[1], [2], [5]–[7]. This paper will explore the capacity of ACJ tobe used as an assessment and learning tool for first-year engineering students.ACJ Assessment ToolACJ is premised on the comparison of items of work and using software, like RM Compare[7], is driven by an algorithm that intentionally and adaptively pairs two items or portfolios torefine statistics and accelerate achieving a reliable rank order of group performance [1], [2],[4], [5], [8]. The pairs of portfolios generated by the algorithm are presented to several judgeswho compare the work based on specific criteria or on their own perception of professionalconstructs such as innovation, creativity, quality of design, etc. [1]–[10]. Validity has beendemonstrated in both
. Robin Fowler, University of Michigan Robin Fowler is a lecturer in the Program in Technical Communication at the University of Michigan. She enjoys serving as a ”communication coach” to students throughout the curriculum, and she’s especially excited to work with first year and senior students, as well as engineering project teams, as they navigate the more open-ended communication decisions involved in describing the products of open-ended design scenarios.Mark Mills, UM, Center for Academic Innovation Mark Mills is a Data Scientist with the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan. He is responsible for leading analysis across the Center in support of its mission to leverage data for shaping
2017 Pacific Southwest SectionMeeting: Tempe, Arizona Apr 20 Paper ID #20721Combined Student Evaluation and Competition Class WorkDr. Majid Poshtan, Cal Poly Dr. Majid Poshtan obtained his PhD in EECE from Tulane University, New Orleans, USA in 2000. Dr. Poshtan has over 20 years of wide-ranging experience in EE academic and industry. He is an expert in electric power systems, transmission planning, short circuits studies and protection, condition moni- toring of generators, induction motors, transformers and power cables, substation design, power system computer simulators, and
thanks Dean TracyMaples and Dr. Jen-Mei Chang for their supports throughout the training and assessmentcampaigns.Bibliography[1] Bradford School of Technical Management, Managerial Skills and Expertise Used by Samples of Engineers in Britain, Australia, Western Canada, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway, University of Bradford, Technical Report TMR 152, Bradford, UK, 1984.[2] Evers, F., Rush, J., Berdrow, I. (1998) The Bases of Competence: Skills for Lifetime Learning and Employability, Jossey Bass, San Francisco.[3] Employability Skills Profile: What are Employers Looking For? The Conference Board of Canada, Ottawa, 1993.[4] Rugarcia, A., Felder, R.M., Woods, D.R., Stice, J.E. (2000). The Future of Engineering
assistant. For thehomework assignments, grading was not standardized.In addition to comparing the student performance in the course, a survey was administeredtowards the end of the semester to assess student usage of and satisfaction with the variouscourse resources, student opinions of their learning, and overall satisfaction with the course. Thesurvey was developed by the CALSTEP External Evaluator, with input from the instructors andthe institution’s Research Office. The survey covers six general areas: (1) student background,(2) online students’ preparation and experience, (3) course resources, (4) lab experience, (5) teamwork, and (6) overall assessment and ideas for improvements. A copy of the surveyquestionnaire is given in Appendix A.4
Fellowship in 2011 and 2012. He is a member of IEEE and SPIE.Mr. David Adam HardenMr. Yang Lu Page 23.353.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Cross-Domain Integration of home automation, entertainment, and e-Health using Wireless Sensor and Actuator Network Xiaojing Yuan1, Ardavan Moinzadeh1, Yang Lu1, David Harden1, Xiaohui Yuan2 1. University of Houston 2. University of North TexasAbstractRecent advances in wireless sensor and actuator network (WSAN) and other emerging technologies arepromoting a paradigm shift in the way that
,” (who was theproject’s the external evaluator, and who sat in on many of the sessions), reported the majortheme of tensions involved in junior faculty needing to push boundaries and forge paths in anevolving field such as engineering education research (EER). She structured her report withinthe framework offered by the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate on the development of anintellectual community:10 having a shared purpose, being diverse and multigenerational, beingflexible and forgiving, and being respectful and generous. The external evaluator determined thatthe structure of the PEER workshop and its participants exhibited these four characteristicsthroughout the workshop, and so recommended that the PEER community see itself as adynamic
