guarded optimism4to be at the forefront of the new educational culture. As the MOOC phenomenon moves towardsmaturity, the concurrent approach within the Department of Mechanical and ManufacturingEngineering was to assemble learning technologies and techniques that modernize the entireMME curriculum and deploy them in an appealing and contemporary package. The ComEx project is imbedded within the MME curriculum. That is to say, unlike thepreponderance of simulation and/or experiment based online learning modules that have beendeveloped for specific courses5-8, whether they be in chemical, electrical, mechanical ormanufacturing engineering, the ComEx studios focus on a set of thematically linked courses.The students utilize the modules as
over three semesters, as opposed to thecollege’s traditional two-semester curriculum. The integrated approach used collaborationbetween one semester of Engineering Design Methods (EDM) and two-semesters of the SeniorDesign Project (SDP). The integrated approach, modeled on the engineering design spine withroots in freshman courses, involved both the EDM and SDP cohorts. The interclass involvementincludes participation in design review presentations, senior-to-junior mentorship, and multiclassworkshops. Student feedback through periodic surveys and interviews provided insight into thestudents’ progress and learning outcomes. This paper reports on efforts that would help anintegrated Capstone Design curriculum succeed. The Department’s surveys
increaseaccessibility for working adults, a new online Electrical Engineering Technology (EET) programwas launched in the Fall 2017 semester. This paper presents the results of a comparative study oftwo groups of students (online and on-campus) doing the same lab-intensive course. The courseis Digital Fundamentals, a 200-level core requirement of the EET curriculum. Four importantresearch questions were posed: i. Can online courses be delivered while maintaining rigorous accreditation standards? ii. Can teamwork be encouraged and maintained in an online setting? iii. Can the integrity of assessment processes be preserved? iv. Can the pedagogical effectiveness of the lab experiences be evaluated?METHODOLOGYTwo groups of students were
College are described. The major elements of thecurriculum that is being planned include: (1) a set of modules for learning the basicsof entrepreneurship, (2) interaction with several on-campus and distributedhatcheries, (3) a set of in-depth learning interactions (projects, modules, courses) thatprovide depth of knowledge in engineering entrepreneurship and (4) capstoneexperiences in entrepreneurship during the sophomore year and the final year of theundergraduate curriculum. New courses/modules specifically targeted on technologyentrepreneurship are being designed between Babson College and Olin College.Babson College’s number one ranking in entrepreneurship is being fully leveraged byjoint appointments of faculty, cross registrations between
desired skillset uniform across local industry or was there considerable variance from one employer to another? Where in our program could we add content? Would we be adding courses, modifying existing courses, or some combination?A two phase project was defined and included in our ABET improvement project process. Theprocess was similar to the process defined by Sticklen et al [3] to gather input from industry andimplement in a local program. The first phase would involve an assessment of needs as definedby local industry stakeholders. The second phase would be a process of deciding how tointegrate this into our curriculum.Requirements Collection and VerificationOur first step was to create a survey to serve as a tool for
understanding ofelectronics to building a television to learning new technology innovations and breakthroughs.The course becomes interesting to students only when the subject material is discussed inrelation to real-world electronic gadgets as evidenced by the course-level assessment-improvement-verification feedback process. The course starts with basics of electricity and endswith microcomputer architecture, and encompasses significant hands-on circuit building andtesting throughout the semester. Details on curriculum, assessment, l aboratory exercises,teaching and laboratory methodologies, homework and textbook issues, and techniques that workas well as the ones that do not work are presented herein.IntroductionAn introductory electronics course as
implementation includes integrating BIMwithin specific courses such as scheduling,7 estimating,8,9,10 engineering graphics,11 MEP(mechanical, electrical, and plumbing),12 or project management.13 Other programs aremodifying their curriculum by adding specific stand-alone BIM courses.14,15 Cooksey and Schiffstate that “introducing BIM to students is more complex than just adding a new course to thecurriculum, because BIM has the potential to be involved in the entire program.”16 However,they further clarify that integration of BIM within the curriculum should correspond with thestudent’s academic maturity.16 While individual CEM programs have to balance how to bestutilize BIM within their individual unique curriculum, it is clear that there is an
