% Solid Mechanics 40% Module Scores 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Figure 4: performance of the Solid Mechanics students on each module Page 24.1100.8 Except for the acceptable performance on Modules 9, 10 and 11, the students‟ performance on all other modules was unacceptably low. This batch of students also had problems in Statics course per their academic transcripts. Several help sessions, tutoring labs were offered with poor attendance on the part of the students. They
review of ATE construction, testing anddistribution is also assessed. We summarize lessons learned in working with hub-coordinatorsand workshops participants, getting attendee participation, and motivating them to prepare forthe training, and follow-up through use of pre- and post-implementation forms required forobtaining stipends and support. The cumulative results of pre- to posttest concept inventories arepresented for a base set of two fluid mechanics and two heat transfer ATE as well asmotivational surveys and information related to demographic findings. We present constructionstrategies, production and implementation findings for our latest modules, an Evaporative Coolerand Fluidized Bed, and how strong technical components are integrated
up to eight semesters offinancial aid. As a result, our engineering degrees are designed as four-year curricula that startwith Calculus 1 and General Physics 1 in the fall of the first year.In 2013, we were awarded a National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate 10K+ Science,Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program (STEP) grant to assistwith increasing the retention of at-risk engineering students (Jones et. al., 2014; Jones et. al.,2015). At the University of Portland, the majority of engineering students who fall into this at-risk category are those who start the first year in pre-calculus based on a Calculus 1 readinesstest that they complete during the summer before their first college semester. For engineering,our
(Table 1). The following are pertinent to the Summer I Calculus Experience:1. New Sequencing of Barrier Math Requirements: S-STEM students complete their Calculus I course during the summer prior to their freshmen year. Calculus II is completed over two 16- week semesters during their freshmen year. We anticipate that allowing students to complete their early math requirements over the summer will provide them with positive mastery experiences that will elevate their math efficacy.2. Sessions with a Learning Strategist: During their freshmen and sophomore years, S-STEM students are connected to a trained learning strategist to help students understand the challenges of learning at the collegiate level, develop cognitive skills to
the following statements concerningyour confidence in your abilities to function as an engineer/scientist in your area. SA A N D SD a. I am confident that I can use technical skills (use of tools, instruments, and techniques) b. I am confident that I can generate a research question to answer. c. I am confident that I can identify a problem to solve. d. I am confident that I can figure out what data/observations to collect and how to collect them. e. I am confident that I can use scientific literature, reports, and standards to guide my research. f. I am confident that I can use scientific literature, reports, and standards
Algebra II,Trigonometry, or Calculus I. One campus implemented a “math mastery” program in Algebra IIand Trigonometry.One-Credit Math Tutoring Course at Four Campuses (Penn State Beaver, Brandywine,Greater Allegheny, New Kensington)The Toys’n MORE one-credit math tutoring course differs from drop-in tutoring offered at acampus Learning Center because it is a course for credit that students are required to attend.Students are actively engaged in weekly 50-minute sessions with master and peer tutors whoaddress their questions and guide them to practice solving math problems. Students earn a gradefor the 1-credit tutoring course and do not pay an additional tuition fee for the class. Twenty-oneto 28 percent of the students enrolled in one of the
enrollment) for STEM majors. Page 23.1256.4Math Tutoring OutcomesThe first intervention, to improve performance and retention in the foundational math classes forSTEM majors, involves seven of the regional campuses. These seven campuses instituted a 1-credit weekly tutoring class taken in conjunction with Algebra II, Trigonometry, or Calculus I.This math tutoring class differs from drop-in tutoring offered at a campus Learning Centerbecause it is an actual course, for credit, that students are required to attend. Students areactively engaged in weekly 50-minute sessions with master and peer tutors who address theirquestions and guide them to practice
cognitive strategy use among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 797 - 816.20. Busch-Vishniac, I. & Jarosz, J. (2004). Can diversity in the undergraduate engineering population be enhanced through curricular change? Journal of women and Minorities in Sci. and Engineering, 10, 255-281.21. Tannen, D. (1994). Gender and discourse. Oxford, Oxford University Press.22. Baker, D., Krause, S., Yasar, S., Roberts, C., & Robinson Kurpius, S. (2004). An intervention on tinkering and technical self-confidence, and the understanding of the social relevance of science and technology. presented at Mini Symposium Session, "Bridging Engineering and Education: The Role of Design
