variable each semester. On average the instructor grade of the student was 5% higherwhen the course was taught as EIA than when it was taught in a traditional EnvE format.Limitations of Short Term AssessmentsThe short term assessments presented thus far do not account for differences in teaching style ofthe two instructors responsible for the course during the assessment period. Instructor A wasresponsible for the course in Spring 2003 and 2005. Instructor B was responsible for the coursein Fall 2004 and 2005. The two instructors taught as a team in Fall 2003 and Spring 2004.Student grades of the course and student grades achieved in the course, as a function of theinstructor and the course format, are shown in Table 1. The difference in grades by
experiences, rated on a scale of 1(strongly agree) to 3 (neutral) to 5 (strongly disagree); average ± standard deviation shown.My experience improved my: lab research on non-AST lab independent study Filtrón and AST research on EWB project (n = 7) (n = 3) (n = 3)ability to apply knowledge of math, science, 1.6 ± 0.5 1.0 ± 0 1.7 ± 0.6and engineering (a)ability to design and conduct experiments 1.4 ± 0.5 2.3 ± 1.5 3.0 ± 1.7ability to analyze and interpret data (b) 1.4 ± 0.4 2.3 ± 1.5 1.7 ± 0.6ability to design a system or process
of Chemical Engineering at the Rose- Hulman Institute of Technology. She holds a B.S.E. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Michigan and a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her research interests include metabolic engineering, synthetic biology, and impacts of undergraduate research experiences.Dr. Tony Ribera, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Tony Ribera serves as the Director of Assessment in the Office of Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. He most recently worked at the Indiana University School of Medicine where he served as the Director of Program Evaluation in the Office of Medical Student
- project management, 17 - business and public administration, and 18 -leadership.Given the background related to individuals’ needs for autonomy and the importance thatengineers possess both technical and non-technical skills, the following research questionsmotivated this study:(1) To what extent do top-ranked environmental engineering programs allow students to make choices in their courses (such as free electives and technical electives)? a. How do choice opportunities in EnvE compare to chemical and civil engineering degrees? b. How do choice opportunities in EnvE compare to non-engineering degrees in chemistry, math, and physics?(2) What is the balance of required technical and non-technical courses in top
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 within realisticconstraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,manufacturability, and sustainability(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility(g) an ability to communicate effectively(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a globaleconomic, environmental and societal context(i) a recognition of the need for, and an
Chemistry, Mass Balances, Risk Assessment, Water Quality (including dissolvedoxygen and biochemical oxygen demand, and water pollutants), Water Treatment, WastewaterTreatment, and Air Quality. The class at Institution A had 23 Civil and EnvironmentalEngineering seniors and was held three times per week for 50 minutes each with a weekly 3-hourlab. At Institution B, the class had 23 juniors and seniors, mostly from Civil Engineering but alsofrom Biological and Agricultural Engineering, and was held twice per week for 50 minutes witha weekly 3-hour lab. At Institution C, two sections were held three times per week for 50minutes with 23-30 juniors and seniors in each section, including students from CivilEngineering and Engineering Management. At all
, P.A.; King, E.A.; Letourneau- Wagner, J.; and Shapiro, K. (1998). A Problem Based Learning, Case Study Approach to Pharmaceutics: Faculty and Student Perspectives, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 62(4): 398-401. 2. Carlson, L. and Sullivan, J. (1999). Hands-on Engineering: Learning by Doing in the Integrated Teaching and Learning Program. Int. J. Engng. Ed. Vol. 15(1): 20-31. 3. Eyerer, P.; Hefer, B.; and Krause, D. (2000). The Reformation of Technical Education through Project- Orientated Education (TheoPrax®), Global J. of Engng. Educ., Vol.4, No.3. 4. Dong, Z.Y. (2005). Improving Learning in Undergraduate Control Engineering Courses using Context- based Learning Models Int. J
more sustainable concepts, but they mustremain dynamic as global needs identify newer sustainable approaches to design. Somestudents’ assessments of learning sustainability may not be entirely positive, but with morecompanies and agencies emphasizing these concepts, the need for their inclusion in the curriculabecomes more evident.Bibliography1. Centre for Sustainable Engineering, (13 January 2006), [Online]. Available: http://www.cseng.org.uk/page.asp?id=3002. Sandekian, R., Amadei, B., and Pinnell, M., “A Summary of the Workshop on Integrating Appropriate- Sustainable Technology and Service-Learning in Engineering Education,” ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, pp
