important skills necessary for success both in and out of the classroom. Specifically,active learning helps students develop problem-solving, critical-reasoning, and analytical skills,all of which are valuable tools that prepare students to make better decisions and become betterstudents and, ultimately, better employees [6].Raju and Sankar [3] undertook a research to develop a teaching methodology to bring real-worldissues into engineering classrooms. The results of their research led to recommendations tofunding agencies and educators on the need to develop interdisciplinary technical case studies sothat the innovations happening in the field of engineering can be communicated to students in theclassroom. 1.2 Active Learning Tools: Class
know about teaching and learning from past research, cognitive science, and experience, then we would achieve innovation with impact to an extent beyond the wildest dreams of the most idealistic reformers” [15].If one believes that many of the axioms of learning and critical thinking were proposed by Saupé aslong ago as 1961 [16], then the issue posed by Felder and Hadgraft can be simply rephrased as:“The question then becomes, how can we get actions in the classroom to align with bestpractices?”One answer is to persuade engineering educators that to be professional is to have acquired atheoretical knowledge base, experimented with it, and drawn actionable inferences that guide their4 In the United Kingdom university teacher training
they? Exploring the impact of contingent faculty on undergraduate education." The Review of Higher Education 30.2 (2007): 91-123.24. Cutler, S., How static is the statics classroom? An investigation into how innovations, specifically research-based instructional strategies, are adopted into the statics classroom, in Department of Engineering Education, 2013, Virginia Tech: Blacksburg, VA.25. Smith, Jonathan A. "Semi-structured interviewing and qualitative analysis." Rethinking methods in psychology (1995): 9-26.26. Marton, Ference. "Phenomenography—a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality." Journal of thought (1986): 28-49.27. Case, Jennifer and Gregory Light. “Framing qualitative methods in
education research and the learning sciences, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 100, No. 1, pp. 151-185, 2011.4. S. Galloway, The professional body and continuing professional development: New directions in engineering, Innovations in Education and Training International, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 231-240, 1998.5. National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, retrieved from http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Reports/25677.aspx, 2005.6. M.H. McCaulley, E.S. Godleski, C.F. Yokomoto, L. Harrisberger, and E.D. Sloan, Applications of psychological type in engineering education, Engineering Education, Vol. 73
https://www.itap.purdue.edu/learning/tools/qualtrics/login.cfm 10. Hawk, T. F., & Shah, A. J. (2007). Using Learning style instruments to enhance student learning. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education 5(1), 1–19. 11. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2006). Learning styles and learning spaces: A review of the multidisciplinary application of experiential learning theory in higher education. Learning Styles and Learning (pp.45-91). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science. 12. Zull, J. E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling. VA: Styles. 13. Experience Based Learning Systems, http://learningfromexperience.com/. 14. Coffield, F. J., Moseley, D
Engineers.Dr. David Krackhardt, Carnegie Mellon University David M. Krackhardt is Professor of Organizations at the Heinz College of Public Policy and a Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University. He received a BS degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Ph.D. from the University of Califor- nia, Irvine. His research focuses on how theoretical insights and methodological innovations of network analysis enhance our understanding of how organizations function. He pioneered the concept of cognitive social structures, wherein individuals provide their perceptions of the network in which they are embed- ded. Empirically, he has related these perceived
, S., Johnson, D., and Johnson, R. (2005) “Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom- Based Practices.” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 94, No. 1, pp. 87-101.7. Smith, K. (2011) “Cooperative Learning: Lessons and Insights from Thirty Years of Championing a Research-Based Innovative Practice.” Proceedings of the 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD.8. Prince, M. (2004) “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research.” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp. 223-331.9. Yadav, A., Subedi, D., Lundeberg, M. A., and Bunting, C. F. (2011) “Problem-based Learning: Influence on Students’ Learning in an Electrical Engineering Course.” Journal of Engineering Education
