c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Use of a Low-Cost, Open Source Universal Mechanical Testing Machine in an Introductory Materials Science Course1. IntroductionIn recent decades, there has been a paradigm shift in engineering and science education frommore traditional passive learning (transmission of facts and knowledge from a lecturer to thestudents) to active learning (engaging with applications and learning through collaboration andcooperation with peers) [1]-[3]. Increasingly, instructors and employers are recognizing that athorough knowledge of engineering theory alone (natural sciences, mathematics, and design) isnot enough to prepare a student to be a fully competent engineer. Rolston and Cox
Engineering and Bio-engineering. Whilethermo-fluidics and aerospace go hand in hand with each other, the joint materials and manufacturingsection relates more to machine design. Bio-engineering includes biomaterials and their manufacturingprocesses whereas the conventional manufacturing processes in the macroscale level give a generalintroduction to the processes that are often used in the metalworking industries. This general introductorycourse is offered to the fourth year undergraduate students in both Mechanical Engineering (ME) andIndustrial Engineering (IE) in their Bachelor’s Degree programs; and the course is compulsory for both theprograms [1]. This paper addresses this joint venture of ME and IE undergraduate students in acompulsory course
insoluble and not dividedat the molecular level. The particles are on the order of 20-50 microns in size.A useful comparison to make in class is to compare a solution and a colloid. These comparisonsare rarely made in general chemistry or materials courses, but important because students oftenmisuse the term solution. Students could be given the column and row headings and complete theelements of the table either individually, in small groups or as a large group classroomdiscussion. Table 1: Comparison of Colloids and Solutions Colloid Solution Phases Involved (solid, solid in solid; solid in liquid, solid in liquid, liquid in liquid, gas
second class was a required tracking classfor the department (Error Analysis and Experimental Optimization) with fifty sophomore students. Thethird class was a required laboratory class for juniors (Materials Laboratory 1 & 2) with forty-fivestudents broken into sections of ten to twelve.The “Accountable Talk” practices that will be discussed here include; “Think-Pair-Share”, “QuickWrites”/”Exit Tickets”, and “Structured Discourse/Circle of Truth”. The verbal discourse of the studentswas taped with student permission using digital recorders, and analyzed using the Conversation AnalysisTool (CAT)4. Student groups were selected at random, and the recorder was moved to a new group everyten minutes. No student names or identifying information
via different metrics, andproposes reasons for some of the successes and failures.CurriculumThe “Modeling and Simulation in Materials Science” sequence of courses included three labsadministered in the 4th, 6th, and 7th semesters of a “standard” 8-semester undergraduatecurriculum in MSE. While there are always deviations from a standard course map forindividual students, the course offerings at OSU are such that most students did take thissequence of courses in that order (which is required) and in those particular semesters. Thegeneral outline and descriptions of the courses are outlined in Table 1. Table 1: Overview of Curriculum for 3 the 3-Semester Sequence of Computational MSE Labs Lab 1 (Semester 4
programming and other course assignments such as homework. The survey wasdistributed in the same junior-year materials kinetics class in subsequent years, with differingresults. In study 1, students were significantly less motivated to complete programmingassignments than other course assignments. However, the following year, Study 2 found thatthere was no significant difference; students were equally motivated to complete programmingand other course assignments. Furthermore, students articulated that programming skills areessential for engineers to be efficient at their jobs. The contrasting results are discussed,presenting several hypotheses for the dissimilar attitudes.IntroductionComputational materials science and engineering (CMSE) is vital to
topicvideo format again when studying for their final exam. In the multi-camera and single cameratreatment groups only 42% and 60% of students, respectively, agreed or strongly agreed to thesame statement. A significant difference was not observed for both student preference andstudent performance on the pre and post-test between the multi-camera and single cameratreatment groups.1.0 IntroductionThe current cohort of students attending university has been classified as the “Net Gen” [1], agroup of “digital natives” who have had access to technology and the Internet during themajority of their schooling [2]. The Net Gen is a unique set of learners, characterized by a needto multi-task, shorter attention spans, functioning as independent and
and telecommunications, agriculture and environment, etc [1]. Broad areascovered by materials science and engineering include synthesis and processing of materials;structure, composition, and properties; tailoring of material properties; and performancetesting and applications. The importance and role of this multi-disciplinary field is becomingeven more significant for the current and future world due to increasing concerns abouteconomics and business, new technologies, environment and ecology, depletion of traditionalmaterials, etc [2].Core MSE CoursesThe undergraduate Mechanical Engineering program at our university includes two serialcore courses Materials Science (MS), and Engineering Materials (EM). The MS course servesas an
