to which students actually achieve thelearning goals of the course. And most students do perform well in CE 4200, which is notunexpected for mature undergraduate students in an upper-division course. From inceptionthrough 16 semesters of instruction, the percentage of students who “passed” the course with agrade of “C” or better varied from 90% to 100%, average 97%. The overall course gradebreakdown per semester was “A”: 19% to 78%, average 47%; “B”: 15% to 66%, average 41%;“C”: 0% to 16%, average 10%; “D”: 0% to 7%, average 1%; and “F”: 0% to 7%, average 1%. As regards assignments, Figure 3 identifies that learning exercises for CE 4200 includefive writing assignments, two quizzes, six bonus assignments, the Mock FE Exam, and the
strengths might be a viable option to foster an increase instudent engineering identity.AcknowledgmentsThis study was funded by the National Science Foundation Award # 1744006. The authors aregrateful to the help provided by the following research students at Angelo State University: JesseLee, Maria Ochoa, Austin Poole, Nicholas Manrique and Timmons (TJ) Spies.References[1] M. Cooley (1989). "Human-centered Systems." Designing Human-centred Technology, 133–143. Springer.[2] M. Garbuio, & M. Dressel (2019). 6 Building Blocks of Successful Innovation: HowEntrepreneurial Leaders Design Innovative Futures. Routledge.[3] P. Polak (2008). Out of Poverty: What Works When Traditional Methods Fail. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.[4] B. Amadei (2014
, no. 3, pp. 28–33, 1996.[13] K. L. McNeill and M. H. Vaughn, “Urban High School Students’ Critical Science Agency: Conceptual Understandings and Environmental Actions Around Climate Change,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 373–399, Dec. 2010.[14] D. P. Shepardson, D. Niyogi, S. Choi, and U. Charusombat, “Students’ conceptions about the greenhouse effect, global warming, and climate change,” Clim. Change, vol. 104, no. 3– 4, pp. 481–507, Jan. 2010.[15] B. Andersson and A. Wallin, “Students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and the problem of ozone layer depletion,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1096–1111, Dec. 2000.[16] E. Boyes and M
problem of their interest. The course learning objectives were: a. Describe the data life cycle b. Determine the dimensionality of a dataset, including the scale triplet of support, spacing extent for both space and time c. Generate metadata and describe datasets to support data sharing d. Discover and access data from major data sources e. Store, retrieve and use data from important data models used in Hydrology such as ArcHydro, NetCDF, and the Observations Data Model (ODM) f. Develop data models to represent, organize, and store data g. Design and use relational databases to organize, store, and manipulate data h. Query, aggregate, and pivot data using Structured Query Language (SQL), Excel, R, and other software
Engineering Education Annual Conference, Honolulu, HI, 2007. 8. Danielson, S., B. Rogers, “A Methodology For Direct Assessment Of Student Attainment Of Program Outcomes,” Proceedings of the 114th American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Honolulu, HI, 2007. 9. Ohland, M.W., Loughry, M.L., Woehr, D.J., Finelli, C.J., Bullard, L.G., Felder, R.M., Layton, R.A., Pomeranz, H.R., & Schmucker, D.G. (2012). The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness: Development of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale for Self and Peer Evaluation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11 (4), 609-630. 10. Smith, Karl A., “Managing Conflict in Multidisciplinary Teams,” Proceedings of the 106th
shortenedtimeframe (compared to individual students) due to the competition deadlines. a) Building Enclosure Design (truly multi-disciplinary performance based) b) Structural PT Concrete Gravity Design (Isolated building system design) c) Ceiling Plenum Coordination (multi-disciplinary agreement on sharing space)Figure 7: Team vs Individual Student Results Examples (taken from final submitted student works)Discussion of Trends for Takeaways Upon analyzing the results from student conversational feedback, final design projectoutcomes, team observations, and administered surveys, this study determined that students weremore aware of, capable of using, and were likely to use documentation, communication
Paper ID #32533Virtually Speaking: Perspectives on ABET Virtual ReviewsDr. Camilla M. Saviz P.E., University of the Pacific Camilla Saviz is Professor and Chair of Civil Engineering at the University of the Pacific. She received B.S. and M.S. degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Clarkson University, an M.B.A. from the New York Institute of Technology, and a Ph.D. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of California, Davis. She joined Pacific in 1999 and is a registered Professional Engineer in California.Dr. Audra N. Morse, Michigan Technological University Dr. Audra Morse, P.E., is a
