Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Poster Session

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yogendra M. Panta, Youngstown State University; Hyun W. Kim, Youngstown State University; Param C Adhikari, Youngstown State University; Sanket Aryal, Youngstown State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

results with the physical principles of fluid mechanicsStudent outcomes in ABET Criterion 6,7: (a) strongly supported: Upon completion of this course, students will have: an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering [Outcome (a)] an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice [Outcome (k)] (b) supported: Upon completion of this course, students will have: an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data [Outcome (b)] an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams [Outcome (d)] an ability to communicate effectively [Outcome (g)] an ability to

Conference Session

Online Learning

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Grant Huang, University of Texas, San Antonio; Andreas Gampe, University of Texas, San Antonio; Arsen Melkonyan, University of Texas, San Antonio; Murillo Pontual, University of Texas, San Antonio; David Akopian, University of Texas, San Antonio

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

nge thevideo sttreaming anngle), and a dedicated ggeneral disccussion boarrd for all useers.4. Currrent Geneeration of eC ComLab— —Gateway Server S4.1 ArcchitectureThe lateest version of o eComLab b is the com mbination off the centrall server andd server as gateway garchitecctures. The central serv ver can eitheer host expeeriment macchine or connnect experiiment

Conference Session

Computers and Simulation

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Hatem M. Wasfy, Advanced Science and Automation Corp.; Tamer M. Wasfy, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis; Jeanne Peters, Advanced Science and Automation Corp.

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

p1 Truss Truss p2 1 Bending sub-element 3 (b) Nodes Beam elements Figure 3. (a) 3-noded beam element; (b) finite element discretization of a beam using the 3- Page 25.641.6 noded beam element.4. Contact ModelThe penalty technique is used to impose the normal contact constraints between finite elementnodes or points on a rigid body and finite element surfaces or quadrilateral surfaces of rigidbodies10, 15. The first step is to find

Conference Session

Hardware Applications

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christopher R. Carroll, University of Minnesota, Duluth

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

implementations of the same function, f(a,b,c) = abc + abc + abc + abc = ac + bc + abc = (a+c)(b+c)(a+b+c)which is shown above in canonical sum of products, minimal sum of products, and minimalproduct of sums algebraic forms. a a c cab b bc c cab a ac b c b c Figure 4. Three different implementations of the same function. Which

Conference Session

Mobile Devices and Apps

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tiina Leino Lindell, The School of Education and Communication in Engineering Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; Stefan Hrastinski, KTH Royal Institute of Technology; Inga-Britt - Skogh

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

documents, they are taking picturesof them. In case they lose the paper, they still have it.” The teachers reported that studentsalso can ask if they may take pictures of their drawings. Two of the students in focus group B explained that they have photographed sketches they had made in the technology subject, during a study visit (see Figure 2). They have chosen the photo medium in order to remember what they have done: “We wanted to remember what we had done.” By recording photographs of drawings

Conference Session

Software and Programming

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Debra J. Mascaro, University of Utah; Stephen Mascaro, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

exam, but b only if thheir semesteer grades werre above theeclass average. In our experience, this is very strong motivation for students to do well in thecompetition.One final important point to note is that unlike other mechatronics competitions we have done inthe past, we intentionally formed teams of two students (rather than three or four), which reallyforced all the students to have a hand in the programming of their device. This required us topurchase kits of Makeblock parts for 70 teams, which was a significant up-front investment(~$300/team), but one that we feel is well justified.3. Course Structure and ContentThe schedule of the course is outlined in Table 1. There are two 80 minute

Conference Session

Computers in Education 2 - Programming 2

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Xueyi Bao, Notre Dame University; Jun Han, University of Notre Dame; Chaoli Wang, University of Notre Dame

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

5 1 2 (a) (b) (c)Figure 1: The user interface of VolumeVisual (study component). (a) Screenshot with Cutting Plane unfolded onthe control panel. (b) Unfolded Lighting Parameters and Viewing Parameters controls. (c) Unfolded VolumeRendering and Isosurface Rendering controls along with the display of data set information.Figure 1 (a) shows a screenshot of the VolumeVisual interface with three major parts: a header bar on the top, twoside-by-side rendering panels, and a scrollable control panel on the right. The top bar displays the VolumeVisual logoand hints about how to change the view with mouse, keyboard, or

Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Technical Session 9: Pedagogical Tools

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Joshua L. Hertz, Northeastern University; Susan F. Freeman, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

students see it, a simple switch usually solves it. Allowing the students to select who they might want on the team, or who they do not want on the team can cause poor or even infeasible solutions, student a wants student b, b wants c, but c does not want a. Therefore, best use is to limit this, and create the rule that both must select each other for example. Unbeknownst to the students, the instructor can also match or unmatch students if they know them well enough, very helpful. The output shows where the student schedules overlap, which provides evidence that they can meet based on their input. Overall, the teams have been great.User feedback has helped make gruepr better and easier to use. This

Conference Session

Software and Programming

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ronald J. Hayne, The Citadel; John I. Moore Jr., The Citadel

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

of the design are a subroutine STACK and a higher capacity, 4K word by16-bit, memory (MEM). The complete data path is shown in Figure 1. STACK BUS A BUS B BUS C 12 PC IR A1 A2 1 REGS 2 2 MUX

Conference Session

Instrumentation and Laboratory Systems

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Hassan Rajaei, Bowling Green State University; Mohammad Dadfar, Bowling Green State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

. His research interests include Computer Extension and Analysis of Perturbation Series, Scheduling Algorithms, and Computers in Education. He currently teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in data communications, operating systems, and computer algorithms. He is a member of ACM and ASEE.Mohammad Dadfar, Bowling Green State University Page 12.803.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 High Performance Computing Student Projects Hassan Rajaei and Mohammad B. Dadfar Department of Computer Science

Conference Session

Mobile Robotics in Education

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Ahlgren, Trinity College; Igor M Verner, Technion--Israel Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

Design for Walker A Project completed. Strong final report.2. Intelligence Systems A- Proposal & mid-term reports solid. Demonstrated working navigation program.3. Algorithms for Autonomous B- Shallow comparative survey.Navigation4. SolidWorks Modeling of Swarm B Accomplished goals. Trained another student.Robots Weak final report.5. Team Management and A Fully integrated with design group’s work.Documentation6. JAUS Communication Control B+ Introduces JAUS architecture and design

Conference Session

Educational Software

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Norman Chonacky, Yale University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

. Page 12.389.4 Survey of the roles of computation in your undergraduate physics curriculum1. What is the approximate number of full time faculty in your department?2. About what percentage of them require students to use computations in their courses as a part of the course grade?3. In what ways has your department modified its traditional physics curriculum because of the existence of computers?4. If your department created a separate computational physics course, please tell us here about it: a. prerequisites: b. number of credit hours: c. textbook used: d. software packages used: e. programming language: f. approximate enrollment: g. for how long it has been

Conference Session

CoED Mechanical Engineering Topics

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joseph Michael Mahoney, Penn State Berks ; Rungun Nathan, Pennsylvania State University, Berks Campus

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

continuous systems fit together.The survey was distributed via Qualtrics at the end of the semester and was completed by 𝑛 = 11students. The results of the numerical responses are displayed in Figure 6 and Figure 7. Theprompts are in the same order as presented in Table 4. The “A” response is perceived ability beforestarting the project while “B” is perceived ability after finishing the project.Figure 6: Boxplot of Survey Results (1). There is a significant difference between the median pre-project ability (A) and the post-project ability (B) for all

Conference Session

CoED: Computer Science Topics

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lulu Sun, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Christina Frederick, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Li Ding, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Rebecca Rohmeyer, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

) 4.35 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00Figure 5. IMI Motivation Analysis for SLA-aBLe and non-SLA-aBLe sectionsResearch Question II: Student Performance Differences The second research question was answered by running a chi-square test of independenceon students’ final grade in SLA-aBLe sections and non-SLA-aBLe sections for all threesemesters. There was no significant relationship associated between the course sections and finalgrade, however there were more A and B grades and less F grades in SLA-aBLe sections thanthose in non-SLA-aBLe section as shown in Figure 6. Frequency count of grades in SLA-aBLe and non