Students But We Don't", Common Core, December 2011.11. "Next Generation Science Standards (First Public Draft)," The National Academy of Sciences, Achieve, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, The National Science Teachers Association, May 2012.12. Sztajn, P., K. Marrongelle, P. Smith, and B. Melton. “Supporting Implementation of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: Recommendations for Professional Development,” The William & Ida Friday Institute for Educational Innovation at the North Carolina State University College of Education, 2012.13. Klein, D. et al “The State of State Math Standards,” Report by Fordham Foundation, Washington, D.C., 2005.14. Problem Solving, Wikipedia
Series]. Beverly Hills, CA: Twentieth Century Fox.[23] Apsell, P. S. (Senior Executive Producer), & Ritsko, A. (Managing Director). (2012). Space, time, and the universe [Video Series]. United States: PBS Distribution.[24] Kalman, C. S. (2007). Successful Science and Engineering Teaching in Colleges and Universities. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.[25] Larkin-Hein, T. (2001). Writing as a Teaching and Learning Tool in SMET Education. Journal of SMET Education: Innovations and Research, 2(1&2), 25 – 35.[26] Hein, T. L. (1999). Using writing to confront student misconceptions in physics. European Journal of Physics, 20, 137 – 141.[27] Brown, S. & Knight, P. 1994. Assessing learners in higher
critical systems, analysis of heterogeneous software protocols stacks and credible auto-coding of embedded systems. These projects are funded by NASA and NSF.Dr. Liam O’Reilly, Swansea University Liam O’Reilly is a Senior Tutor at the department of Computer Science at Swansea University who spe- cialises in Formal Methods, specifically verification using algebraic specification and processes algebra. Liam currently develops and delivers various courses as part of the undergraduate programme and an innovative work-based learning degree.Prof. Markus Roggenbach, Swansea University Associate Professor in Computer Science at Swansea University, who specialises in Formal Methods in Software Engineering. Area of expertise is
development using the ‘Assessmenttriangle’ to develop and test the Thermal and Transport Science Concept Inventory. International Journal ofEngineering Education 27, (5), 968 -984.[13] Clement, J (1981). Problems with formulas. Some limitations. Engineering Education, November, 158 –162.[14] Cowan, J (2006). On Becoming an Innovative University Teacher. Reflection in Action. Buckingham,SRHE and Open University Press citing Skemp, R. R. 91979). Intelligence, Learning and Action. Chichester,Wiley.[15] De Cecco, J. P and W. R. Crawford (1974). The Psychology of Learning and Instruction. Englewood CliffsNJ, Prentice-Hall.[16] McDonald, F (1968). Educational Psychology. Belmont, CA. Wadsworth.[17] Grasha, A. F (1984). Learning styles. The journey from
unique initiative to produce secondary science or math teachers through a design- based engineering degree. With the aim of enhancing curricular choice as a means to broaden participa- tion among who chooses to attend engineering college, the GE+ degree was quickly expanded to provide a strong analytical, engineering-based platform for students driven to chart their own educational path. Sullivan was conferred as an ASEE Fellow in 2011 and was awarded NAE’s 2008 Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education. Page 26.1512.1 c American Society for Engineering
active in the NSF’s ATE and CCLI programs as a knowledge leader in the wireless telecommunications field. A co-founder of the long running National Center for Telecommunications Technologies (then the ICT Center) located at STCC, Mullett also played a principle role in the development of the innovative and long running Verizon NextStep employee training program. The author of two text books, Basic Telecom- munications – The Physical Layer and Wireless Telecommunications Systems and Networks, Mullett did both his undergraduate and graduate work (in Remote Sensing) in the ECE Department at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst where he also taught the undergraduate sequence of courses in electromag- netics. He
Page 26.1561.11not the same, as the industry experience.The academe benefits as students tend to value instructors that can bring real world experience tothe classroom and provide stimulus for innovation [3]. While stress reduction and schedulingflexibility are major incentives, making the career move into academia will fail if there is nosense of accomplishment gained with working with students. ‘Intrinsic’ rewards to the instructorarise from students’ appreciation and feedback, which typically include student’s appreciation oftheir time and care, perception as a positive ‘role model’, and serving as a student mentor.Another benefit to the career change is developing an entirely new and greatly expandedprofessional network. Being a