could serve as a filter for faculty to decidewhether to teach the technical skills related to the inertial fusion confinement career whenmentoring the student projects.We found that a discussion of jobs is good for students during recitation sessions in which theywere free to move around inside the lab space, when compared to the seating arrangementrestriction in a lecture room setting. The Feb 2024 award of 1.5 billion dollars toGlobalFoundries (Headquarters: Malta New York) for chip production to support GeneralMotors, etc. could attract more students to careers in semiconductor technology when comparedto careers in fusion energy technology [17]. This report proposed a pedagogy to help thosestudents interested in fusion energy
, classwork, and assessments.In a traditional college course, students attend lectures, take notes at school, and then completeassignments at home. Educators have been developing active learning strategies to enhance thelearning experience.According to Canavesi and Ravarini (2024), the most effective active learning strategies includewriting, large group discussions, group work, peer assessment, case studies, flipped classroom,quizzes, gamification, game-based learning, business simulations, role-playing, jigsawdiscussions, problem-based learning, project-based learning, site visits, learning by doing, anddebate [1]. Blended learning would be a great addition to this list. In the following sections ofthis paper, a few of these major strategies will
and the Structural Engineers Association of California. He has published over fifty technical papers in the areas of Structural Control and Earthquake Engineering. Dr. Pong has been the Director of the School of Engineering at SFSU with 20 full-time faculty and over 25 part-time faculty since 2009.Dr. Cheng Chen, San Francisco State University Dr. Cheng Chen is currently associate professor of civil engineering at San Francisco State University. His research interests include earthquake engineering, structural reliability fire structural engineering and engineering education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017
and senior design engineers take thestudent project team to the project site to collect all related information. Before Purpose andNeeds can be identified, the project team needs to contact local city for its general plan as well aslocal communities for their concerns, which often include severe traffic congestion and pooraccessibility. Throughout the whole year, the following topics are covered in various meetingsbetween faculty, senior design engineers, and the project team. 1) Caltrans Methods and Processes 2) How Caltrans Delivers Projects 5 3) Teamwork and Networking 4) Communication 5) Presentation Skills 6) Value Analysis and
phase atzero stress, a complete shape recovery is observed upon unloading to austenite. This SMAmaterial behavior is called the pseudoelastic effect12.One drawback of the SMAs is the relatively low actuation frequency of bulk SMA structures(typically <1 Hz) compared with other active materials. This low actuation frequency is due tothe generation of the latent heat of transformation. In order to allow fast phase transformationfrom austenite to martensite, SMAs need to have sufficiently high heat transfer rate to removethe latent heat of transformation. However, bulk SMA structures do not allow for a sufficientlyhigh heat transfer rate for quick release of the latent heat. One possible solution to the problem ofdissipation of heat is to
remained in continuous operation for over 12 years with recent usage averaging over12,000 hits daily by learners from around the globe. This resource enabled technical experiments[9] and ambitious concept-development efforts for a generation of students who now take suchresources for granted. This showed that engineering students can indeed venture well outsidetheir home disciplines to solve problems, learning what they need from other disciplines.At the same time, several serious issues demanded attention before cross-disciplinary learningand problem-solving could become routine. The first is the depth required for engineeringproblem-solving. The second and probably more difficult issue is that the present generation offaculty came up for the
name a few. Teams trying to make a profitwill have to decide between offering (1) lower fares and little to no extra services (mimicking thebusiness strategy of a low-cost carriers) or (2) higher fares with extra perks (similar to thebusiness strategy of traditional carriers).What staff should be hired?Each airline must first determine which managers to hire. The directions students receive listhow an airline will profit from hiring each of eight possible managers. For instance, if thePurchasing Maintenance Manager is hired, the simulation will reduce the airline’s final quarterlymaintenance cost by 10%. Once hired, a manager can only be let go by charging the airline a
. and international universities to key elements and the business realities of industry by enabling them to "look over the shoulder" of working professionals at several levels of the technical, business, and management career paths. They will leave the program with an understanding of Boeing's business including its research needs, with an improved understanding of the practical application of technical and business skills and with a network of contacts within Boeing and among their faculty peers that can form the basis of long-term relationships”1In all, 149 faculty from around the globe have participated in this program since its inception.The objectives of the Welliver Program are1: 1. To