knowledge of materials science. This level includes the non-expert who recognizes a need and applies a known, “proven” material as a solution. The solution is most often based on historical learning (by observation or recommendation) or after consideration of some limited information gleaned from current research (commonly the internet today).Years ago, the Boyer report recognized that research and study boundaries at the undergraduatelevel were reinforced by the traditional departmental structures and one proposed remedy wasthe implementation of an interdisciplinary undergraduate educational paths that includedindependent research and thus supported a more independent and creative environment forlearning [1]. Although this
such as atmospheric aerosols and feedback control. Prof. West is the recipient of the NSF CAREER award and is a University of Illinois Distinguished Teacher-Scholar and College of Engineering Education Innovation Fellow. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Computational Curriculum for MatSE Undergraduates: Three-year impact and influence on senior computational classes Xiao Zhang1 , Andr´e Schleife2 , Andrew Ferguson2 , Pascal Bellon2 , Timothy Bretl3 , Geoffrey L Herman4 , Jessica A Krogstad2 , Robert Maass2 , Cecilia Leal2 , Dallas R Trinkle2 , Matthew West2 , and Jian Ku Shang2 1 Department of Mechanical Science and
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Encouraging a growth mindset in engineering studentsIntroduction and backgroundThe idea of “mindset” became widely known due to Dweck’s 2008 book [1]. A person’s mindsetguides a great deal of how they approach life – and especially how one approaches education.Dweck defines two different mindsets: a “fixed mindset” and “growth mindset” [1]. Someonewith a fixed mindset believes that their intelligence is fixed and unchangeable. On the otherhand, someone with a growth mindset believes that their intelligence is changeable and can growas they learn more. Most people’s mindset lies along a continuum with these two mindsets
the computationalmodules, lectures, and their integration within the broader MatSE curriculum.1. Introduction and BackgroundThe rise of materials modeling has generated a nationally recognized need for materials scientistsand engineers with computational training 18;23;24 . In industry and academic settings alike,computational materials science skills are in high demand as researchers seek to acceleratematerials design with computational tools 24 . Yet, a 2009 survey revealed that, on average,employers desire for 50% of new hires to have computational training, while only 37% of recentgraduates actually have such training 24 . These trends mandate that materials science andengineering departments around the country must better serve their
of these changes beyond courses participating in the original SIIP project. Wecontinue to keep track of students’ perception of the computational curriculum withinparticipating courses. Furthermore, we investigate the influence of the computational exposure onstudents’ perspective in research and during job search. Finally, we collect and analyze feedbackfrom department faculty regarding their experience with teaching techniques involvingcomputation.2 IntroductionA computational approach has become an indispensable tool in materials science research andrelated industry. In addition to the research interest, the 2009 survey by Thornton et al. [1] andthe followup 2018 survey by Enrique et al. [2] showed that employers of MSE students, such
classesare described along with examples, lessons learned, student performance data and the impact onthe students and program.Introduction 3D printing (3DP), also known as additive manufacturing, is an important manufacturingmethod that has become more accessible for academic lab facilities in the last ~five to sevenyears [1]-[5]. Traditional manufacturing techniques, such as injection molding and forging,involve fixed molds or dies that are expensive and present limitations to the 3D shapes that canbe fabricated. In 3DP, no molds or dies are required. Parts are designed using a computer-aideddesign (CAD) program and then the digital part file is loaded into a slicer program that preparesthe part file for printing on a 3D printer. From idea
for c & h-j for design,contemporary issues, and social context.Laboratories are a natural fit for coursework combining development of engineering practicesand skills aligned with core content theories. Research indicates engineers “learn by doing”3-7,and that laboratory experiences are critical to development of professional engineers. While thereare variations in objectives for laboratory in the research literature, an approach taken by Ma andNickerson7, who conducted a literature review on laboratory objectives and then aligned them toABET objectives will be used here as a frame for discussion. It is easy using this frame toconnect and extend the original work7 to ABET goals for 2015 as shown in Table 1. This revisedframe was used by
