Conference Session

Curriculum Development in Mechanical ET

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

James Turso; David Johnson; Shannon Sweeney

portion of the course grade (about 20%) is determined by out-of-class assignments. Theexaminations constitute the remainder of the course grade. From faculty outcomes assessment,the performance level of students and the dispersion of work quality in this course are consistentwith that of other upper division engineering technology courses.The instructor’s teaching effectiveness and the quality of the course are evaluated by havingstudents rate certain aspects of teaching and course content on a numerical scale from 1 to 7 nearthe end of the course. Students also have the opportunity to provide anonymous writtencomments at that time. From these ratings and comments, the course is perceived by the studentsas value-added for their core set of

Conference Session

Improving Teaching & Learning

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Patrick Hollis; Namas Chandra; Chiang Shih

from and teach to their own peers, thus developing a horizontal bonding among studentsthat helps create a communal desire for mastery of the material. This practice not only enhancestheir study skills but also changes their attitude toward the overall educational experience.We have practiced the LTT concept in our department recently by implementing the programfrom the sophomore-level “Introduction to ME” class, to the junior-level “Thermal and FluidsLaboratory” class, and to the senior-level technical electives; all with different degrees ofsuccess. Based on our preliminary assessment, most students who have participated in the LTTpractice indicate that the program had a positive impact on their overall learning experience. Webelieve that the

Conference Session

Engineering Education Research

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Kimberly Barron; Sang Ha Lee; John Wise; Robert Pangborn; Thomas Litzinger

following the completion of their undergraduate education.This instrument was originally distributed in paper form, but was converted to an online versionin 2001, which is now administered via the World Wide Web.2The new expectations regarding formative assessment for engineering program accreditationserved as an additional driver for a change in approach. It simply made sense to reformulate thesurveys so that measures would result that could be used to effect change. The challenge was todesign the new instruments so that the value of comparison with the results of previous surveyswas not lost, while introducing the new content in a way that would not make for a time-consuming and ultimately off-putting format.The most likely candidate for piloting

Conference Session

Writing and Communication I

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Roberta Harvey

objectives. They were also askedto describe or draw how they learn, to analyze the assignment and explain in their own wordswhat they were being asked to do, and to describe how they went about doing the assignment. Asimilar assessment will be performed at the end of the semester. Content analysis will be doneon each set and a scale for comparison developed. Meanwhile, for each assignment done duringthe semester, students are filling out a “grid” that describes how each learning pattern ismanifested in their personal learning processes, how each learning pattern is called for by the Page 9.254.8assignment, and how they will strategically

Conference Session

Innovations in the Aerospace Classroom

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Masoud Rais-Rohani

. This paper presents thedetails of this experiential learning activity as well as a formative assessment of its effectiveness.I. IntroductionPrior to the 1950's, it was common for engineering programs to offer in their curricula suchcourses as sheet-metal fabrication, casting, and machine shop. With the advent of computers andmore emphasis on the theoretical side of engineering education, the courses on mechanical artswere gradually phased out with most of hands-on activities reduced and squeezed into thelaboratory courses. This shift in engineering education is mostly responsible for manyengineering graduates to have a very narrow understanding of the product development processthrough which a design concept is transformed into a physical

Conference Session

Retention: Keeping the Women Students

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Philip Parker

graduates from UWP. This paperintroduces the survey we created and analyzes and assesses the results.2 Creation of the SurveyThe primary intent of the survey was to determine the fraction of women graduates fromthe College of Engineering, Mathematics, and Science (EMS) at UWP who were retainedin the SMET (Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology) workplace. A varietyof questions using a variety of formats were used to help determine which factorsimpacted the decision of women to be retained in the SMET workplace.We investigated two groups of factors which might impact a woman’s decision to remainin a SMET workplace. The first group of factors dealt with determining the reasons thatsurvey respondents pursued a SMET degree in the first place