Conference Session

Computers in Education Poster Session

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bruce Eric Davis, Purdue University; David M. Whittinghill, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

22.1704.5Bibliographic Information1 Susi, T., Johannesson, M., Backland, P. 2007. Serious Games – An Overview.2 Heeter, C., Chu, C., Maniar, A., Winn, B., Mishra, P., Egidio, R., Portwood-Stacer, L. 2003. Comparing 14 Plus 2Forms of Fun (and Learning and Gender Issues) In Commercial Versus Educational Space Exploration DigitalGames.3 Siwek, Stephen E. 2007. Video Games in the 21st Century: Economic Contributions of the U.S. EntertainmentSoftware Industry, Entertainment Software Association (2007).4 Read, J.C., MacFarane, S. 2006. Using the Fun Toolkit and Other Survey Methods to Gather Opinions in ChildComputer Interaction. IDC ’06, June 7 – 9, 2006.5 Kahn, K. 1999. A Computer Game to Teach Programming. National Educational Computing Conference 1999.6 El-Nasr

Conference Session

Computed Simulation and Animation

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bill Genereux, Kansas State University, Salina

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

AC 2007-1853: INTRODUCING ART AND VISUAL DESIGN CONCEPTS TOCOMPUTER SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY STUDENTSBill Genereux, Kansas State University, Salina Bill Genereux is an Assistant Professor of Computer Systems Technology at Kansas State University at Salina. Bill has earned an A.A. degree from Cloud County Community College, a B.S. degree in Computer Science with minors in Art and English from Kansas Wesleyan University, and a Master of Liberal Studies degree with emphasis in Internetworking and Telecommunications from Fort Hays State University. His computer and electronics training began in the US Navy, and he served aboard the USS Missouri, now a memorial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii

Conference Session

Online Learning

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan L. Miertschin, University of Houston (CoT); Carole E. Goodson, University of Houston; Barbara L. Stewart, University of Houston

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

elements or structures are valuable to students in enhancingtheir time management for the enrolled course. A limitation of the reported results is that actualimprovement in time management skill was not measured; rather, the students’ perception ofimprovement was measured. Further study with measures of actual time management skills iswarranted. Further, longitudinal study regarding the persistence of time management skillacquired could elucidate important relationships about transfer of this necessary life skill to othercontexts. Page 25.911.12References1. C.E. Goodson, Miertschin S., Stewart B. “On-line Delivery of Courses: What Components

Conference Session

Tablets, Mobile and Technology

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Steven Chingnam Goh, University of Southern Queensland; Linda Ann Galligan, University of Southern Queensland; Harry Ku, University of Southern Queensland

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

enhancedlearning outcomes for engineering students (not just as an engagement tool).AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to acknowledge the financial support via a Learning and Teaching grantprovided by the Faculty of Engineering and Surveying at the USQ.Bibliography1. Gates, B. (2001), State of the industry: The digital decade, Comdex Keynote Address.2. Condon, R. Tablet PCs in Education, National Institute for Technology & Liberal Education, http://www.nitle.org/resources/issues/tabletpc.htm3. Loch, B. & Donovan, D. (2006). Progressive teaching of mathematics with tablet technology. e-JIST, e-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 9(2). Retrieved 27 June 2009 from http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs

Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Daniel S. Brogan, Virginia Tech; Vinod K. Lohani, Virginia Tech; Randel L. Dymond, Virginia Tech

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

Page 24.1398.10water quantity and quality during rain events to landcover within the watershed. For the thirdmodule, students assessed the watershed on a rotating weekly basis by visiting the field site,analyzing data and writing on a course wiki about their observations. Overall, studentassessment results indicated that students believed exposure to the LEWAS was beneficial forlearning hydrologic concepts.24Table 1 outlines the details of the longitudinal true experimental research design52-53 in thesenior-level Hydrology course. Since this course has only a single section, random assignmentwill be used to break students into groups A and B of roughly five subgroups each with eachsubgroup consisting of roughly three students each. Following