the United Kingdom, South Hampton, Department of mechanical engineering university of Southhapton 1982.[24] Vinck, D (ed) (2003). Everyday Engineering. An Ethnography of Design and Innovation. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press.[25] Trevelyan, J (2014). The Making of an Expert Engineer. London, Taylor and Francis (CRC Press).[26] SCANS (1992). Learning a Living. A Blueprint for Higher Performance. Washington DC. US Department of Labour.[27] Heywood, J (1994) Enterprise Learning and its Assessment. Technical report No 20. Learning Methods Branch. Sheffield. Employment Department Page 26.1572.14
competence, while maintaining motivation grounded in their engineeringdisciplines. To tackle this challenge and develop innovative instructional practices it is necessaryto develop the foundational knowledge that uniquely characterizes computational problem-solving behavior and expertise in engineering practice. Assessment is a central component of educational reform efforts; the use of valid and accurateassessment tools enables us to determine the impact of a given intervention on student learningand allows us to see the relationship between instruction and student learning outcomes.Assessment quickly became a central theme in engineering education and there are severalexamples of assessment tools and frameworks aimed to determine what a student
Product Design & Entrepreneurship course, where students develop their own product concepts.Dr. Lelli Van Den Einde, University of California, San Diego Van Den Einde is a Teaching Professor at UCSD. She teaches core undergraduate courses in Structural Engineering, is the chair of the ABET committee responsible for the continuous curricular improvement process, incorporates education innovations into courses (Peer Instruction, Project-based learning), is responsible for TA training (preparing next generation faculty), serves as faculty advisor to student or- ganizations, hears cases of academic misconduct as a member of the Academic Integrity Review Board, and is committed to fostering a supportive environment for
Promotion of Engineering Education, Buffalo, NY, 1901.16. Mann, C. R., “Report to the Joint Committee on Engineering Education”, in Proceedings of the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education, 26, (1918), pp. 126-176.17. Grinter, L. E., “Report on the Evaluation of Engineering Education”, Journal of Engineering Education, 46, 1956, 25-63.18. Jamieson, L. H. and Lohmann, J. R., Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education, ASEE, 2009.19. Schaefer, D., “Advising the Advisor: Professional Development of Junior Faculty.”, in Thomas, B. (Ed.), ASEE Southeastern Section Annual Conference: "Advancing Scholarship in Engineering Education: Lessons Learned From a Year of Dialogue", Louisville
State University and her M.S. and B.S. in manufacturing engineering and electrical engineering, respectively, from the Missouri University Page 26.1610.1 of Science and Technology. Dr. Nagel’s long-term goal is to drive engineering innovation by applying her multidisciplinary engineering expertise to instrumentation and manufacturing challenges.Dr. Amber L. Genau, University of Alabama at Birmingham c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Paper ID #11885 Dr. Amber Genau is an
&db=psyh&AN=1989-98230-000&site=ehost-live>22. Schunk, D. H. Self-Efficacy and Skill Development: Influence of Task and Attributions. J. Educ. Res. 79, 238–244 (1986).23. Zimmerman, B. J. & Martinez-Pons, M. Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 80, 284–290 (1988).24. Weinstein, C. E. & Mayer, R. E. The Teaching of Learning Strategies. Innov. Abstr. 5, 315–327 (1983). Page 26.1642.1425. Henderson, R. W. Self-regulated learning: Implications for the design of instructional media. Contemporary Educational Psychology 11, 405–427
/2.963450 .6. Fewell, J. (2012, July). All aboard. (The Agile Project Manager column) PM Network, 27(7), 26.7. Beck, K. (1999). Extreme programming explained: Embrace change. Addison-Wesley Professional.8. Highsmith, J. & Cockburn, A. (2001, September). Agile software development: the business of innovation. IEEE Computer, 34(9), 120-127.9. Pyhäjärvi, M. & Rautiainen, K. (2004). Integrated testing and implementation into development. Engineering Management Journal, 16(1), 1-7.10. Williams, L. & Cockburn, A. (2003, June). Agile software development: It’s about feedback and change. IEEE Computer, 36(6), 39-43.11. Gale, S.F. (2012, January). The evolution of agile. PM Network, 26(1), 28-33.12. Redacted for blind review13