Education, 2007 The Current Generation of Integrated Engineering Curriculum - Assessment After Two Years of ImplementationAbstractIn September of 2004 our university adopted the Multidisciplinary Engineering FoundationSpiral Curriculum as the basis for disciplinary engineering programs in Chemical, Civil,Electrical, Mechanical and General Engineering. The curriculum includes a sequence of firstand second year engineering courses, matched closely with the development of students’mathematical sophistication and analytical capabilities and integrated with course work in thesciences. Students develop a conceptual understanding of engineering basics in this series ofcourses which stress practical applications of these principles.The
his BS degree in electrical engineering (1975) from California State University, Sacramento, and his MS (1980) and DE (1983) degrees in industrial engineering from Texas A&M University. His educa- tion and research interests include project management, innovation and entrepreneurship, and embedded product/system development.Dr. Jay R. Porter, Texas A&M University Jay R. Porter joined the Department of Engineering Technology and Industrial Distribution at Texas A&M University in 1998 and is currently the Associate Department Head for Undergraduate Studies. He re- ceived the BS degree in electrical engineering (1987), the MS degree in physics (1989), and the Ph.D. in electrical engineering (1993) from
obtained in 2003 the substantial equivalence certification from ABET, for the curricularprograms in Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, ComputerScience Engineering and Chemical Engineering. This is the first Engineering School in Chile andthe second in Latin America in obtaining this recognition.Despite this encouraging situation, the School decided two years ago, to start a deep curricularrevision process. One of the triggering facts for this decision was the award of public funding(project MECEUP UCH0403, www.reing.cl), in order to develop a joint initiative with ourcolleagues from Universidad de Chile. Its objective in short, was to do a thorough analysis of themethodologies that are been used internationally for
expectations associated with theindividual outcome. Learners would be able to envision all of the components of their programassociated with specific developmental milestones in contrast to a dizzying list of coursescomprising the degree map.In addition to the archiving of student work, integrated electronic portfolio reflective exerciseswould be discipline-specific, purposefully articulating the connections of skills between courses,and the advancement of those skills throughout the curriculum. While not all ET students maybe capable of deep personal reflection, activities associated with this electronic portfolio wouldinvolve observations about technical skills, the extension of problem solving abilities, andreadiness for capstone projects. In
(Callaghan, McCusker, Losada, Harkin & Wilson, 2009),effectively allowing a safe training environment for participants, e.g., high school students, whomight not have sufficient resources for necessary training to be around the laboratory equipmentduring potential STEM outreach collaboration with K-12 educational institutions. Propercollaboration and associated curriculum service learning activities, prospective K-12 students arebetter engaged in universityactivities, better connected to the college culture, and are in aposition to acquire deeper understanding of STEM disciplines. The effective college and K-12partnerships are shown to be the likely instrumental reason for the student knowledgeacquirement (Fonseca et al., 2016). In addition, the
engineering technology curriculum. Based on thesurvey manufacturing ET curriculum was developed that provides a foundation in sciencescomplemented by general technical courses in mechanical and industrial engineering disciplines.The general technical courses, focusing on the practical application of engineering knowledge,include the subject areas of engineering graphics, engineering materials and mechanics,hydraulics and pneumatics, CAD/CAM, geometric tolerancing, design and engineeringeconomics. The manufacturing-specific courses cover subjects in manufacturing processes,CNC, quality assurance, facilities layout, material science, design for manufacturing, and leanmanufacturing.INTRODUCTIONDevelopment of the proposed MFET (Manufacturing Engineering
the mechatronics option in the ET department was under themechanical engineering technology (MET) program in 2014. While the program already offeredfundamental courses for mechanical curriculum in statics, dynamics, and fluid mechanics forexample, along with courses in automation control, industrial robotics, computer integratedmanufacturing, and computer numerical control, there were not yet courses specific tomechatronics specialization. Bridge courses towards the electrical side of mechatronics wereavailable under the dual enrolment courses, and electronics/hardware courses were availablethrough minor specialization in electrical engineering technology (EET), but a clearly definedmechatronics pathway in the program curriculum was not yet