suggest that such an experience is very valuable in helping thestudents decide if they want to purse STEM research careers. Moreover, this experienceenhances students’ technical research skills such as scientific thinking, ability to analyze andinterpret results, and presentation skills. 1. IntroductionThe motivation behind this work was to offer research experience to undergraduate students andinspire them to pursue higher education and research careers. Research experience is nottraditionally offered in an undergraduate curriculum, especially for community college students.An effective approach to address this gap is to offer summer research experience forundergraduate students. An effective research experience for undergraduate students
and worst comments is not attributable to tone.Keywords: peer review, feedback, written feedback, oral feedback, student comments, genderedfeedback.1. BackgroundThe common approach to providing and receiving feedback in a problem-based learning designcourse involves a formal presentation followed by a Q&A session for which students areencouraged to provide feedback on the presentation.1 Ideally, this peer feedback design reviewprocess would be objective and produce actionable observations. The ability of presenters toreceive such feedback should be divorced from bias toward either the process they applied orresulting artifact they created. The review process should educate the reviewers on how toidentify and share strengths and
withinthe engineering program described above plus students from other programs at Arizona StateUniversity’s Polytechnic campus work together as a multidisciplinary team for each project. Thesecapstone projects usually are spread out over both semesters of the senior year. Page 22.1389.4Figure 1. Curriculum Diagram Page 22.1389.5III. General instruction and evaluation approach This paper presents our different approach, an assessment of its effectiveness and overallexperience in covering engineering analysis in a junior-level project course; EGR 302/394 (2010Spring Concentration Projects and its embedded
AC 2010-2270: UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES OF SUPERSONIC TRANSPORTDEVELOPMENTNarayanan Komerath, Georgia Institute of Technology Page 15.1295.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES OF SUPERSONIC TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT 1. AbstractThe technical and business case for hydrogen-powered supersonic airliners is re-examined as anexercise in multidisciplinary concept innovation by undergraduates at different levels. Aprogression of exercises is used. A conceptual design exercise in a freshman introduction coursewas expanded to modify a conventional hydrocarbon fuelled airliner concept to one
Paper ID #36384Familial Influence on the Choice to Study Engineering: Insights from aCross-University Study.Miss Amanda Marie Singer, Michigan Technological University Amanda Singer is a PhD student in the Department of Engineering Education at the Ohio State Univer- sity. Prior to attending OSU, she received a B.S. and M.S. in environmental engineering from Michigan Technological University. Her current research interests include understanding engineering identity and motivation in first-generation college students, online learning pedagogy, and service learning projects.Mrs. Katrina L Carlson, Michigan Technological
three assignments analyzed in this study.Figure 3 shows box and whisker plots of final score (out of 100) of all 651 students in Fall 2021categorized by the CATME flags they received in Project 1 Report. 88% of the students did nothave a CATME flag (n = 575; mean = 93.6). Final scores of students flagged as “LowPerformer” had a wide range and were generally lower than students with other CATME flags (n= 5; mean = 59.4). Students flagged manually for having an adjustment factor < 0.8 did betterthan the “Low Performer” category (n = 30; mean = 83.5) and performed similar to studentsflagged as “Overconfident” (n = 9; mean = 85.3). “Manipulator” flag was rare (n = 2), with bothstudents with this flag receiving high final scores. For all other
2 belowand in Jawaharlal et al. (2016)1. This redesign was motivated by two concerns: (1) The generalinformation discussed in the old version of ME 100L, such as career options, library resources,and teamwork, is covered in a college-level introductory engineering course and hence wasredundant; (2) The course’s technical content was outdated, with the old version of ME 100Lculminating in a rubber band car competition.Additional motivation to update the course came from viewing engineering education from abroader perspective. Many educators in engineering also have introduced innovative freshmanengineering courses focused on engaging and motivating students at an early stage2-9. Freshmanstudents currently entering universities are referred