Conference Session

Teaching Design Through Projects

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

George Wise; Philip Kosky; Robert Balmer

detailed design of thecourse; 5) a learning outcomes assessment, and 6) a discussion of challenges for the future. A useful way of categorizing typical introduction to engineering courses has beenpresented by Sheppard and Jenison.1 One dimension contrasts teaching students as individualsversus grouping them in teams. Another dimension contrasts content (such as the traditionalengineering content of kinetics and dynamics, energy, electrical circuits, information and so forth)versus process (in particular, the process of design). On this map, the Union College Introductionto Engineering and Mechatronics course combines the teaching of content on an individual basiswith the teaching of process on a team basis. Students are grouped in sections

Conference Session

Integrating Engineering and the Liberal Arts

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Kenneth Van Treuren

struggle to construct a conceptual definition of liberal arts, this paper shallrely mostly on an “historical” approach, defining liberal arts as it has been practiced at Baylorover the last 155 years. This approach values Baylor’s self-assertion that it has a long and strongliberal tradition and seeks to, as Mannoia would say, “link the meaning of liberal arts today totheir roots in the past”.In its Mission Statement, Baylor proclaims that “the University seeks to familiarize students withthe principal bodies of knowledge, cultural viewpoints, belief systems, and aesthetic perspectivesthat affect the world in which we live” and “Baylor encourages all of its students to cultivatetheir capacity to think critically, to assess information from a

Conference Session

ASEE Multimedia Session

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Sallie 'Lee' Townsend; Natalie Segal

presented as grammars for use in describing the worldand solving problems in the world. In this paper, we report on the first semester of our FIG and what we learnedteaching it. Page 7.1088.2Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationExpected Outcomes In planning the FIG, the authors completed OATAs (Outcome/Activity/Technique/Assessment) in a grid format. Figure 1 shows the OATAs the authors createdas they prepared to teach the FIG for the first time in the fall 2001 semester.Figure 1: First-Year

Conference Session

Trends in Mechanical Engineering

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Richard Lundstrom; Ram Chandran; Arnaldo Mazzei

. Quantitative assessment will be done by KetteringUniversity's office of institutional research. The project team is in the process of identifyingpotential outside evaluators. The Assessment tools will also include student surveys. Qualitativeassessment will be conducted throughout the implementation part of the project. This will allowfor modifications and improvements in course content and delivery. The team will also makequalitative assessments based on the outcomes such as exam results, student design projects andnumber of undergraduate papers which the students may co-author.ConclusionsIn this paper the status of the implementation of two new core courses at the MechanicalEngineering Department at Kettering University is discussed. The courses aim

Conference Session

Societal Contexts of Engineering Education

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Steven VanderLeest

hammer forpounding nails or people; a computer for accessing facts or porn. Since the same technology canlead to morally opposite actions, they conclude that human actions – and never inhuman objects –are subject to ethical judgments. However, these objects are not featureless. They have specificcharacteristics that lend themselves to specific usage; features that are in large part the result of anintentional design. While it is nearly always impossible to design technology that is foolproof(because fools are so ingenious, to paraphrase Arthur Bloch), the existence of one flaw does notnecessarily condemn a technology as unethical. Rather, the value of the technology is assessed byhow likely (due to its specific design) it is to be used in ways

Conference Session

Trends in Mechanical Engineering

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Nabil Ibrahim

engineeringpathway. Workforce Silicon Valley also shares their expertise in issues such asarticulation and internship development.Both Workforce Silicon Valley and the Workplace Learning Resource Center at MissionCollege help in administering the assessment piece of our program. Students are testedwith Work-Keys, a group of assessment tests designed to focus on important workplaceskills. These test scores are used by the 2+2+2 program and Workforce Silicon Valley toidentify areas where students need additional instruction and more hands on experience.This knowledge is used to design faculty development workshops and to create a feedbackloop, informing teachers and potential employers where the students’ strengths and

