theMFS graduate students, the course regularly has a large percentage of undergraduate studentswho take it as a technical elective with total enrollment nearing 40 each semester. During the Fall 2014 semester, Canvas was used as the LMS for this course and allmaterials—including handouts, lecture videos, reading material and homework assignments—were shared using this platform. Approximately 35% of the course content was delivered in theonline format, with previously recorded lectures delivered asynchronously using Canvas (screenshot of an example module shown in Figure 3). In-class discussions were held to address studentquestions and clarify content for the material delivered online. In addition, 30% of the quizzes(students had quizzes
pedagogical goals of TCC can be met through individual writing without individual technical work; however, some pedagogical goals of TCC can only be met through a certain amount of individual reflection on each student’s part. In those cases, the value of reflection about client needs or wants should be emphasized.3. Emphasize to students that the evolution of problems over time is a common phenomenon in all fields of engineering. Defining the problem and what should be done about it is at least as important an intellectual task as executing the solution, but it is a process that students must pursue actively (get on with it and expect change!). It is useful for all students, including those not in SE, to understand the evolutionary
usingidiomatic expressions. For the great majority of international students, their readingcomprehension in English is better than their listening or speaking ability in English. Theirtraining in English, particularly for those students from China and Korea, has generallyemphasized written English as so much of the technical literature is in English. For thesestudents the availability of online course materials, such as lecture notes, makes the course muchmore accessible. All of the lecture notes in the course were therefore made available on theWebCT course site.The change in educational system can be quite significant for many students. The traditional wayof conducting this type of course was with a weekly lecture, a midterm exam and a final. Forsome
begin to take coursework specific to theirconcentration of mechanical, electrical, civil, or industrial engineering, along with more coreengineering coursework, which continues with Circuit Analysis I, Engineering Probability andStatistics, Thermodynamics, Engineering Materials, and Fluid Mechanics. By this point in thecurriculum, many of these required core curriculum courses have included laboratorycomponents: Chemistry I, Physics I and II, Electronics I, Circuit Analysis I, and EngineeringMaterials. Other “upper division” courses have laboratory components, including ElementarySurveying, Concrete Design, and Geotechnical Engineering for the civil concentration,Electronics II, Circuit Analysis II, and Microprocessors for the electrical
teach these coursesand a description of the global aspects of this study-abroad program, as well as preliminaryassessments of the collaborative program.Introduction:In Technically Speaking: Why All Americans Need to Know More about Technology,1 theNational Academy of Engineering (NAE) has established the importance for engineers’understanding to go beyond technical expertise and to include an understanding of howtechnology affects society, as well as how society affects the development of technologies. Inaddition to the importance of technological literacy, the NAE’s Educating the Engineer of 2020,Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century 2 and the American Society of CivilEngineers’ The Vision for Civil Engineering in 2025 3 have
].[7] K.A.J. Mohr and E.S. Mohr, Understanding Generation Z Students to Promote aContemporary Learning Environment, Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 1(1),Article 9, 2017[8] E.J. Cilliers, “The Challenge of Teaching Generation Z,” PEOPLE: International Journal ofSocial Sciences, vol. 3, issue 1, pp. 188-198, Jan. 2017.[9] K. Moore, C. Jones and R.S. Frazier, “Engineering Education for Generation Z,” AmericanJournal of Engineering Education, 8(2), 111-126, 2017.[10] N. Sabag and S. Kosolapov, “Using Instant Feedback and Micro Exams to Enhance ActiveLearning,” American Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 115-122, Fall 2012.[11] D.J. Waldorf and L.T. Schlemer, “The Inside-Out Classroom: A Win-Win-Win Strategy forTeaching
division classes [1,2]. Deciding where to access individual learning outcomes is a critical step in preparing for accreditation. We started by developing a matrix that has a row for each required course in the program and a column for each outcome. The content of each cell of the matrix indicates whether or not the course supports achievement of the outcome in that column or if the course is where the outcome is assessed. Creation and use of this type of matrix in well documented in [3]. For each of our program’s learning outcomes, we have developed specific types of assignments in different courses where outcomes are assessed. To