assessment and graduates.Deng et al. [5] discussed the evaluation of assessment tools for outcome-based engineeringcourses for mechanical engineering program at Alabama A & M University. They adopted anapproach based Bloom’s taxonomy and is called SEAARK (Knowledge, Repetition, Application,Analysis, Evaluation and Synthesis) in reverse order. Specifically, they discussed the assessmentevaluation for data on fluid mechanics course. Schmidt and Beaman [7] discussed a department-wide major curriculum reform effort, PROCEED, an acronym for Project-Centered Education. Following ABET [1], each engineering department, the program outcomes aresummarized as educational objectives that describe the unique characteristics of that program.Similar to
history of implementingsuccessful curriculum innovations. Prince, et al. (2004) identified 12 innovative research basedinstructional strategies among chemical engineering educators collaborative learning, activelearning, problem-based learning, inquiry learning, concept tests, think-pair-share, cooperativelearning, case-based teaching, peer instruction, just-in-time teaching, thinking-aloud-pairedproblem solving and service learning. About 87% of faculty who completed the survey for thisstudy indicated that they currently use at least one of these strategies. However, faculty membersalso identified a number of barriers to adopting these pedagogical strategies. Preparation timeand class time were their biggest concerns of faculty members (averages
orientation and motivation, curriculum innovation and integration, underrepresented groups, human interface issues and employment opportunities. There must be a well-established coordination between the institution’s responds for adjusting their programs and services and the today’s students’ expectation. First year seminar course that provides the basis for cohesive learning is useful. The author will demonstrate the effect of changing the sequence of courses on retention in electrical engineering technology program in a Canadian institution. The underrepresented groups specially the women whom represent nearly fifty percent of the population will be motivated to enroll and finish the program by
) 3,4; convection 1, 2, 3, 4; radiation 3; change of phase 2; heat exchangers 1, 2, 4Case Study Project Topics 1. Brayton Cycle Combustion; compressors/turbines; 1-D flow; second law; nozzles/diffusers; compressible flow; heat exchangers; electrical generator efficiencies, gearbox efficiencies, etc. 2. HVAC System Refrigeration cycle; psychrometrics (humidification or dehumidification); air duct flow; heat exchangers; liquid & two- phase flows; insulation. 3. Thermal Transient conduction; radiation; mixed convection
students learn and retain and what can they apply anddemonstrate). The Environment addresses students’ experience while learning and can bedemonstrated through project-based learning, student competitions, and the availability oflaboratory facilities and group space. Several efforts have been directed towards defining andmeasuring the impact of these four elements on construction education, however, the focus wasprimarily on Curriculum (C) and Pedagogy (P), with some relatively recent work on Assessment(A) and Experience (E).Examples of these efforts include Abdelhamid (2003) who addressed the evaluation of teacher-student learning style disparities in construction education, Bernold (2005) and Bernold et al.(2000) who emphasized the need for
AC 2008-937: INCORPORATION OF BROADBAND ACCESS TECHNOLOGY INA TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMWarren Koontz, Rochester Institute of Technology Warren is currently a professor in the College of Applied Science and Technology at RIT and chair of the Telecommunications Engineering Technology program. He joined RIT in December 2000 after retiring from Bell Laboratories. He began his thirty two year career at Bell Labs as a member of technical staff in the Electronic Switching Division in Naperville Illinois. He was involved in a variety of projects at a variety of Bell Labs locations, including international assignments in The Netherlands and Germany. At the time of his retirement, he
, some of which the library orders on demand. To assistwith such needs, engineering librarians can provide additional support to the teams, particularlywith demonstrating reliable and domain-specific resources for more efficient searches. Theengineering librarian aims to continue to offer introductory workshops and deliver up-to-dateinformation on business and engineering research to the student project teams in closecollaboration with the business librarians.ConclusionSeveral conditions have contributed to escalating demand for business education in theengineering curriculum: the heightened emphasis on building professional skills in response toindustry expectations, the increase in funding for entrepreneurial projects on college campuses,and
interdisciplinary projects, and have an understanding ofthe legal, political and socio-economic impacts of engineering projects. Many committeesand workshops organized with the sponsorship of the National Academy of Engineering,the National Science Foundation, professional associations, and academic institutions haveresulted in essentially the same recommendations. As an example, the Engineering DeansCouncil and Corporate Roundtable (ASEE, 1994) recommended that universities continueto teach scientific and engineering fundamentals as well as a broadened curriculum byincorporating team skills, communication skills, leadership skills, system perspective andintegration of knowledge throughout the curriculum with a commitment to quality andethics.In this paper
