysis Group at the United States Military Academy. Dr. O’ Neill is a retired Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He has been active at the national level with ASCE’s Technical Council on Computing and Information Technology (TCCIT), Committee on Faculty Development (CFD) and Excellence in Civil Engineering Education (ExCEEd) initiative. Dr. O’Neill is a licensed Professional Engineer in California, Florida, Nevada and Virginia. He is a civil engineering program evaluator for the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). He is an American Society of Civil Engineering Fellow (ASCE), a member of the
exam questions in the class helped showcase the skillsused in the class. Secondly, while many of the topics identified as necessary for a sophomore-level statics and dynamics course were listed on the syllabi for the courses, there was adisproportion between the amount of coverage received in the first-year courses and theutilization of these skills based on the number of homework and exam problems related to them.In addition, it was shown that simply because a topic is listed on the course syllabus does notprovide enough information to determine the notation used when teaching the material or theactual time spent covering the material.Bibliography1. ABET, Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Effective for Evaluations During the 2010
mechanics, including nonlinear structural analysis, computational mechanics, and biomechanics. He is also active in engineering education and engineering ethics, particularly in mechanics education and appropriate technology. At UPRM Papadopoulos serves as the coordinator of the Engineering Mechanics Committee, which man- ages the mechanics courses taken by all engineering majors. He also co-coordinates the Social, Ethical, and Global Issues (SEGI) in Engineering Program and Forums on Philosophy, Engineering, and Technol- ogy.Vincent C. Prantil, Milwaukee School of Engineering VINCENT C. PRANTIL Vince Prantil is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at the Mil- waukee School of Engineering. Dr. Prantil
GamesAbstract:Students being engaged in lectures plays a big role in their learning process. Students come tolectures sometimes tired, bored, or just have lots of things going on in their mind, either personal,or course/program related, etc. As such it is important to set their mind clear to be ready to digestthe new material they are going to learn in the course. It is also important to excite them enoughto come to early morning classes and keep their attention to stay in the late afternoon classeswhile staying focused.This paper discusses the use of different methods to increase engagement, attention andattendance in class and the students’ reflection on these methods. Some of these engagementpieces are directly course related and some are just general
maynot relate to an upper level course, but could be critical for every civil engineer (e.g. a topiccritical to professional practice, graduate courses or a topic that is not directly related to thedisciplines covered in depth within a program).The authors made and distributed the topic list and survey in Microsoft Excel for easy synthesisof data for Step 3 (Figure 1).Figure 1: Part of survey and topic list in Microsoft ExcelStep 3The survey results are synthesized by scoring each topic. For example, if there are fivedisciplines, then each discipline gives a score for a topic (average of the faculty members withineach discipline score of zero, one or two for the first question) and there is one score for thesecond question for each topic
styles using the Felder-Soloman index of learning styles (ILS) survey.The analysis shows that there are program-specific systemic barriers hindering student success.Furthermore, the learning style survey results indicate that student learning could improved byadopting a more balanced approach to teaching. Associated learning tools, specific to thedynamics curriculum, designed to address the learning outliers are suggested.1 IntroductionThe Schulich School of Engineering (SSE) at the University of Calgary consists of fivedepartments (Chemical, Civil, Electrical, Geomatics, and Mechanical Engineering) and offersspecialized majors programs such as Oil and Gas. All students in the SSE take commonengineering courses in the first year of their
Army and currently a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. His is a former assistant profes- sor at the United States Military Academy. His research interests include capstone design teaching and assessment, undergraduate engineering student leadership development, and social network analysis.Dr. David B Knight, Virginia Tech Department of Engineering Education David Knight is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education and affiliate faculty with the Higher Education Program, Center for Human-Computer Interaction, and Human-Centered De- sign Program. His research focuses on student learning outcomes in undergraduate engineering, learning analytics
the problem-solving methods used by engineering students and howthey relate to spatial skill levels.ParticipantsIn fall 2019, students in their third or fourth year, who were enrolled in a Mechanical, or closelyrelated, engineering program at the University of Cincinnati, were recruited for participation inthis study through announcements in their upper division courses. A total of 47 students,including five female students (10.6%), participated in the study. Students were compensated $75for their participation in the project. All research conducted through this project was monitoredand approved by the Institutional Review Board at the university.ProcedureThe student participants completed the Mental Cutting Test (MCT, [10]), a test of
and research in student progression. Previously, he was a special title series assistant professor in electrical engineering at the University of Kentucky, and the KEEN Program Coordinator at Gonzaga University in the School of Engineering and Applied Science. He completed his doctorate in engineering education from Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education. Pre- viously, he received an M.S. in earth and planetary sciences studying geospatial imaging, and an M.S. in physics studying high-pressure, high-temperature FT-IR spectroscopy in heavy water, both from the University of California, Santa Cruz. He holds a B.S.E. in engineering physics with a concentration in electrical engineering from Case Western