Conference Session

ASEE Multimedia Session

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Sundiata Jangha; Richard Peltier; Pamela Reid; F. Scott Cowan; Christal Gordon; David Woessner; Douglas Edwards; Donna Llewellyn; Marion Usselman

high school studentslag far behind the national average in science and math scores. Specifically,• The Fordham Foundation gave Georgia a grade "F' in science.• Over half of Georgia 8th grade students scored at the lowest science achievement level in the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress study.1• One out of every four Georgia high school students fails the science portion of the Georgia High School Graduation Test on his or her first attempt.2• Georgia ranked dead last nationally in Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) scores in 2002.As part of a National Science Foundation (NSF)-supported GK-12 program, the Student andTeacher Enhancement Partnership (STEP) Program, Georgia Tech has initiated partnerships withthree

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

David Kelley

theperformance of each individual member is assessed ... and the member is held responsible bygroup mates for contributing his or her fair share to the group’s success” (p. 86). It is importantto remember the performance of individuals in a group when assessing the task outcomes of thegroup. Determining if a group obtained the criteria set for them is important, but it is equallyimportant to determine if each individual met a prescribed level of performance. By measuringthe level at which an individual performed, it can be assessed how well he or she contributed tothe overall efforts of the group. It is important that no one individual is allowed to ride theefforts of the group without contributing equally in the educational process. Allowing

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Brian Manhire

Copyright  2001, American Society for Engineering Educationare a good measure of teaching efficacy.28 However, some recent studies cast doubt on the valueof SETs and suggest that they foster lower standards (by way of inflated grades) and encouragefaculty to dumb-down their courses for reasons pertaining to the impact of SETs on tenure, pro-motion in rank and salary increases.28-35 Apart from conflicting research findings, there is theperception that SETs foster lower standards.6, 36-39State governments have increased interest in assessing and controlling the performance of publicuniversities.40-42 In Ohio for example, the Ohio Board of Regents has implemented SuccessChallenge, a program which, through budgetary control, seeks to improve

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Ann Anderson; Richard Wilk

critical to the team’s success in achievingits objective. In the DMS course the students organize themselves into functional groups, e.g.shaft, bearing, structure, shielding, controls, etc. The group structure is needed to simplifyindividual tasking and assessment as well as to heighten the sense of accountability among groupmembers.The courses also complement each other in both project type and length. The DTFS course usesmultiple in-house generated projects of two week duration, while the DMS course uses 1 termlength industrial project. They are also complementary in their introduction of other non-engineering topics. The DTFS course addresses both engineering economics and contemporaryenvironmental issues while the DMS course addresses design

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Rita Caso; Jeanne Rierson; James Graham

educational opportunities to all groups, regardless oftheir ethnicity or sex. The development of such initiatives will, beyond providing opportunitiesfor under-represented students, create a diversity in the field of engineering which will contributeto the discipline’s continued advancement and growth.JAMES M. GRAHAMJames M. Graham is currently a doctoral student in Counseling Psychology at Texas A&M University. He receivedhis B.A. in Psychology from Purdue University and his M.A. in Clinical Psychology from Pepperdine University.James is currently the head graduate assessment analyst for the NSF TX Louis Stokes Alliance for MinorityParticipation and the TAMU Foundation Coallition Assessment and Evaluation Office

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Paul Wojciechowski

:• Provide input in formulating the mission, goals, and objectives of the York College engineering program.• Provide input related to curriculum structure, course content, and classroom and laboratory needs for the purpose of maintaining program relevancy and focus.• Assist in determining appropriate outcomes (and their measures) required to achieve program objectives.• Help assess program outcomes from an industrial point of view and assist with the use of these assessments in the continuous improvement of the program.• Assume, as needs arise, a proactive role in proposing new engineering programs—as well as alternatives to existing ones—for the purpose of both improving and expanding the base of engineering and