Paper ID #11641Pre-defined roles and team performance for first year studentsDr. Jess W. Everett, Rowan University Jess W. Everett has worked in four distinct areas: waste management operations research, contaminated site assessment and remediation, education innovation, and sustainable engineering. He has employed a wide variety of techniques, including computer modeling, laboratory experiments, field testing, and surveys. His current research focuses on energy conservation, alternative energy generation, engineering learning communities, and hybrid courses (courses with classroom and on-line aspects).Dr. Jenahvive K Morgan
/10.7771/1541- 5015.141012. Pedersen, S. and Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research & Development, 51(2), 57–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF0250452613. Watson, W. R. and Fang, J. (2012). PBL as a framework for implementing video games in the classroom. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 2(1), 77–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.201201010514. Ash, K. (2012). Educators evaluate ‘flipped classrooms. Education Week, 32(2), s6–s8.15. Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning
them to generate systems that areinterconnected as one can evolve to generate a process that can give a solution to natural orpeople-made problems. In this current project, there is still space for further development inregards to the testing and optimization of the overall system design due to the limitation of aroughly 10 cm range in the detecting of the RFID tags due to the low frequency of operation ofthe RFID reader.Bibliography1. Kossiakoff, A. (2011). Systems engineering principles and practice (2nd ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley- Interscience.2. Jamshidi, M. (2009). Systems of systems engineering: Innovations for the 21st century. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.3. Keating, C., Keating, C., Rogers, R., Rogers, R., Unal, R., Unal, R
include educational technology innovations that may facilitate learning, team-based approaches to learning, and examining trends in Page 26.1311.1 articles published in various educational journals and societies. He was a Visiting Fulbright Scholar, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand and was named as one of the most published authors in educational psychology journals from 1991-1996, 1997-2002, 1991-2002, and 2003-2008, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1998, 2004, 2010. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015
in the top part of the matrix (Figure 16),the template will be modified.The objective of this matrix is classifying all projects in some methodology. Themethodologies identified in this template are: Innovation, Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) Investment Just Do It Kaizen Page 26.1312.21 TOTAL WEIGHT OF PROJECT Service Quality
Advanced VehicleTechnology Competitions, and in this case EcoCAR 3, to reengineer a Chevrolet Camaro toreduce emissions while maintaining performance [16]. Not all members of the team requireadvanced safety training as they do not work directly on the vehicle. Some baseline training ishowever required for educational purposes as all students participate in outreach events andshow the vehicle in the community. Page 26.1352.7Design and Application of Innovative Student Safety Training ProgramThe safety training for the student team is a progressive multi-tier system that is separated intofour levels. The four different levels are used to reflect the
Multithreaded Programming, Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 3(1), 2003. 7. G. Cattaneo, A. D. Santis, and U. F. Petrillo, Visualization of Cryptographic Protocols with GRACE, Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 19(2):258-290, 2008. 8. D. E. R. Denning, Cryptography and Data Security, Addison-Wesley, 1982. 9. C. Li, J. Ma, J. Tao, C.-K. Shene, M. Melissa and C. Wang, VIGvisual: A Visualization Tool for the Vigenère cipher, to appear in Proceedings of the 20th annual Conference on Innovation and technology in Page 26.1371.17 Computer Science Education, 2015.10. A. J. Menezes, P. C
topics that are covered in an EE course for non-majors. Students usually enjoy laboratory work, especially as it can be related to some of theirown major interests. Therefore, it is imperative to choose experiments that provide students withreal-life applications that are challenging but achievable, and most importantly that the labexperiments are tightly coupled with the lecture. We also receive input from our IndustrialAdvisory Board for experiments that would be beneficial for the students in their professionalcareers. Therefore, undergraduate laboratories require constant updating and development of newand innovative experiments each semester, which requires a fairly large amount of time on theinstructor’s side. The author frequently re