(SWECC) on the Software Engineering Body ofKnowledge (SWEBOK) project. Their efforts are investigated along with the current impact ofthe SWECC and the SWEBOK project on software engineering curriculum. The different viewson licensing professional software engineers and different accreditation criteria will also beexamined. Here we present the initial findings of our study to help other institutions in similar situationsby providing a concise, although not totally complete, history of how software engineeringcurriculum has evolved over the decades and examining where it appears to be heading. Ourhope is that this paper may serve both to give an overview of SE curricular issues as well as tojump-start the investigation for other schools
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
engineering education is stillmostly unknown. Brown, et. al. [2009] investigated social capital in a sophomore electricalengineering lab and found that need and lack of resources were key aspects that helped developsocial capital. He then asks the questions, “… should engineering curriculum and laboratories bedesigned to encourage the development of social capital?” A more recent study by Martin et. al.[2013] explored the role of social capital on four Hispanic women pursuing engineering degrees.Martin’s study concludes that “facilitating opportunities for students to develop sustained socialcapital may have potential to attract and retain underrepresented students in engineering”.This paper describes the transformation of an introductory electrical
, California Polytechnic State University Lynne A. Slivovsky, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering (Ph.D., Purdue Uni- versity, 2001), has led service-learning initiatives both within the College of Engineering and across the university at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. In 2003 she received the Frontiers In Education New Faculty Fellow Award. Her work in service-learning led to her selection in 2007 as a California Campus Compact-Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Faculty Fellow for Service-Learning for Political Engagement. She currently oversees two multidisciplinary service-learning programs: the Access by Design project that has capstone students
curriculum is industry-valued, attainable by any highschool student and portable for virtual or off-campus learning opportunities. This work is fundedunder the Plant Priority Act (PPA) through the United States Department of Agriculture’s(USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).Curriculum Design Process a. Project Team and ExpertiseThe primary author of the paper, Iftekhar Ibne Basith has a Ph.D. in Electrical and ComputerEngineering. A major focus of this curriculum is developing visual learning modules toincorporate and feature within the lesson plans. He is supervising a senior undergraduate studentfrom Film and Animation department, Devyn Matthews, for the development of visual learningmodules. Richard Ford has an EdD in
, ArizonaAbstract:Presently, the dynamic nature of the electronic industry is posing challenges toelectronics engineering technology (EET) programs to keep pace with the explosive anddisruptive changes in the electronics field. The urgency to establish new directions forET education becomes more critical each day as industry and society processes becomemore mediated by electronics devices and systems. During the past century electronicshas evolved from the basic methodology of electrical signal modification, transmission,and re-conversion for useful human sensory perception to a mediating technology that isat the core of most human activity. The fuzzy disciplinary boundaries, the ubiquitous andcovert nature of electronics technology’s influence on human processes
Paper ID #29675Work-in-progress: Implementing Sophomore Cornerstone Courses inElectrical and Computer EngineeringProf. Branimir Pejcinovic, Portland State University Branimir Pejcinovic received his Ph.D. degree from University of Massachusetts, Amherst. He is a Pro- fessor and former Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education at Portland State University, Electrical and Computer Engineering department. In this role he has led department-wide changes in curriculum with emphasis on project- and lab-based instruction and learning. His research interests are in the areas of engineering education, semiconductor device
, c) to develop lifelong learning capacity through real-world projects andindustry-based training, and d) to train well-rounded software engineers adept in industry-relevant professional skills.This paper will detail the development and implementation of the consultation and redesignprocess, including final curriculum content changes and related delivery recommendations.Consultation ProcessThe taskforce consulted several subcommittees and stakeholder groups to adequately assess thechanging landscape of software engineering. These stakeholder groups included faculty memberswithin the department, faculty members in related departments who may be impacted by thecourse changes, industry advisors, and faculty administrators. Consultation was done