; Exposition. 7. Krupczak, John, Greg Pearson, and David Ollis, Assessing Technological Literacy in the United States, Paper No. 2006-701, Proceedings of the 2006 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. 8. Ollis, David F., Installing a “Technology Literacy” Course: Trials and Tribulations, Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. 9. Ollis, David, Technological Literacy: Connecting through Context, Content, and Contraption, Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. 10. Ollis, David, Teaching Technological Literacy as a Quest, or “Searching for Self
transformationalideas, assess and analyze the merits and demerits and then make recommendations to the campusleadership team.The College of Engineering and Applied Science formed the Phoenix Taskforce, in reference tothe Greek mythology tale of the Phoenix rising from the dead. The taskforce consisted ofengineering and business faculty, representatives from industry, and administrators from thecampus leadership team; the taskforce was chaired by dean Haefner. After several meetings overthe summer of 2004, the Phoenix taskforce made a remarkable recommendation to merge theCollege of Engineering and Applied Science and the College of Business to form a single,aggregated college. This new college would be focused on innovation, or rather the innovationprocess
Biochemistry) respectively in 1987 and 1991 from the University of Delaware. She also received a master's in Environmental Engineering and Science from the John Hopkins University in 1996. Her past professional experience includes conducting laboratory research at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in the gastroenterology and oncology departments, working as a risk assessment contractor for the EPA, and directing the Human and Environmental Health research program at the Water Environment Research Foundation, a non-profit foundation that funds research related to wastewater treatment and water quality. She serves on the Board of Directors for the Federation of Earth Science
Mentor/Mentee Interactions • Structure – Bi-Weekly Group Meetings – Mentor/Mentee Evaluations • Assessment – Program Data CollectedFigure 1. Adapted from Systematic Mentoring Model2 to illustrate the structure and dynamics of the FAMU-FSU NSBE Chapter Stratus Mentoring ProgramThe incorporation of a systematic and well structured mentoring framework and the mission andprinciples of the National Society of Black Engineers had far reaching benefits to both thestudents who ran the program (mentors) and the students who participated (mentees) which
- 105.4 Douglas, J., Iverson, E. & Kalyandurg, C. (2004). Engineering in the K-12 classroom: An analysis of currentpractices & guidelines for the future. American Society for Engineering Education: Washington, DC.5 Iversen, E., Kalyandurg, C., & de Lapeyrouse, S. (2004). Why k-12 engineering? Available online;http://www.engineeringk12.org/. Retrieved December 2006.6 Foley, E. T., & Hersam, M. C. (2006). Assessing the need for nanotechnology education reform in the unitedstates. Nanotechnology Law & Business, 3(4), 467-484.7 Coll, R. (2005). The role of models/and analogies in science education: implications from research. InternationalJournal of Science Education, 27(2), 183-198.8 National Center for Learning and Teaching
. Passive Capture and Structuring of Lectures. In Proceedings of the ACM Multimedia conference (MM ’99). ACM Press, Orlando, FL, Oct 30 – Nov 5, 1999, pp. 477-487.[9] Promiti Dutta, Alexander Haubold, “Use of Assessment Survey to assign Project Teams and Roles”, ASEE Annual Conference & Exhibition, Jun 2007.[10] Promiti Dutta, Alexander Haubold, “Engineering Design via Team-based Service Learning Projects: Case Survey of five unique Project Genres”, ASEE Annual Conference & Exhibition, Jun 2007 Page 12.985.14
examines the inverse case of delaying all activities as late as possible withoutimpacting the project end. The flexibility of each activity, its float, is assessed by comparingthese extreme cases. Activities with zero float are time critical, as postponing any of them wouldimpact the project end.Any traditional computer program for the two-step CPM algorithm consists of defining variablesfor the time and dependency information of each activity from the schedule input, sorting them,making case distinctions whenever the dependency structure splits or merges betweenpredecessors and successors, and saving the maximum early dates and minimum late dates to theoutput. An object-oriented programming (OOP) approach would use the appealing existingdivision
ofEngineering and Business. Internal course evaluation was completed at the end of the semester.Students were asked to evaluate the project results in two broad categories: “overall quality ofthe course” and “effective of the instructor.” Each category has more than 10 Likert-typequestions. Students’ comments on the course were overwhelming positive. They liked havingthree professors from differing departments, especially the mix of engineering and business.This gave them different perspectives and teaching styles, which added to the enthusiasm thestudents felt from the faculty. Students appreciated the variety of assessment methods, whichincluded short essay exams, a competition with the Lego simulation, presentations from teamactivities, and the