) Keeping Team on Track, 4) Expecting Quality, 5) HavingKnowledge/Skills, using a behaviorally anchored peer-evaluation scale. Each team memberresponded to a series of statements for the other members of their team (Fig. 5). Students ratetheir peers in all categories using the same scale, and different statements. Appendix B includes acomplete listing of the categories and statements for each category.Fig. 5: Example screen of peer evaluation tool (CATME) utilized by students in “Introduction toEnvironmental and Ecological Engineering” (Fall 2016). Instructors are able to see individual student evaluations of each other, as well asaggregate evaluation, and aggregate evaluation corrected for the student’s self-evaluation. TheCATME system
. Despotakis. 2010 “Known and Unknown Weaknesses in Software Animated Demonstrations (Screencasts): A Study in Self-Paced Learning Settings.” Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol. 9, pp. 81-98. 3. Lee, M., S. Pradhan, B. Dalgarno. 2008. “The Effectiveness of Screencasts and Cognitive Tools as Scaffolding for Novice Object-Oriented Programmers.” Journal of Information Technology Education. Vol. 7, pp. 61-80 Page 22.1635.7
peersand thus spawn professional growth. By marrying individual studies and a capstone course, the proposed model better meets theintent of ABET General Criterion 3 and General Criterion 5. These criterion sketch theknowledge bridge this proposed curriculum model seeks to build. ABET Student OutcomeCriterion 3-a, 3-b, and 3-e outline the need for the student to demonstrate the ability to applymath and science by designing and conducting experiments related to an identified problem.Then, in Student Outcome Criterion 3-c and Curriculum Outcome 5-c, ABET requires that thestudent be able to apply this knowledge to “design a system, component, or process to meetdesired needs within realistic constraints…”2 Studying engineering is intensely time
Experience of Undergraduate Students; and Engineering Outreach Service Learning courses, among others. She is also a faculty advisor for the California Water Environment Association (CWEA), Engineers Without Boarders (EWB), and Society of Hispanic Professionals Engineers (SHPE) student chapters. Additionally, Dr. Palomo is the CE Water Analysis laboratory director and coordinates all teaching, research and safety training activities in the engineering laboratory. Dr. Palomo conducts research in surface water quality improvement via natural treatment systems, water and wastewater treat- ment processes, and water education. She is involved in outreach programs for K-12 students to increase the participation of Hispanic
AC 2010-1752: ENGAGING STUDENTS IN CRITICAL THINKING: ANENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING EFFECTNicole Berge, University of South Carolina Dr. Nicole Berge received her BS and MS degrees in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of South Carolina in 1999 and 2001, respectively. In 2006, she received her PhD in Environmental Engineering from the University of Central Florida. From 2006 – 2008, Dr. Berge worked as a Postdoctoral Associate at Tufts University. Currently, she is an Assistant Professor at the University of South Carolina.Joseph Flora, University of South Carolina Dr. Joseph Flora is currently an Associate Professor at the University of South Carolina. He received
Future. Second Edition. American Society of Civil Engineers. www.asce.org5. Anderson, N.R. and M.A. West. 1998. Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 19, 235-258.6. Armstrong, S.J. 2000. The influence of individual cognitive style on performance in management education. Educational Psychology. 20 (3), 323-339.7. Aritzeta A, Senior B, Swailes S. 2005. Team role preference and cognitive styles - A convergent validity study. Small Group Research. 36 (4), 404-436.8. Aronson, Z.H., R.R. Reilly, and G.S. Lynn. 2006. The impact of leader personality on new product development teamwork and performance: The moderating role of uncertainty
the twenty-first centurypractice demanded fundamental changes in the dominant engineering-science paradigm” (17). Inthe 1992 annual report, ABET President John Prados challenged the Board of Directors toconsider radical revision in accreditation philosophy, criteria, and procedures. Thus, EngineeringCriteria 2000 (EC 2000) was developed and was structured similarly to previous criteria, butwith the addition of the engineering “professional” skills. Criterion 3 of EC 2000 lists thefollowing outcomes of engineering education (1): (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret data (c) an ability to design a system