Paper ID #33622Impact of COVID-19 Transition to Remote Learning on EngineeringSelf-efficacy and Outcome ExpectationsJohanna Milord, University of Missouri - Columbia Johanna Milord is a Counseling Psychology Doctoral Candidate at the University of Missouri. She earned her Masters of Science degree in Mental Health Counseling. Her general research focus is marginalized populations’ attainment of their desired academic and career outcomes. Her most recent projects have explored career self-efficacy and critical race consciousness interventions.Fan Yu, University of Missouri - ColumbiaDr. Sarah Lynn Orton P.E., University of
asked to find the relevant literature and prepare peer teaching notes whichsummarize their understanding and questions that they have to share with their team mates.This activity does not only enhance their understanding on engineering, but also helps themto formulate better questions to ask during the interview session. Assignment 1 In your team, find literature for information on what engineering is in general and the topic assigned from literature search. Find credible literature (books, magazines, websites with credible authority) and summarize in your own words what you understand, and list questions on points that you want to verify and those that you do not understand (Sept 12
ofengineering curriculum which was built around the “basic sciences, technical subjects, andhumanities, with theory taught before application”7. Naturally, the following questions arise forengineering education today: 1) What is engineering? , 2) Who is an engineer? and 3) Howshould engineering be taught? These questions should be answered in order to properly informengineering teaching in pre-college and college settings. Since engineering is a constantlyevolving field, the answers to these questions continue to change over time.Engineers in society have many roles and typically are known for their ability to solve problemsand meet needs in the most efficient manner possible by using different types of knowledge. Thissection of the literature review
ethics of information, including skills and practices to maintain their own intellectual property generated during the design process • Revise and expand on present library instruction methodologies to address shortcomings identified in the assessment mapping to standardsMethodologyDuring the spring term of 2009, all first-year Drexel engineering students were required toprepare for their library instruction session by completing a series of online tutorials. Thesetutorials were embedded into the lecture section through a central website. The tutorialsintroduced the various formats of engineering literature that students were expected to usethroughout their research including scholarly journal articles, encyclopedias
Page 15.1330.10any of the suggested claims. Second, we are a small college with just under 2,000 students soexperiences will differ between institutions of different types and sizes.At time of publication, we had thirteen guides. In the first six months of use, the top five guidesused are as follows:1) “Logan Library Databases” - a list of all our subscribed databases in two tabs (“AtoZ List”and “By Subject”). - accessed 8,916 times2) “Engineering (general)” - accessed 2,217 times3) “Humanities and Social Sciences (general)” - accessed 1,376 times4) “RH-330 Technical Communications and Professional Communication” (class specific guide)accessed - 936 times5) “Applied Biology” - accessed 416 times.These numbers indicate several things. First
researchers and educators.A tool that allows seamless communication and documentation would be ideal for both studentswho want to communicate conversationally and teachers who need to assess learning and want tosee process thinking. This project looks to fill that gap by designing a language currentlypopular with students (and some adults) to be the foundation framework for a future designrationale tool. Using live video from student groups and classroom sessions and based onresearch in computer-mediated communication and literacy, we generate a classroom text andIM language that can be used to facilitate communication between students and improveengagement between students and instructors during the engineering design process. Thelanguage includes
affect, is self-efficacy asdescribed in Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory [5]. According to this theory, peoples’ beliefs intheir capabilities vary across domains and situations, and can develop through 4 mechanisms: 1. Mastery experiences: achieving success on a challenging task 2. Social modeling: seeing similar people achieve success 3. Social persuasion: being convinced by others that one can succeed; and 4. Physical and emotional statesSelf-efficacy can have significant impacts on student resilience, persistence, and attitude during aproblem solving session; as Bandura describes: “How people perceive the structuralcharacteristics of their environment—the impediments it erects and the opportunity structures itprovides