look at the effectiveness of theirteaching methods on student design learning in such areas as heuristics, problem definition, etc.Besides allowing instructors to assess their students’ design learning process, the ‘online book’generates data of potential interest for research on design learning. For research purposes,videotapes of the input process have been used to determine the amount of information, if any,lost during the participants’ solving of the design problem on the computer (i.e., discussion ofideas not presented in the input response). The video data has shown that most ideas, heuristics,methods, etc. discussed by the students during the exercise are included in the data input asresponses into the system, making this a useful tool
have presented excellent opportunities to discuss ethics and global and societalimpact related to EAC of ABET criteria 3(f) and 3(h) [13]. Especially in ME 242 when many ofthe students see the Dr. Evil projects for the first time, the pretenses usually raise questions suchas “Should we consider construction labor costs?” or “Would Dr. Evil pay for labor costs?” andother questions related to ethics. The competing costs of energy from different types of fuels andtheir related pollution issues is certainly a primary and contemporary concern of powercompanies. In the ABET current culture and use of “direct assessments,” projects based onfictional and comical pretenses provide many opportunities for the students to demonstrateunderstanding of
alltransportation, lodging, and most meals. Travel in France was via train. There were severalreasons for the low cost: air travel was very inexpensive right after the holidays, each of ourindustry and university hosts provided at least one meal, some of the industry hosts providedtransportation between the hotel and their facilities (renting minibuses are expensive), and INPGarranged for our students to stay with their students, thus saving several nights of hotel bills.Also, only one faculty member’s travel cost was charged to the program; the other faculty was anadministrator and the cost was covered from other funds.A set of assessment questions was developed to gather feedback from the students regarding theexperience. An example of the quantitative
. Page 13.93.16Student AssessmentTo date, qualitative and quantitative student feedback on the course structure and project hasbeen very positive and representative selections of student comments are presented in thefollowing student assessments.The following comments are extracted from course assessment forms developed by theauthors. Four questions were presented to the students during the last class of DigitalCommunications during Winter Quarter of 2007. Overall, the comments are very encouraging:1.0 Did the class project illustrate the concepts presented in the course? "This project covered just about all of the concepts presented in the course. We explored design considerations, in testing circuits to find
develop all of the necessary hardware and softwarefor the data acquisition and balloon tracking. We recommend that either off-the-shelfhardware and software be used, if possible, or else develop these items prior to offering anactual Balloon Satellites course. The initial offering of our course was a somewhat stressfulexperience, at least partly because some of the necessary hardware and software for theinitial mission was developed while the course was being taught! While we have not conducted any quantitative assessment of student outcomes for thecourse sequence to date, we are quite convinced that the students benefit significantly fromtheir exposure to a “hands-on” open-ended design project. The experience serves both as a
analysis includes graphical representations of similarities among respondents, an estimate ofhow well the cultural consensus model fits this data, and a data-driven model that assesses whichbeliefs are prioritized.The data can be powerfully represented through a visual display using multidimensional scalingto show patterns of agreement among group members. According to the visual display (whichpresents the quantitative output of the application of a scaling routine to an agreement matrix ofall respondents), each respondent is represented as further from, or closer to, other respondentsbased on how differently or similarly (respectively) they organize information about a particularcultural domain. Respondents who are represented as closer to each