engineers fully aware of their social responsibilities and better able toconsider related factors in the decision-making process, institutions must require course work inthe humanities and social sciences as an integral part of the engineering program. Thisphilosophy cannot be overemphasized. To satisfy this requirement, the courses selected mustprovide both breadth and depth and not be limited to a selection of unrelated introductorycourses.I.C.3.d. (2) (b) Such course work must meet the generally accepted definitions that humanitiesare the branches of knowledge concerned with man and his culture, while social sciences are thestudies of individual relationships in and to society. Examples of traditional subjects in theseareas are philosophy
that are based oncalculating relative scores on individual exam topic relative to our comparator group. We doanticipate that through continuing assessment and further refinement of our efforts to prepare andmotivate our students they will achieve FE exam pass rates that meet or exceed the rates seennationally.Bibliography1. Balascio, C., Wehrle, L, Henry, R. and C Hollis. 2008. Nationally normed exams for outcomes assessment of Engineering Technology programs and certification of Engineering Technology graduates. Proceedings of the 2008 American Society for Engineering Education. Washington, D.C.: American Society for Engineering Education.2. Wicker, R. B., Quintana, R, and A. Tarquin. 1999. Evaluation model
applications. The objectives of the laboratory experiments werewell defined; however, the students determined the process of conducting the experiment. Theinformation provided to the students focused on the rationale behind developing standardizedlaboratory procedure and their broad ranging applications on the civil engineering industry.The transportation course, which is traditionally a lecture course, was redesigned to ensure thatevery student actively participates and understands the physical elements of transportationdesign. Throughout the course, the faculty conducted a stimulating and engaging exercise ofrequiring students to solve practical problems during class in teams of two immediately aftercovering the relevant theory. The practical
problem-solving processes and involves self-monitoring and self-correction of followingthree aspects in creativity and self-directed learning: Motivation: related to self-actualization including personal pursuit of well being, passion, and extended to overcoming frustration due to failure, and maintaining optimal emotion and mode. Metacognition: including awareness of one’s beliefs on learning and creativity, and metacognitive knowledge of the following interrelated parts: (a) knowledge of one’s own cognition and creativity process; (b) knowledge about the specific cognitive and creative strategies that might be used for various learning and creativity tasks, particularly including
, p. 96.5. Bloom, B. S. 1984. Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Pearson Education.6. Champion, R. 2002 Taking Measure: Choose the right data for the job. Journal of Staff Development, 23(3).7. Heron, J., 2000, “Co-operative inquiry: research with rather than on people,” in P. Reason and H. Bradbury (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, London: Sage.8. Honey, P., Mumford, A., 1982, “Manual of Learning Styles,” London: P. Honey.9. Jensen, E., 2000, Brain-Based Learning. San Diego: Brain Store Incorporated.10. Laurillard, D., 2001, “Rethinking University Teaching,” 2nd ed., London: Taylor & Francis.11. Meyers, K., S. Bert, 2007, “A Technique for Program-Wide Direct Assessment of
Paper ID #33789Civil Engineering Master’s Programs: Requirements and OutcomesDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and Director for the Engineering Plus program. She has served as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education in the CEAE Department, as well as the ABET assessment coordinator. Professor Bielefeldt was also the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where students learned
design. The University Curriculum Committee approved the request to change thecontact hours for Structural Analysis from 3 hours of lecture per week to 2 hours of lecture plus2 hours of laboratory per week to accommodate the experiential aspects of these proposedchanges. After assessing the changes to the Structural Analysis course, we will decide whether tomake similar changes in the class meeting times for the Structural Design courses.The Structural Analysis course syllabus lists the following broad goals for the course: a) Students will develop technical skills in classical methods for analysis of determinate and indeterminate structures. b) Students will gain proficiency in analysis structures comprised of trusses, beams, frames
-Refutation of a Persistent Myth,” Session 1331, Proceedings of the 2004 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.11. Dee, K. C., 2007. “Student Perceptions of High Course Workloads are Not Associated with Poor Student Evaluations of Instructor Performance,” Journal of Engineering Education, 96 (1), pp. 69-78.12. Chen, Y., and L. B. Hoshower, 2003. “Student Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness: an assessment of student perception and motivation,” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28 (1), pp. 71-88.13. Hackworth, J., C. Considine, and V. Lewis, 2009. “A Comparison of Instructional Delivery Methods Based on Student-Evaluation Data,” Paper AC 2009-1319, Proceedings of the 2009 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.14. Geisey, J