form of student-active pedagogies, in target 1st- and 2nd-year gateway courses, improving the classroom environment and student learning andpersistence.To this end the team created an intensive summer pilot program aimed at faculty who teachgateway engineering and computer science classes. Faculty were invited to participate in the2017 Summer Gateway Course Redesign Working Group, the purpose of which was to modifygateway classes to include and/or enhance students’ active learning and test the success of thesechanges in their classrooms in the 2017-2018 academic year.Those who participated in the Program received: peer and technical support, time and space towork on new ideas, a summer salary supplement and an additional supplement
of record for the course discussed in this paper sought out the Xorro-Q online teachingplatform to support their introductory structural engineering class with over 250+ students.Institution & Course DescriptionThe University of Auckland (UoA) is recognized as New Zealand’s top university for civil andstructural engineering. With a particular focus on training students to fulfill the shortage ofengineering professionals in the country, there are significant undergraduate enrollment demandsplaced on a limited group of faculty. This results in lower division courses that have 250+students in a single lecture hall with a primary instructor and only 3-4 student teaching assistants.In spite of this, faculty remain committed to excellence in
prominent that the phrase“Digital Systems Engineering” has been coined in [1], [2]. Many engineering reference booksand a few college textbooks on the subject have been published in the past fifteen years as givenin the appendix of this paper. Many technical conferences have special or regular sessions on SIand PI under titles such as high-speed digital designs, power distribution networks, high-speedinterconnects, etc.[3] These conferences include DesignCon,, IEEE International Symposium onEMC, IEEE Electronic Components and Technology Conference, IEEE Conference on ElectricalPerformance of Electronic Packaging and Systems. In addition, Signal Integrity Engineer has
National Societyof Professional Engineers (NSPE) 1935 Code of Ethics specified a duty to “seek to promote thepublic welfare” [3], emphatic recognition of social responsibility did not consistently appear inethical codes until the third phase, which began post-WWII and continues today.A defining feature of the current phase is that all engineering codes of ethics explicitly prioritizesocial responsibility in their first canons: “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of thepublic” [1]. Differences exist among codes to reflect unique areas of technical focus, and codesare updated periodically in response to changing social and professional values. For example, in2003, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) added “and protect
parts: educative intentions, objectives, general contents that includes a contentsblock diagram, profile of the IEC program, IEC study plan, curricular map showing the coursesserving E-95-863 as well as the the courses served by E-95-863, conceptual contents, proceduralcontents, attitudinal contents, learning strategies and course activities. Some of the learningtechniques used in the course are: Interactive exposition of topics (from 16 to 20 hours persemester), Internal group activities (11 during the semester), homework done by external groups(8 during the semester), monthly projects that include report writing and oral presentations doneby external groups (3 during the semester), self-study reading assignments and discussion (14during the
model was used to drive the reform of the course Introductory Dynamics. This course was redesigned to achieve three goals: (1) improve students’ low engagement and enthusiasm, (2) improve instructors’ experience and reduce their high workload, and (3) maintain and elevate the current standards for content. Introductory Dynamics is one of the core second-year mechanics courses in our engineering curriculum, serving approximately 800 students per year. Course revisions have led to the adoption of a spectrum of evidence-based practices such as context-rich, collaborative problem-solving sessions, and classroom response systems. These efforts have improved student satisfaction with the course and have
1) and they may have success in limited applications (level 3), but they frequently lack the context of the fact (level 2). Time was spent in each classroom activity to emphasize the levels of knowledge through both the instructor’s and the students’ questions and answers. Targeted knowledge areas include: I. Process Education Modules II. Physiological Background III. Cell / Tissue Engineering IV. Biomechanics V. Medical Imaging VI. Biomedical Instrumentation VII. Artificial Internal Organs vii. Web site
/overview. Some activities were individual lesson plans and otherswere modules that consisted of several lessons.Over the course of the first two years of the three-year program, STEP has involved 8 graduateand 4 undergraduate Fellows working with 23 teachers distributed throughout 7 schools in theCincinnati area. The graduate Fellows were students in the colleges of engineering and Page 10.367.1education; 3 were doctoral students in education, 3 were doctoral students in engineering and 2“Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & ExpositionCopyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