. Environmental educationis the necessity of the current generation, primarily because of the enormous demand exerted onthe natural environmental resources as a consequence of rapid population growth, pace ofurbanization and industrialization across the world. The first official attempt at defining whatenvironmental education ought to be was made by William B. Stapp in 1969. According to Stappet al., “Environmental education is aimed at producing citizenry that is knowledgeableconcerning the biophysical environment and its associated problems and motivated to worktowards their solution”1. The emphasis in this definition is on making environmental education atool to create a self-sustaining human population that is aware of its environmental
this case. This neat example presents opportunities for some interesting discussions in the classroom. Page 26.1402.8The final example will simulate the flow into a vacuum cleaner attachment. We will consider theflow of air into the floor attachment nozzle of a typical household vacuum cleaner. The width of theslot is w = 2 mm, and its length is L = 35.0 cm. The slot is held a distance b = 2.0 cm above thefloor, as shown in the figure. The total volume flow rate through the
until you know what theproblem is.” In other words, primarily, instructors should select a few prominent assessmenttasks in their courses (Dick & Carey, 1996, 2001). It is also important to observe that all courseassignments need not necessarily be identified as assessment tasks. It may be adequate if aninstructor can designate one or two tasks from each of the chosen courses (Brookhart, 1999).Authentic Assessment Fallon, Hammons, Brown and Wann (Fallon, 1997) define authentic assessment tasks arethose that (a) are meaningful to both students and the teacher, (b) are individual to each student’s experience in order to demonstrate his or her achievement, (c) require students to locate and analyze information as well as to
Paper ID #28779Implementation of real-world class activities in an Introduction toEnvironmental Engineering ClassDr. Cara J Poor P.E., University of Portland Dr. Poor teaches many of the integral undergraduate civil engineering courses at University of Portland, including hydraulics, fluids, and environmental engineering. Dr. Poor is a licensed professional engineer with ongoing research in green infrastructure design, water quality, watershed management, and engi- neering education. She is currently developing new curricula for hydraulics, fluids, and environmental engineering labs, and conducting research on methods to
. The markings on the exposed rebar are used to determine the rebar size and its grade (yieldstrength). Since it is not possible for the students to determine the compressive strength of theconcrete in the classroom, the instructor provides them with a value of 4 ksi. The cross-section of the reinforced concrete beam is shown in b Figure 2 and the values of the relevant parameters are displayed in Table 1. Table 1: Reinforced Concrete Beam d Parameters h
Delta ’00 Symposium on Undergraduate Mathematics, Toowoowba.Dunne, B. E., Blauch, A. J., Sterian, A., “The Case for Computer Programming Instruction for all Engineering Discliplines,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2005, pp. 1525-1537. Portland, OR.Environmental Protection Agency: https://www3.epa.gov/region10/pdf/sites/boomsnub_airco/2010annual_status_report_boomsnub_airco.pdfMaase, Eric. 2007. “Kangaroo Thinking: Mathematics, Modeling, and Engineering in Introductory Computer Programming for Engineers,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2007, Honolulu, HI.Ogata, A., and Banks, R. B. 1961. A Solution of the Differential Equation of Longitudinal
from suchan arrangement, also known as CDI cell, is relatively purer than water entering the cell.MethodologyIntuitional Review Board ApprovalSince this study involved students, appropriate approval from Intuitional Review Board ofLouisiana University was obtained. Authors were required to get training on various aspectsof social and behavioral research to complete a certification process. The completioncertificates of these trainings, pre and post activity questionnaires and a detailed descriptionof the research was submitted as a part of human-use-approval packet. It was carefullyevaluated by the Intuitional Review Board before it was determined that the study met therequirements of exemption under 45 CFR 46.101(b) (2): Research involving
. Rodhe, S. Sörlin, P.K. Snyder, R. Constanza, U. Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R.W. Corell, V.J. Fabry, J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, P. Crutzen, J.A. Foley. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 261(24 September), 472-475.5. Mihelcic, J.R., J.B. Zimmerman. 2010. Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design. John Wiley and Sons.6. PBS. 2006. Design/e2. PBS Home Video, Kontentreal.7. L.D. Fink. 2003. Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. Jossey-Bass.8. Felder, R.M. 1993. Reaching the second tier – learning and teaching styles in college science education. Journal of College Science Teaching 23(5), 286