26.892.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Impact of Upgrading Equipment for Strength of Materials Labs on Student Perceptions, Motivation, and LearningAbstractAn important component of teaching introductory Strength of Materials (Mechanics ofMaterials) concepts to undergraduate engineering and technology students is the inclusion oflaboratory experiments, which give the students the opportunity to conduct tests and collect dataon the materials to obtain relevant properties. These laboratory experiments also allow studentsto observe firsthand the behavior of materials under different loading conditions, thereby givingthem a greater physical feel for these different behaviors. The
Accreditation Commission (EAC), the body responsible foraccreditation of engineering programs, changed the criteria for Civil Engineering programs toinclude a requirement that graduates of those programs “can . . . apply knowledge of . . . at leastone additional area of science, consistent with the program educational objectives”.1 This newrequirement appears to have its origins in the Body of Knowledge (BOK), and the desire to makethose ideals and the ABET requirements for Civil Engineering programs become one in thesame. However, for many programs across the country this became an issue of concern andconfusion. Taking its cue from the BOK the “one additional area of science” shortly becamedefined to mean a physical science, as opposed to a social
AC 2011-1348: GLOBAL INTERESTS AND EXPERIENCE AMONG FIRST-YEAR CIVIL ENGINEERING STUDENTSAngela R Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder Angela Bielefeldt, PhD, PE, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental, & Ar- chitectural Engineering at the University of Colorado - Boulder (CU). She is affiliated with the Mortenson Center in Engineering for Developing Communities at CU. She has taught the first-year Introduction to Civil Engineering course 13 times, starting in 1997. She also teaches a senior capstone Environmental En- gineering Design course, which included international water and sanitation projects in 2001, 2002, 2006, and 2010. Her research interests include ceramic water
13.1338.2General Program Criterion 3 – Program Outcomes ABET EAC criterion 3 defines 11 program outcomes that all engineering programs mustmeet and document, not just civil engineering programs.“Engineering programs must demonstrate that their students attain the following outcomes: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs withinrealistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,manufacturability, and sustainability (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
, Experience and School (Expanded Version)." Education Canada 46(3): 21-21.6. Cantor, J. A. (1995). Experiential Learning in Higher Education: Linking Classroom and Community, Association for the Study of Higher Education. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, Association for the Study of Higher Education.7. Itin, C. M. (1999). "Reasserting the Philosophy of Experiential Education as a Vehicle for Change in the 21st Century." The Journal of Experiential Education 22(2): 91-98.8. Yeo, R. K. (2008). "Brewing service quality in higher education: Characteristics of ingredients that make up the recipe." Quality Assurance in Education 16(3): 266-286.9. Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain
AC 2007-875: SURVIVING ABET ACCREDITATION: SATISFYING THEDEMANDS OF CRITERION 3Allen Estes, California Polytechnic State University Allen C. Estes is a Professor and Head for the Architectural Engineering Department at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. Until January 2007, Dr. Estes was the Director of the Civil Engineering Program at the United States Military Academy (USMA). He is a registered Professional Engineer in Virginia. Al Estes received a B.S. degree from USMA in 1978, M.S. degrees in Structural Engineering and in Construction Management from Stanford University in 1987 and a Ph.D. degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado at
AC 2012-4218: CIVIL ENGINEERING PROGRAM EVALUATOR REFLEC-TIONS: THE MOST RECENT LESSONS LEARNEDCol. Karl F. Meyer, U.S. Military Academy Karl F. ”Fred” Meyer is the Civil Engineering Division Director in the Department of Civil and Mechan- ical Engineering at the U.S. Military Academy. He received a bachelor’s of science degree from USMA in 1984, a M.S. degree in civil engineering from Georgia Tech in 1993, and a Ph.D. in civil engineering from Georgia Tech in 2002. Meyer has been a member of the USMA faculty for 10 years and teaches courses in basic mechanics, structural steel design, reinforced concrete design, structural system design, and construction management. He has served as a Senior Mentor and Seminar