Page 10.630.11Undergraduate Education). Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering EducationBibliography1. Roco, M.C. International Strategy for Nanotechnology Research and Development. Journal of Nanoparticles Research, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 3(5-6): 353-360, (2001),2. NSF. Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education, A Report and Recommendations Based Upon A Workshop Held at NSF on Sept. 11-12, 2002. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation, (2002).3. NSF. Nanoscale Science and Engineering (NSE) Program Solicitation for FY 2003. Washington, D.C.: National Science
Annual Conference & ExpositionCopyright O 2001, American Society for Engineering Educationv U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division, 2000.vi U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division, 2000.vii Peter J. Schraeder, African Politics and Society, Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2000) p. 326.viii Ibid.ix “Africa: A Focus on the Southern Cone” Department of Education, Business and International Education,start date June 2001.x Afuah, Alan, Innovation Management, Strategies and Implementation, New York, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press 1999.xi Africa-America Institute (AAI), Human Resource Development, Washington, D.C. 2000.xii “South Africa Looks West for Some Economic Muscle,” The New York Times , December 31
delivery.Taking the time to learn the strategy and tools required to create and deliver a successful hybridcourse at any level of sophistication often detracts from “…other professional activities whichmay be needed to be successful in the tenure process.”3 Also, most research universities do notallow any "workload release" for the additional effort often required for the initial developmentof a hybrid course. Faculty are used to being the “experts” and due to the lack of priority and/ortime are not properly motivated to become experts in the development and delivery of effectivehybrid courses. They further cite the “complexity” of developing effective online coursesincluding technical, pedagogical, and administrative (no time or budget, lack of training
the general chair for the 2009 conference. Prof. Froyd is a Fellow of the IEEE, a Fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), an ABET Program Evaluator, a Senior Associate Editor for the Journal of Engineering Education, and an Associate Editor for the International Journal of STEM Education.Dr. Deborah M. Grzybowski, Ohio State University Dr. Deborah Grzybowski is a Professor of Practice in the Department of Engineering Education and the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at The Ohio State University. She received her Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering and her B.S. and M.S. in Chemical Engineering from The Ohio State University. Her research focuses on making engineering
surprising that Davies study of the vocationalpreferences of dip.tech students found that only 27% of the engineers and 11% of the appliedscientists said their aim was to become a manager [19]. Whether they thought managementwas part of what an engineer does is not clear because Davies separated management andteaching out as a specific career options.Andrews and Mares also interviewed industrialists, and those who commented, took autilitarian view of what should be studied [20]. Their results led them to suggest that thesyllabus (content) should fall into four main divisions –language and communications,technical studies, social studies and optional (e.g in the humanities and creative arts). Therewas, as Davies showed, an extensive debate about what
techniques and methodologies of conducting research• Students prepared a summary report, and made presentations. In addition one-day field trip to one of the NASA Centers for SURE participants wasplanned. Each year NASA-SURE program recruited 15 pre-engineering students from 10different institutions.BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Pai, D., Layton, R.A., Hamoush, S., Owusu-Ofori, S., and Wang, S-L. “Space – Sugar Coating for the Mechanics Pill,” CD Proceedings of 2000 International Conference On Engineering Education, August 14-18, 2000. 2. Wang, S-L., “Case Studies on NASA Mars Rover’s Mobility System,” CD Proceedings of 2000 ASEE Southeast Conference, Roanoke, Virginia, April 2-4, 2000. 3. Layton, R., and Pai, D., “An Apparatus for
principle, could work, andwhat rather will not. The redesigned Cryptography I course also includes basic hardwareconsiderations in the design of heavily used primitives, for example in the Advanced EncryptionStandard (AES) or in the recently launched NIST SHA-3 competition for the design of a newhash standard. The discussion of side-channel attacks was added to the basic course, thoughmore technical study of the feasibility of such attacks is delayed to a following course.Cryptography II – Advanced Cryptographic AlgorithmsThis course investigates advanced topics in cryptography. It begins with an overview of thenecessary background in algebra and number theory, private- and public-key cryptosystems, andbasic signature schemes. The course covers the