Conference Session

CoED: Potpourri

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Osman Yasar, State University of New York, Brockport; Jose Maliekal, The College at Brockport, State University of New York; Peter Veronesi, The College at Brockport - SUNY; Leigh J Little, SUNY Brockport

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

their: a)accuracy to predict scientific phenomena, b) ability to conduct studies that are impossible todo experimentally due to size, access and cost, and c) economic impact to design, test, andmanufacture industrial products such as engines, planes, cars, and new drugs.16 As a result,modeling and simulation is now regarded as a third pillar of doing science because itfacilitates the deductive and inductive cycle of scientific thinking.6,12,16-17 Furthermore,modeling and simulation has been found to support deductive and inductive approaches toteaching as well.20,22,27-35 So, judging from its utilization in both scientific research andteaching, one might say that modeling and simulation is a common process through whichelectronic computers and

Conference Session

Computers in Education 10 - Technology 2

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Irini Spyridakis, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

citations. ____ Are placed as close as possible to the text that refers to them.Style, Grammar, & Punctuation____ Uses clear and concise sentences.____ Uses words precisely that relate to the report’s purpose, and match audience’s background.____ Uses appropriate tone for the UX director.____ Uses correct grammar.____ Uses accurate punctuation.____ Uses accurate spelling.____ Uses APA or IEEE formatting for in-text citations and reference list. Appendix B. Grading RubricPlease check your final report against the following rubric and bring a blank copy to class onpeer review day. Document Assessment Criteria Meets Criteria Features Evaluates the

Conference Session

Programming for Engineering Students II

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John K. Estell, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

promoted through the group, and of the opportunities that have been offered formaking connections. Knowing of this appreciation has made this effort a rewarding experience. Page 14.358.10Bibliography 1. D. M. Boyd and N. B. Ellison, “Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11, 2007. Online: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html 2. M. Hauben and R. Hauben, “Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet.” IEEE Computer Society Press, 1997. 3. J. C. R. Licklider and R. W. Taylor, “The Computer as a

Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Technical Session 5: Online Teaching and Learning

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven; Nadiye O. Erdil, University of New Haven; Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven; Jean Nocito-Gobel, University of New Haven; Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

, M-I., Nocito-Gobel, J., and Li, Q. (2018), Developing an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students using integrated e- learning modules. Advances in Engineering Education, 7(1). 8. Harichandran, R. S., & Erdil, N. O., & Carnasciali, M., & Li, C. Q., & Nocito-Gobel, J., & Rana, A. (2019, June), EML Indices to Assess Student Learning through Integrated e- Learning Modules. Paper presented at 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Tampa, Florida. https://peer.asee.org/32704 9. Redmond, P. (2011). From face-to-face teaching to online teaching: Pedagogical transitions. In G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown & B. Cleland (Eds.), Changing Demands, Changing Directions

Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rachel M. White, Oregon State University; Bill Jay Brooks, Oregon State University; Debra M. Gilbuena, Oregon State University; Milo Koretsky, Oregon State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

hidden menu (Figure 2).To conserve screenspace, the menu willexists as a small imageat the top of the screen.Students will be able toaccess this menu byeither tapping the imageor swiping from left toright. The menu willserve as the mainmethod of navigationthrough the application;students will be able toaccess their profile,settings, informedconsent information,and log out of theapplication. Moreimportantly, studentswill be able to answerquestions. The Profilescreen will allowstudents to update theirdemographic A Binformation. This screen willcontain the same fields Figure 1. Mockup of the Home screen, both (A) with questions and (B) when no

Conference Session

Technology-Related Educational Research

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joshua Sai Yuen, University of California - Riverside; Alex Daniel Edgcomb, University of California - Riverside; Frank Vahid, University of California - Riverside

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

   total ​answered. We defined five earnestness categories:  ● Highly earnest: 80%­100%  ● Moderately earnest: 60%­80%  ● Moderately unearnest: 40%­60%  ● Highly unearnest: 20%­40%  ● Cheating the system: 0%­20% B. Student earnestness through the course The average earnestness was calculated for each individual learning question for each college classification. Questions were ordered in our analysis based on the order they were presented to the student. We plotted the averages, and noticed a decline in earnestness as students progressed through questions.  Two factors were considered that might have affected student earnestness:  ● Tiredness factor: Easy learning questions at the end of the semester may have lower  earnestness