ClassroomAbstractThis paper will describe recent innovations in the Fluid Mechanics course (CE3300) at theUniversity of Wisconsin-Platteville. The innovations include learning activities and feedbackmechanisms. Specifically, the innovations are: “Challenge Problems”; in-class “physicalmodels”; a “Create-A-Lab” exercise; and an effective grading rubric for laboratory reports.Significant Learning ExperiencesIn “Creating Significant Learning Experiences” (Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2003) by L. Dee Fink,guidelines are provided to help instructors create significant learning experiences for theirstudents. The basis of Fink’s model is the concept of “integrated course design.” In anintegrated course, the Learning Goals, Teaching and Learning Activities, and Feedback
Paper ID #25353Bringing Graphs Alive in Structural DynamicsJames M. Thompson, Carnegie Mellon University Jim Thompson is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Depart- ment at Carnegie Mellon University. He teaches primarily undergraduate courses, from the first year In- troduction to Civil and Environmental Engineering course to the senior capstone Civil and Environmental Engineering Design course. Jim’s experience and expertise is in structural engineering, and primarily focused on buildings. He has worked as a structural engineer in Baltimore and Pittsburgh, and worked on projects
academia. After teachingclasses the traditional way, class lectures augmented with textbook homework, a program wasdeveloped to engage students in model building activities that encouraged creativity, promotedownership in student learning, linked physical behavior to mathematical expressions, andhopefully better prepares students for engineering practice.1Students in the college begin hands-on learning during their freshman year and this served as theimpetus to link kinesthetic learning with lower level and upper level engineering courses.Students often list a junior level class as their favorite class because it incorporates modelbuilding projects into the curriculum. Students are often eager to work on these projects and aretypically proud to
for engineers and STEM outreach in early education. Page 22.180.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 An Innovative Mechanism to Establish Positive Association within the First Year of Civil Engineering CurriculumAbstractRetention of students after the initial year of class work is a major issue facing engineering programs today.The typical approach has been to create a common freshman or first year experience that faculty oradministrators have predetermined to be positive. This technique has been criticized as lacking depth orbreadth of
AC 2009-2401: GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF HIGHWAY VERTICAL ANDHORIZONTAL CURVES USING EXCELBradly McNair, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort WayneSuleiman Ashur, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne Page 14.647.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Geometric Design of Highway Vertical and Horizontal Curves Using ExcelAbstractThis paper presents the work that was developed as a project in the first offering of thetransportation engineering class at the new civil engineering program at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne. The project statement required the use of Excel in developing aprogram for
and MS in Civil Engineering from the University of Illinois, Urbana - Champaign . She also has a BE in Construction Engineering from University of Mumbai and Diploma in Civil Engineering from Government Polytechnic, Mumbai. Prof. Kamat’s research is in the areas of reinforced and prestressed concrete, concrete blocks and engineering education.William Jordan Cashel-Cordo, Wentworth Institute of Technology Lab Tech Civil Engineering c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Steel Frame Sculpture for Teaching PurposesAbstract: Steel Design is an important structural engineering course which is taught widely in mostof the universities in the United States. One
AC 2007-1827: “MAKING STATICS DYNAMIC!” COMBINING LECTURE ANDLABORATORY INTO AN INTERDISCIPLINARY, PROBLEM-BASED, ACTIVELEARNING ENVIRONMENT.Robert O'Neill, Florida Gulf Coast University Robert J. O'Neill is Professor and Chair of the Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering in the U.A. Whitaker School of Engineering at Florida Gulf Coast University. He received his Ph.D. in Structural Engineering from Kansas State University in 1993, M.S. degrees in Structural and Geotechnical Engineering from Stanford University in 1984, and a Bachelor of Science from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1975. He served in the Army Corps of Engineers for 23 years and retired as a
AC 2007-871: ORIENTATION FOR NEW DEPARTMENT HEADSAllen Estes, California Polytechnic State University Allen C. Estes is a Professor and Head for the Architectural Engineering Department at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. Until January 2007, Dr. Estes was the Director of the Civil Engineering Program at the United States Military Academy (USMA). He is a registered Professional Engineer in Virginia. Al Estes received a B.S. degree from USMA in 1978, M.S. degrees in Structural Engineering and in Construction Management from Stanford University in 1987 and a Ph.D. degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado at Boulder in 1997.Ronald Welch