Chester F. Carlson Award in recognition of distinguished accomplishments in engineering education.Helen Chen, Stanford University HELEN CHEN is a Research Scientist at the Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning and the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE), Stanford University. Her current research focuses on the application of electronic portfolio pedagogy and practices in engineering education and the evaluation of eportfolios and other social software tools (wikis, weblogs, etc.) to facilitate teaching, learning, and assessment for students, faculty, departments, and institutions
classrooms more effective for women (and men) students.29. House, J., Johnson, M., & Borthwick, G. (2003). Assessment tool development for extracurricular SMET programs for girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9(1), 89-89-102.30. Jessup, E., Sumner, T., & Barker, L. (2005). Report from the trenches: Implementing curriculum to promote the participation of women in computer science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 11(3), 273-273-294.31. Kekelis, L. S., Wepsic Ancheta, R., Heber, E., & Countryman, J. (2005). Bridging differences: How social relationships and racial diversity matter in a girls' technology program. Journal of Women and Minorities in
large third harmonic component, as well as allthe other triplen harmonics. When the students see these results, they are surprised, even thoughthey have been told that in class.ConclusionInexpensive, three-phase, variable-frequency motor drives have been used for three semesters.While there has not been any formal assessment of the student learning as a result of their use ofthe drives, it has been observed that all students were able to program the drives and obtain therequired data for the lab. Their lab reports generally showed a good understanding of theoperation of variable-frequency drives. Overall these drives have proven to provide as good alearning experience for the students as the previous “name brand” drives. In addition, for
is beneficial, in that the resulting outcome statements can be assessed more effectively and consistently.8 Page 13.743.4 Level Illustrative Verbs 1 Knowledge define, identify, label, list, 2 Comprehension classify, describe, explain, generalize, paraphrase 3 Application apply, calculate, compute, demonstrate, solve 4 Analysis analyze, differentiate, formulate, organize, prioritize 5 Synthesis create, design, develop, devise, integrate, plan 6 Evaluation critique, evaluate, judge, justifyTable 1. Six levels of
, M. and McCormick, C.B., Cognition, Teaching and Assessment, HarperCollins, New York, 1995.20. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America’s Research Universities, State University of New York at Stony Brook for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Stony Brook, NY, 1998.21. Hadim, H.A. and Esche, S.K., “Enhancing the Engineering Curriculum through Project-Based Learning,” Proceedings of the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontier in Education Conference, November 6-9, 2002, Boston, MA, Section F3F, pp. 1-6.22. Witt, H.J., Alabart, J.R., Giralt, F., Herrero, J., Medir, M., and Fabregat, A., “Development of Coaching Competencies in
Study of Higher Education.19 Peterson, M. & Spencer, M. (1990). “Understanding Academic Culture and Climate.” In W. Tierney (Ed.), Assessing Academic Climates and Cultures. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass, Inc. Page 13.713.12
theinstructors. (This negotiation is being replacement this spring with a mid-semestertechnical report and assessment, after which the instructors will provide a modifiedstatement of work if deemed necessary.) This document describes, in detail, the projectdeliverables and the proposed validation/testing process. This Statement of Work isconsidered a binding “contract” between the team and the instructors and satisfaction ofthe contract will be a significant factor in determining the team’s grade. Proceedings of the 2003 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference The University of Texas at Arlington Copyright 2003, American Society for Engineering EducationTeams provided four written and four
Exceptional Average 1. I gain factual knowledge (terminology, 1 2 3 4 5 classifications, methods, trends). 2. I learn conceptual principles, 1 2 3 4 5 generalizations, and/or theories. 3. I get a chance to talk to other students 1 2 3 4 5 and explain my ideas to them. 4. I am encouraged to frequently evaluate 1 2 3 4 5 and assess my own work. 5. I learn to apply course materials to 1 2 3 4 5 improve my own thinking, problem solving
be significant cost penalties. From anational point of view, wear is very costly to the economy. At a recent workshop by the Office ofTechnology Assessment, U.S. wear costs were documented in various equipment categories.Some examples (in 1975 dollars) were as follows: Naval aircraft, $243.87/flight hr; Navy aircrafttires, $1,853,200/year; Navy ships, $38.92/ship hr; cutting tool wear, $900 million/year.Automotive maintenance and repair costs were estimated to be $40 billion per year, a large portionof which could be attributed to wear. In a recent report by the National Institute for Standards andTechnology (formerly the National Bureau of Standards), $70 billion was estimated for corrosion,and $20 billion for wear. Peterson estimates