Session 2558 Defining a Curriculum Framework in Information Assurance and Security James Davis Melissa Dark Information Assurance Center Center for Research in Information Department of E CPE Assurance and Security Iowa State University Purdue University Ames, Iowa West Lafayette, Indiana davis@iastate.edu dark@cerias.purdue.edu1. IntroductionIn this paper, we
Session 1455 Enabling the U.S. Engineering Workforce to Perform: Building a Culture for Technological Innovation and Leadership in Professional Graduate Engineering Education D. A. Keating,1 T. G. Stanford, 1 J. M. Snellenberger,2 D. H. Quick,2 I. T. Davis,3 J. P. Tidwell,4 D. R. Depew,5 A. L. McHenry,6 S. J. Tricamo,7 D. D. Dunlap,8 University of South Carolina 1 / Rolls-Royce Corporation 2 / Raytheon Missile Systems 3 The Boeing Company 4/Purdue University 5 / Arizona State University East 6 New Jersey
wet process bench, an SVG photoresist coat and develop track, a barrel etcher, aGCA 8000 wafer stepper, and a CRC sputtering system. The equipment was donated bycompanies such as Micron Technology, Motorola (Austin division), Zilog, Micron Electronics,American Microsystems, and SCP Global Technologies. The estimated value of the donatednew and used 150mm wafer processing equipment is $3 million. Figure 1. LEO 1430 VP Scanning Electron Microscope System with nanoscale imaging, analysis, and patterning capabilityThe following additional tools have been acquired through $3 million in grant monies in 1999-2000 and will be operational in 2000-2001. Dr. Duttagupta and fellow faculty have beenawarded two NSF-Idaho EPSCoR instrumentation grants
Session 1447 Mechanical Engineering Technology Division: “Integrating Culture as well as Engineering Instruction in Capstone Project and Machine Design Courses” Francis A. Di Bella, PE (617 373 5240; fdibella@coe.neu.edu) Assistant Professor, School of Engineering Technology Northeastern University; Boston, MAC.P. Snow’s famous 1959 Rede Lecture on the clash of the “Two Cultures”: Art andScience continues to reverberate in the halls of science and engineering education. Snow’slecture brought to the surface what seemed apparent to most
assessments include: 1) overall the studentsare improving both their comprehension of the learning objectives and their confidence about thesubject matter; 2) parallel and series circuits remain confusing for the students; 3) there is alsoconfusion about the system components and terminology, specifically the boundary between gasproduction (i.e. the electrolyzer) and gas storage, and 4) the introduction of material prior to the Page 15.908.10lab session will facilitate greater understanding of the exercise and allow for more time for theexperiment and efficiency calculations.We are currently in the process of further analyzing results to determine
, American Society for Engineering Education”on the other hand, will benefit from educational multimedia tools by having active participationin the classroom.The ideal multimedia-enabled classroom is filled with highly technical modern equipment andsophisticated software applications. If the instructor is expected to widely adopt informationtechnology in teaching, what should be the outcome of his training and how should this outcomebe achieved? Is the primary goal to make the instructor technically competent or to focus onnew pedagogic approaches made possible by IT?In Break-out Session 3 of the NSF workshop,27 it was argued that • IT must be made more accessible to faculty, and facilitated not only by proximity and ease of use, but also by
Advancement of Teaching, Carnegie Classifications Data File, (2008).2. Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, "Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America's research universities," (1998).3. Bauer KW, Bennett JS, "Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research experience," J. High. Educ., 74(2), 210-230 (2003).4. Kardash CM, "Evaluation of undergraduate research experience: Perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors," J. Educ. Psychol., 92(1), 191-201 (2000).5. Van der Spiegel, J., Santiago-Aviles, J., & Zemel, J.N., “SUNFEST – research experience for undergraduates”, FIE Annual Conference Proceedings, 1997, http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie97.6. Hathaway
Paper ID #13811Engineering the Future Workforce Required by a Global Engineering Indus-tryDr. Michael Richey, The Boeing Company Michael Richey is an Associate Technical Fellow currently assigned to support workforce development and engineering education research. Michael is responsible for leading learning science research, which focuses on learning ecologies, complex adaptive social systems and learning curves. Michael pursues this research agenda with the goal of understanding the interplay between innovation, knowledge trans- fer and economies of scale as they are manifested in questions of growth, evolvability