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Carl White; Myra Curtis; Clifton Martin

during the 1995 – 1996 academic year. Student leaders gave presentations onthe goals, objectives, and outcomes of the Saturday Academy, Engineering Awareness Day, andLittle Sister Day. An open discussion was led on ECSEL’s “Role in the K - 14 Community” forthe 1996 – 1997 academic year. Each participant from an ECSEL sponsored program was givena project assessment form to complete. Representatives from 14 elementary, middle, and seniorhigh schools were invited to the workshop. Nine schools were represented: 1 elementary school, Page 6.1000.3 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference &

Collection

2000 Annual Conference

Authors

Jeffery M. Saul; Rhett J. Allain; Duane L. Deardorff; David S. Abbott; Robert J. Beichner

Page 5.411.3rotated and students regularly assess the “teamsmanship” of themselves and theirteammates. We have also incorporated a “group bonus” that adds a few points to eachteam members exam score when the group average is above a specified minimum. Thishas worked very well to encourage involvement by the better students, who otherwisemight feel “dragged down” by others in their group. Readers interested in more detailsare referred to the paper “Promoting collaborative groups in large enrollment courses”associated with poster session 1526.3. Experiment with classroom layoutAfter trying rectangular tables and three different diameters of round tables, we havechosen tables with a diameter of 6 feet. (See Figures 1 and 2.) Tables that are much

Collection

2000 Annual Conference

Authors

Winthrop J. Aldrich; M. Catharine Hudspeth

each receive a TI-86 graphing calculator for $25 andthose successfully completing the program earn a $600 stipend.Retention and Academic Performance of Participants One way to assess the performance of theparticipants who entered Cal Poly Pomona is to examine enrollment and grade point average atthe end of fall quarter one year after completing the program. These data can be compared with Page 5.568.4the performance at the end of Fall quarter 1994 of a similar cohort entering Cal Poly PomonaFall 1993 without benefit of Quest. This comparison cohort consists of all students who wereadmitted to MEP fall 1993. Therefore, they had to be regularly

Conference Session

Technology Entrepreneurship Education

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Stephen Markham; Russell Thomas; Roger Debo; Angus Kingon

thecapstone class, Entrepreneurship and New Product Development, are consistent with new product “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”development processes and emphasize prototype development and market needs assessments in ateam environment involving new product categories and extensions. At the end of the class,students present a prototype and business assessment to corporate intrapreneurs and venture seedfund representatives. Students are required to take two electives from a wide range of relatedcourse offerings including business law, marketing, finance, statistics, management, and logistics.The

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Mitchell Neilsen

specificcourse content]. This was the area with the most diverse student responses. As seen in Table 2,students completing the first modules in the Spring 2000 semester had the most prior knowledgeof course material. In following semesters, most students had some prior knowledge of coursecontent, but not a great deal.To assess learning of specific course objectives, students were asked to use a five-point scale toindicate their agreement with the statement: I learned a lot about…[insert specific courseobjective]. Students were generally quite positive about the amount of learning on specificlearning objectives. Very few students indicated disagreement with the evaluation items (seeTable 2). This is also the case with their assessment of overall learning

Conference Session

Innovations in Freshman Engineering

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Theodore Zern; Richard Grabiec

indicated that communication guidelinesneeded to be established to enhance protégé/mentor communication. As a result,“prompts” or discussion topics for e-mail exchange were provided to both mentors andprotégés. These prompts were coupled with assigned course deliverables that served bothas assessment tools to determine whether or not the prompts were being successful infacilitating communication, and if protégés were completing assigned work in a timelymanner. The need for prompts to serve as “suggestions” to help facilitate communicationbetween mentors and protégés was noted and implemented by Danielson. The sixprompts selected for the AMP program are noted below. (1) Resume Exchange (2) Job Challenges (3

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Jess Everett; Joseph Orlins; Beena Sukumaran; Kauser Jahan; Linda Head