Science Foundation under Grant Nos.DUE-0716599, DUE-0717556, and DUE-0717428. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography1. Allen, D., B. Allenby, M. Bridges, J. Crittenden, C. Davidson, C. Hendrickson, et al. 2009. BenchmarkingSustainable Engineering Education: Final Report. University of Texas at Austin, Carnegie Mellon University,Arizona State University.2. Murphy, C. F., D. Allen, B. Allenby, J. Crittenden, C. I. Davidson, C. Hendrickson, et al. 2009. Sustainability inEngineering Education and Research at U.S. Universities. Environ. Sci. Technol., 43 (15), 5558–5564.3. Bielefeldt, A. R
AC 2007-485: UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH EXPERIENCES THAT PROMOTERECRUITMENT INTO THE FIELD OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERINGCharles Bott, Virginia Military Institute Charles B. Bott, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington, Virginia Adjunct Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia Previously an Environmental Engineer with Parsons Corporation Ph.D. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from Virginia Tech M.S.E. in Environmental Engineering from Johns Hopkins University B.S. in Civil Engineering from Virginia Military
anyelements of the program influence your post-program academic and/or professionaldevelopment?” and provided a free-form response. The responses were coded and could becategorized broadly into experiences that were mainly technical (n=13) or mainly cultural (n=6).Seven participants reported experiences from both categories were impactful. For example,Respondent A states: “After visiting a few treatment plants in Sweden, I was interested inlearning more about water treatment… I now work for a firm that specializes in water treatmentand have spent my young career working on solutions to different issues related to water,”indicating the impact of a primarily technical visit on career direction and choice. On the otherhand, Respondent B writes, “Taking
Travel Guides Ltd. UK. 7. United Nations (2000) Millennium Declaration: UN A/Res/55/2. 8. Bielefeldt, A. (2006) Attracting Women to Engineering that Serves Developing Countries.” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 9. Norwood, S. and Striebig, B. (2009) WATER: A Model Partnership for Sustainable Development and International Education. Accepted for publication in the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 10. Brown, J. et al. (2008) Local drinking water filters reduce diarrheal disease in Cambodia: A randomized, controlled trial of the ceramic purifier. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 79(3): 394-400. 11. Van Halem, et al. (2009
experiments focused on the production of high-value chemicalsfrom plants. At large, chemicals are synthesized from petroleum resources and it is well establishedthat the continued extraction of these resources is detrimental to the environment. On the contrary,synthesizing chemicals from “plant factories” may be a boon to the environment and have anegative carbon footprint. The program uses three initiatives: a) expanded professionaldevelopment activities for developing, teaching inquiry-based lectures and experiments, b)inclusion of sustainable high-value chemical production from plants across the laboratorycurriculum, and c) increase of student hands-on access, competency with instrumentation andcutting-edge techniques. The overarching goal of the
engineering design course for bothsections. Average, maximum, minimum and standard deviation grades are shown as percentagesfor both Section 01 and 02 (n=84). The average final grade was 84%, where most grades fell inthe B range (80-90%), indicating a high success rate in the course.Table 4. Grades for Section 01 and 02 of the green engineering design course, expressed as percentages (n=84). Project Progress Final Individual Final Final Midterm HW Proposal Report Video Report Participation Exam Grade Avg 90 82 89 87 96 90 96 71 84 Max 102 99 98
AC 2007-109: PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS FORSERVICE-LEARNING IN ENGINEERINGFrank Giannelli, Lafayette College FRANK R. GIANNELLI graduated from Lafayette College in Easton, PA in May 2007. He received his B.A. in Engineering with a minor in Economics and Business. He is interested in project management and plans to pursue a career in engineering management.Sharon Jones, Lafayette College SHARON A. JONES is an Associate Professor at Lafayette College in the BA Engineering Program. Her research includes environmental and infrastructure policy. Dr. Jones received a BS Civil Engineering from Columbia University, and a PhD Engineering and Public Policy from Carnegie Mellon University. She