Paper ID #34588A Super Department Model for Multi-University CollaborationDr. Kenneth A. Connor, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Kenneth Connor is an emeritus professor in the Department of Electrical, Computer, and Systems Engi- neering (ECSE) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) where he taught courses on electromagnetics, electronics and instrumentation, plasma physics, electric power, and general engineering. His research in- volves plasma physics, electromagnetics, photonics, biomedical sensors, engineering education, diversity in the engineering workforce, and technology enhanced learning. He learned problem
, methods, tools, etc.), sustainability, ethics, team management, andtechnical communication (both oral and written), while incorporating elements of engineering scienceand analysis. Students apply design instruction in the context of two projects during the six-coursesequence—a cornerstone project spanning the fall and spring semesters of the sophomore year, and acapstone project spanning the junior and senior academic years.The curriculum of our non-discipline specific engineering program, shown graphically in Figure 1,combines a campus-wide, liberal arts general educational core with courses in math, science,engineering design, engineering science, business, systems analysis, and sustainability3,4. Individualskills taught developmentally through
incarnations of the course, more emphasis has been placed on the team-based design projects, as evidenced by 50% of the course grade being contributed by team work.Table 1. Common grading scheme adopted for all EDSGN 100 sections. Assessment of individual proficiency (50%) Assessment of team work (50%) 20%: In-class Assessments Introductory Design Project(s) to support 25%: 15%: CAE Activities and Assessments learning of design process 5%: Making Activities Client-sponsored Design Project to 25%: 10%: General Assignments
in 2009; Brazil in 2010; China in 2012; Costa Rica in 2013; New Zealand in 2014; Italyin 2015; and Chile in 2016. Over 280 students and seventeen different faculty members haveparticipated.This study abroad program was initially designed to address ABET General Criterion 3(h) whichnotes that graduates must have “the broad education necessary to understand the impact ofengineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal context.” Specific ABETeducational outcomes for the program include: 1) the broad education necessary to understand theimpact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context, 2) recognition of the need for, andan ability to engage in, life-long learning, and 3) knowledge of contemporary issues
around the limitations of the technology. For more information on EEAAPs and how to fill them out, visit accessibility.psu.edu/eeaap or contact accessibility@psu.eduThe topics that must be addressed include: 1. Description of the issue(s) 2. Persons or groups affected 3. Responsible person(s) 4. How Alternative Access will be provided a. Are there other products that provide the same functionality, with possibly improved accessibility? b. Describe in general terms the accommodations to be provided for the person with the disability. For example, “For this product, the instructor will provide reading materials to give the same educational experience and
the Year inDelaware Valley, IEEE Philadelphia Section in 2004. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 DEVELOPMENT OF AN EXPERIMENTAL PLATFORM FOR ANALYSIS OF CYBERATTACKS ON POWER GRIDAbstract This paper presents the development of a single generator networked control system (NCS)to provide an experimental platform for cyber security studies on the power grid. The generatorNCS is comprised of three main components: 1) a synchronous generator in a two-bus system, 2)a data acquisition (DAQ) unit, and 3) a controller connected in a local area network. The two-buspower grid consists of a LabVolt synchronous generator driven by a dynamometer serving as theprime mover, and the
different design processes [14]. The case study was particularly appropriate fordocumenting potential variation in teams’ strategies.FindingsThe number of design decisions varied by teams. On average, teams engaged in 7.00 designdecisions per session, with a standard deviation (SD) of 2.59. Team Step made as few as 4.00decisions per session, SD = .00. Team Watch and Team Rise made as many as 8.33 designdecisions per session, SD = 1.53 and 3.79, respectively. Team Bone engaged in 7.33 decisions onaverage, with SD = 1.15.ENA provides the design decision structure of each team (Figure 1). The dimensions can beinterpreted as follows: the bottom left focuses on regulation types (i.e., self- and shared regulatedlearning). The bottom right leans towards