Conference Session

Computers in Education Division Technical Session 1: Topics Related to Engineering - Part 1

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Enrique Alvarez Vazquez, North Dakota State University; Manoel Cortes-Mendez, Georgia Institute of Technology; Ryan Striker P.E., North Dakota State University; Lauren Singelmann, North Dakota State University; Mary Pearson, North Dakota State University; Ellen M. Swartz, North Dakota State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

-impact academicdeliverables is a way to feed the fire of their own creativity.References[1] E. Swartz, R. Striker, M. Pearson, L. Singelmann, and E. Alvarez Vazquez, “Innovation Based Learning on a Massive Scale,” in 2019 IEEE Learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS), 2019.[2] J. W. Thomas, “A review of research on project-based learning,” 2000.[3] W. B. Gudykunst, Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication. Sage, 2004.[4] R. Striker, M. Pearson, E. Swartz, L. Singelmann, and E. A. Vazquez, “21st Century Syllabus: Aggregating Electronic Resources for Innovation-Based Learning,” in 2019 IEEE Learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS), 2019, pp. 75–78, doi: 10.1109/LWMOOCS47620.2019.8939640.[5] E. Alvarez Vazquez

Conference Session

Best of Computers in Education Division

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Petr Johanes, Stanford University; Larry Lagerstrom, Stanford Center for Professional Development

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

authors had studentspredict their performance on the post-video learning task and found that (a) students are in factoverconfident about their learning after watching video-recorded lectures, (b) in-video testingimproves students’ predictions about their actual performance on the learning task, and (c) asingle post-lecture test also helps to adjust unrealistic expectations.28 Therefore, some sort of in-video or post-video testing, or both, is recommended to check viewer expectations about theirown learning.Recommendation #5: When determining an appropriate video length, somewhere in the rangeof 5-15 minutes is recommended.There is no conclusive body of literature on the optimal length of an educational video, but ingeneral shorter is better. Guo

Conference Session

Educational Software

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Anthony Rynne, University of Limerick; William Gaughran, University of Limerick

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

AC 2007-2132: COGNITIVE MODELLING STRATEGIES FOR OPTIMUMDESIGN INTENT IN PARAMETRIC MODELLING (PM).Anthony Rynne, University of Limerick Anthony Rynne is a Lecturer in design graphics and communication and in parametric modelling systems at the University of Limerick. He is a consultant to industry and education in PM strategies. He is currently undertaking PhD research in CAD pedagogics with particular reference to parametric modelling.William Gaughran, University of Limerick Bill Gaughran is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Manufacturing and Operations Engineering at the University of Limerick (UL). He leads a number of research groups, including design strategies, graphics and

Conference Session

Software and Hardware for Educators I

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Chad Hager, United States Air Force Academy; Steven Barrett, University of Wyoming; Cameron Wright, University of Wyoming; Jerry Hamann, University of Wyoming

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

Register File Control Zero Fill A data B data Instruction Decoder 0 1 MUX A Stage 1-Control Pipeline Registers Pipeline Registers Stage 2-Control FU Control A B Data In Address Stage 2-Control

Conference Session

Simulation

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Camilo Vieira, Purdue University; Alejandra J. Magana, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Anindya Roy, Johns Hopkins University; Michael L. Falk, Johns Hopkins University; Michael J. Reese Jr., Johns Hopkins University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

not have a standard deviation, and therefore it was not possibleto identify a correlation for those items in the individual projects. Hence, these cells are markedwith ‘N/A’ in the correlation tables.In the correlational analysis of individual projects (Appendix B), there are similar patterns ofcorrelations for projects 1, 3, and 5, while project 2 and 4 behave more like each other. The maindifference between these two groups of projects is the strong correlation found between problemframing and problem synthesis for the first group of projects (r > 0.6). For the latter group ofprojects (i.e., projects 2 and 4), this coefficient depicts a weak correlation (r < 0.2). Note that theproblem framing phase includes programming skills