growth is due in large part to the depositionof lipoproteins related to cholesterol levels. Over time, atherosclerosis can grow frommild to severe depending on both mechanical and biological responses in the artery wall.Given the localization of inflammation to bifurcated regions, fluid dynamics and wallmechanics are proposed to have a large effect on this process. Numerical analysis offlow through a stenotic carotid bifurcation provides insight into local flow dynamics andan assessment of the risks of particular modes and degrees of stenosis.Further danger of plaque deposit is that ruptured particles can be carried off to the brainand lead to a stroke9. One such phenomenon of plaque rupture, plaque excavation, isobserved clinically as blood
hands-on activity, or a lab visit. Thepresentations were from aerospace, bioengineering, civil, computer science, electrical, industrial,mechanical, and materials science engineering. There were also presentations about chemistryand physics as well. The presentations were from an hour to an hour and a half in length. Mostpresentations covered a particular professor’s interest in their field rather than covering the entirediscipline. Therefore the civil engineering presentation focused on air quality assessment whenone professor spoke and then on water resources and use when a different professor spoke inanother camp week. The electrical engineering presentation introduced concepts of RFID andhow that technology affects the students daily. The
how, I had to search the manual for specificcommands. The other comment was, Some of the drawings seemed like they were alreadycompleted all we had to do is change a few things. The prepared files were, as the last commentimplies, basically finished drawings – or almost finished. Perhaps this illustrates student desire totake on longer, more involved, exercises?The lack of more positive responses to question four can be at least partially explained by theway in which the instructor presented the material. Portions, or excerpts, of the Site I manualwere photocopied and distributed to the class. The students did not receive the entire manual.Therefore, this might not represent a true student assessment of the materials.The author posed question
. D. M C V EY, and J. M C M ASTERS (1999) “Industry Expectations of New Engineers: A Survey to Assist Curriculum Designers,” Journal of Engineering Education, 88(1), pp. 43–51.4 W ILSON , J. M. (1995) “National Issues in Engineering Education,” in Workshop on Re-Engineering Engineering Education (R. T. Lahey, ed.), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, August 21–22, pp. 5–10.5 G RAY, G. L., F. C OSTANZO, D. E VANS, P. C ORNWELL, B. S ELF, and J. L. L ANE (2005) “The Dynamics Concept Inventory Assessment Test: A Progress Report and Some Results,” in Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, paper presented in Session No. 3268 of the 2005 American Society
, Z., “Development of Engineering Problem Solving Skills Through Laboratory Experimentation,” 2001 ASEE Annual Conference (Albuquerque: ASEE, June 2001).8. Morgan, R., and Jones, K., “The Use of Simulation Software to Enhance Student Understanding,” IEE International Symposium on Engineering Education: Innovations in Teaching, Learning and Assessment (Ref. No. 2001/046), 2001, 33/1-33/6.9. Pitts, G. “How do we teach students to relate to real applications,” IEE Colloquium on Engineering Education in the Twenty-First Century (Digest No: 1996/105), May 1996, 5/1-5/5.10. Elahinia, M., and Ciocanel, C. ”Redeveloping the Mechanics and Vibration Laboratory: a Problem Solving Approach,” 2006 ASEE Annual Conference.11
programming and PICmicrocontroller. The students found the software was very user friendly and easy to use. It tookthem very little time to become familiar with the software and the associated hardware setup.The students were able to change codes very easily based on their need for different types ofsensors and actuators. All students felt that within a short time they received very good hands-onexperience in real-time embedded networking systems. The five students were asked toparticipate in a survey to assess the learning outcomes of the laboratory. The survey result isshown in Table I. Page 13.106.11 Table I. Survey results of the
Engineering Students Ability to Solve Open-Ended Problems, Proceedings of the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference & Exhibition2. Joan A. Ballantine, Patricia McCourt Larres and Peter Oyelere, Computer usage and the validity of self- assessed computer competence among first-year business students, Computers and Education 49 (4) (2007), pp. 976-990.3. Shu-Sheng Liaw, Hsiu-Mel Huang and Gwo-Dong Chen, Surveying instructor and learner attitudes towards e- learning, Computers and Education 49 (4) (2007), pp. 1066-1080.4. Robert W. Wendover, Understanding the Millennium Mind, The Center for Generational Studies, wendover.gentrends.com