experience with community-based infrastructure projects andthat of an extended mentorship team made up of working professionals in various disciplines. Coremembers of the mentor team are practicing civil engineers who frequently attend project meetingsand are involved in the review of all major project submissions. Their involvement typicallyincludes comments on technical documents, guidance and review of calculations, one-on-one worksessions with students, project-wide instructional sessions, etc.The structure of the teaching and mentoring team is advantageous as compared to solely anacademic instructional team for a number of reasons. This assignment co-creation method offersstudent leaders an opportunity to work directly with a faculty member to
increases retention rate and graduation rates [1-8]. Research Experience forUndergraduates (REU) Site hosted by University 1 aims to engage undergraduates in variousinterdisciplinary research projects of drone swarms. The goals of the REU Site are: 1) attract undergraduate students to state-of-the-art drone swarm research, especially those from underrepresented groups, and from institutions with limited opportunities. 2) develop the research capacity of participants by guiding them to perform research on drone swarms. 3) grow the participants’ technical skills to enable a wide variety of beneficial applications of drone swarms. 4) promote the participants’ integrated AI/machine learning and drone swarm competencies
experience abroad, and mentoring new staff. Isabelle collaborates with faculty from the Vanderbilt School of Engineering to provide study abroad opportuni- ties for Engineering students. As a result of their joint efforts, Vanderbilt has increased the number of Engineering students studying abroad, which now exceeds the national average.Dr. Christopher J. Rowe, Vanderbilt University Dr. Christopher J. Rowe, M.Eng., Ed.D., is associate professor of the practice of engineering management and director of the division of general engineering at Vanderbilt University. He holds degrees in biomed- ical engineering, management of technology, and higher education leadership and policy. His research and teaching interests in
educational curricula. This study assesses the implications of AI integrationwithin these subfields and its potential impact on students' skill development and comprehension.1 IntroductionIntegrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into engineering management education significantlytransforms pedagogical methodologies. This study focuses on two primary impacts of AI in thisfield:1. Revolutionizing Learning Paradigms: This study explores how generative AI, capable of creating diverse and interactive content, redefines the educational landscape. This technology facilitates personalized learning experiences and introduces innovative methods for knowledge dissemination, enhancing student engagement and understanding.2. Challenges to Academic Integrity
, Runway Safety/Runway Incursions/ Runway Excursions, AirportEnvironmental Interactions, and Airport Management and Planning [1]. Student teams are free toeither address specific challenge areas as defined in the Technical Design Challenges section ofthe ACRP design competition guidelines, or propose design solutions based on other topics thatfit the four broad challenge areas [1].The evaluation criteria for the design competition are available on the ACRP website [7]. Thecriteria are used by the competition judges to evaluate design proposals, and could assist studentteams to evaluate and improve their proposals before final submission. Each of the designproposals submitted are evaluated, and evaluators may choose to provide a score in half
Assessment Local Real-world Problems Project Repository Industry Virtual Company Figure 1: The EXPLORES learning environment. The purpose of using a virtual company is to give students a more realistic feeling of thepracticality of their projects. The company was named STAR Corp. Technical Center. It has twodepartments; namely, Manufacturing (corresponding to the Manufacturing Processes course) andQuality Assurance (corresponding to the Engineering Statistical Methods course). There are threetypes of users, summarized as follows: Engineers. They are students who will be working on
Session 1615 Transportation Course Transformation through the Use of Instructional Technology Carlos Sun University of Missouri-ColumbiaAbstractThis paper documents the transformation of the Transportation Systems EngineeringCourse through the use of instructional technology. The course described is ajunior/senior level Civil Engineering course that is required for all undergraduate CivilEngineering students at the University of Missouri-Columbia. The goal in the use ofinstructional technology is to enhance both the teaching infrastructure and
plausibledistractors, all aimed at testing students' understanding and application of strain hardeningprinciples. Figure 1 shows the prompt given to GPT4 to generate the MCQs, after feeding it [9].Figures 2 and 3 display the output of the prompt. Figure 1: Prompt to Chat GPT 4 to generate an MCQ of 5 questions. Figure 2: First 3 MCQs. Figure 3: Last 2 MCQs.It should be noted that, in Figures 2 and 3, the AI's approach to generating MCQs was overly directin addressing the LOs. This level of directness, while beneficial for clarity, potentially underminesthe development of analytical skills by not fully challenging students to apply their understandingin