, question 4 isintended to compare students’ impressions of learning alone versus learning in groups. Table 1. Questions about student experiences with and attitudes towards learning in a formal group setting.Question Type1) When working on assignments in groups of 2, what percent of the Multiple choice technical work do you usually do?2) When working on assignments in groups of 2, what percent of Multiple choice the communication-type work do you usually do?3) On a scale of 1 to 5, please rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements: a) I fully participate in group work when
2017 Pacific Southwest SectionMeeting: Tempe, Arizona Apr 20 Paper ID #20716Making People and Projects: Implications for Designing Making-Based Learn-ing ExperiencesDr. Micah Lande, Arizona State University Micah Lande, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering pro- grams and Tooker Professor at the Polytechnic School in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. He teaches human-centered engineering design thinking, making and design innovation project courses. Dr. Lande researches how technical and non-technical
been accomplishing during their labsassigned during the first half of the semester. The second or final exam is a take home project inwhich the students had several weeks to work on their design collimating with a demonstrationto the TA and / or principle instructor during the last laboratory session of the semester. Theintent of the project/exam is to utilize all the fundamentals and skills acquired during the 4semesters of laboratory classes. Table IV provides the averages for exam #1, exam #2 (theproject), and a total average between the two exams. Table IV reveals that the control groupaverage was higher for exam #1 than the treatment group, but the treatment group scored higherthan the control group for exam #2 (the project). Overall the
method, and discusses PFMEA inclusion in senior aeronautical engineering technologycourses.IntroductionThe Aeronautical Engineering Technology program at Purdue University is an ABET TACaccredited program. Undergraduate students take courses in aircraft sciences and systems,manufacturing processes, and general education topics prior to the senior year. The senior yearhas multiple capstone courses. This paper discusses the use of Process Failure Modes and EffectsAnalysis (PFMEA) in two capstone courses where students gain experience in proposing andconducting performance improvement projects.The performance improvement projects proposed and implemented by the students must alsoconsider the impact on safety. PFMEA is one tool used in the aerospace
responsibility, and tostrengthen connections with communities [1]. We define service-research in a similar manner:research that integrates meaningful community service with research activities to enrich thelearning experience of the service partner as well as the researchers.GTECH Strategies is a nonprofit dedicated to fostering community and growing the greeneconomy through creative community revitalization. GTECH Strategies nurtures community Page 22.1284.2growth through green job creation and the elimination of blight, specifically through growingbiofuels on abandoned lots within the city of Pittsburgh.The work done by GTECH aligns well with a team
were collected with undergraduate studentsparticipating in Engineering Projects in Community Service (EPICS) teams in spring 2010,yielding 257 completed surveys and 112 pairs of pre and post self-reported data. The datacontain self-reported CDTL efficacy as well as information on individual background, teamprocesses and outcomes. Data analysis aims at three important issues at the individual level: 1)validation of the CDTL efficacy scale, 2) assessment of the nature of change in individual CDTLefficacy, and 3) exploration of factors that explain the change in individual CDTL efficacy.Factor analysis was conducted to assess the factor structure of the CDTL efficacy scale and thereliability of each factor. A reliable three-factor CDTL efficacy
students praisedthe efficiency of navigation afforded by this medium.In the course survey and interviews, students expressed universally high levels of satisfactionwith in-class activities such as labs, problem sets, and group learning in general, but had mixedresponses to the overall flipped approach of the course (see Table 2). Although some studentscommented that they found the labs challenging and time consuming, most students listed the labamong the things that they liked best about the course and that they felt contributed the most toTable 1. Comparison of student performances for traditional lecture courses at COM 2011-2014,and for flipped courses at COM Spring 2015, at MPC Fall 2015 and at MPC Fall 2016. COM Lecture
. Saleh’s current research revolves around three broad topics: 1) satellite reliability and multi-state failure analysis, 2) programmatic engineering as it pertains to space programs (including a focus on space responsiveness, schedule risk and slippage, and system obsolescence); and 3) accident causation and system safety. Dr. Saleh is the author or co-author of some 100 technical publications, including two articles in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering (Wiley) and 44 journal publications. He is an Associate Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) and a Senior Member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Dr. Saleh has received several awards for his