Computer, and Mechanical Engineering have commonEngineering Clinic classes (Clinics) throughout their programs of study (Table 1). Page 6.499.2 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering EducationTable 1: Overview of Civil Engineering Clinic Content Year Engineering Clinic Theme (Fall) Engineering Clinic Theme (Spring) Freshman Engineering Measurements Competitive Assessment Sophomore Discipline Specific Design Interdisciplinary Design Junior

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

James Bean; Aparajita Mazumder

fulfill the 8 week international experiential learning through studying abroad, an overseas industrial internship or overseas team project. 8. The term “Global Concentration” will appear on the student’s transcript.5. Program Development Major tasks involved in development of the Global Concentration include: • Assessing global course work available at Michigan and from foreign partners • Development of the required cross-cultural course • Development of the international experience program • Evaluation mechanisms5.1 Selection of Global CoursesWhen selecting the courses for the global concentration, we used the following guidelines:Our recommended courses selected from the home

Conference Session

Engaging Families and Exciting Girls with Engineering

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan M. Caley Opsal, Illinois Valley Community College; Dorene M. Perez, Illinois Valley Community College; James A. Gibson, Illinois Valley Community College; Rose Marie Lynch, Illinois Valley Community College

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering

B.S. in Industrial Technology, minor in chemistry, from Illinois State University.Rose Marie Lynch, Illinois Valley Community College Rose Marie Lynch, communications instructor at IVCC, is Co-Principal Investigator for NSF grant #0802505 and NSF grant #1003730 and was co-PI for NSF grant #0501885. She was co-leader of IVCC’s Tech Prep team and co-director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning and Assessment. In 1999, she was named Illinois Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation. She holds a Ph.D. in English from Ball State University. Page 22.796.1 c

Conference Session

Developing Young MINDS in Engineering: Part I

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sarah Cooley Jones, Louisiana State University; Kelly A. Rusch P.E., Louisiana State University; Del H. Dugas, ExxonMobil

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering

interviewing skills seminar. Ms. Dugas and fellow ExxonMobil engineers havecritiqued student resumes and conducted mock interviews with student volunteers. On theseminar series survey, students have consistently rated this particular seminar as one of the mostinteresting and helpful presentations with a score of 4.4 of 5.The ExxonMobil scholars from both Phases have had mandatory one-on-one meetings (retentioninterviews) with the CoE Diversity Staff approximately once per month during the academicyear to assess their academic progress and any issues outside the classroom that impact theiroverall success. Students who were determined to be in need of additional support and guidancewere asked to meet on a more regular basis, and/or they were referred to

Conference Session

Best Zone Paper Competition

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rebecca A Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Andrew Petersen, University of Toronto Mississauga

Tagged Topics

Council of Sections

the idea, and Section 4 presents our experiences using variants onthe baseline team testing implementation in the classroom.2. IMPLEMENTING TEAM TESTING2.1 Giving the ExamThe exam format depends on the ultimate goal of the group exam: evaluating content knowledgein a group context or creating a learning environment. To assess individual ability, an exam isgiven to each student. The individual exam is evaluated and typically forms the majoritycomponent of the student’s score. After the individual exam, there is a group component, whichcan either be a required part of the exam (evaluation goal) or considered a bonus (learningenvironment goal). Groups of 3 to 4 students collaborate on the group test. Larger groups reducethe impact of individual

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

James Dean Palmer, Northern Arizona University; Joseph Flieger, Northern Arizona University; Eddie Hillenbrand

Tagged Topics

NSF Grantees

interactive feedback students receive is cryptic compiler errors. 4. Complex development environments. Assignments often require using and configuring a compiler and development environment. Students often fight incompatible versions, dependencies and IDE-specific workflows to make any progress. 5. Lack of teamwork. Most textbook assignments and CS programs we are familiar with focus on individual mastery of skills, neglecting the positive and necessary role of teamwork. 6. Difficult assessment. As a teacher working with large sections, it’s often difficult to provide comprehensive feedback, execute every program, and look at every line of code.3.2. Our ApproachIn an effort to address these goals we developed