oflearning behaviors indicate that the POGIL approach resulted in significant gains (p<0.01) innearly all assessed areas over traditional lecture based coursework including: critical thinking,participation, interest, motivation, and reading. Students viewed provided model solutions, takehome problem sets, concept check activities (learning catalytics), lecture, in-class demos, andguided inquiries as significantly supportive of learning. Finally, students found the course andinstructional methods: (1) aided in seeing relevance of engineering to real-world needs, (2)increased their interest in own major, and (3) felt the material presented will be value followinggraduation.Introduction: Despite a general dissatisfaction with large format stand and
formative feedback and JTF pedagogy helped guide development of web-enabled student resources as well as shifting students' resource use away from traditionalresources like textbooks and more toward peer mentors, classmates and web-enabled resources.IntroductionJTF (Just-in-Time-Teaching with Interactive Frequent Formative Feedback) is an NSF TUESType 2 project in which eight faculty at four institutions are using a web-enabled, engagementand feedback pedagogy in their classrooms in the discipline of materials science. In the JTFproject the guiding principles are based on the research findings described in the book, HowPeople Learn (HPL).1 It discusses how cognitive processes act to achieve learning throughconceptual change based on three major
persist in the face of difficulty.1 Although researchers have shown Page 26.1616.2that undergraduate students’ achievement and persistence within undergraduate programs can belinked to individual students’ beliefs, less is known about how self-efficacy is related to studentsuccess (academic achievement such as grades) in large service courses at the university level. Because most undergraduate engineering students in their first two years take a materialsscience and engineering (MSE) service course that centers on understanding the fundamentalrelationships between the structures, properties, and processing of various materials, the
structural changes governing plastic deformation innanoscale specimens and their inability to use this knowledge to predict behavior of othermaterials. There are also common misconceptions concerning the relationship between elasticand plastic strain before and after yielding, as the elastic strain continues to increase afteryielding for a material that work hardens.Shown in Figure 1 are examples of tensile stress-strain curves for ductile metals corresponding tomacro-scale and nano-scale specimens. The two curves shown in Figure 1a contain all thefeatures taught in a traditional tensile testing laboratory including the definitions of Young’sModulus, yield stress, ultimate tensile stress (UTS), and percent elongation8. These curves aredominated by
Science technicalcontent, but also specific learning goals necessary for professional practice: design, creativity,teamwork, communication, lifelong learning, information literacy, environmental impact, andsocietal impact. An emphasis was placed on higher order thinking skills. The course goals aregiven in Table 1. Table 1. Course Goals Goal description Abbreviated name 1 Relate material composition and processing methods to structure and properties, Structure, processing, and in turn to the performance of the major classes of materials (metals, properties, performance ceramics, polymers
the foundation was laid for a furtherphase of expansion and detailed research into student gains.IntroductionThere is variety of professional development programs designed to promote interest in STEMfields and to give educators valuable teaching tools. As an example, the ASM MaterialsEducation Foundation (ASM) has offered week-long summer camps to introduce elementary(grade 5 and above) and high school teachers to materials science through hands-on activitiesand experiments [1, 2]. Materials science is attractive because it is a very accessible and hands-on science and can act as a unifier in typically disjointed physical science courses. While thesecamps successfully give educators many valuable tools, they are not designed to
field; to apply and integrate knowledge from each of the above four elementsof the field using experimental, computational and statistical methods to solve materialsproblems including selection and design.”1 Yet, for students beginning their studies in Materials,this integrated understanding is difficult to achieve; achieving an understanding of how newconcepts and methods connect to each other can be a challenge that delays their overallunderstanding of Materials Engineering as a discipline. As they struggle to understand therelationship between any material’s properties and the chemical and molecular structure thatgives rise to those properties, they can often lose sight of the contexts in which the materials’properties matter, the patterns
“PETE”,displaying the familiar #1 recycling code on the base of the cup.1 Plastic cups are typicallyprocessed by a molding method known as thermoforming, in which a thin sheet of PETE isheated and expanded into a cup-shaped mold cavity by either applying a vacuum or mechanicalpressure.2 This processes causes significant stretching of the sheet, as shown in Figure 1. Theshape is then cooled, released from the mold, and trimmed from the sheet, forming a stand-alone,solid plastic cup. Figure 1: Side-view schematic illustrating the three basic steps in a mechanical thermoforming process used to make a cup from a hot plastic sheet.As described in a recent study3, the thermoforming-induced stretching of the PETE sheet to formthe cup’s
A Computer-Based Interactive Activity for Visualizing Crystal Structures in Introductory Materials Science CoursesAbstractThis paper presents and discusses an interactive classroom activity on visualizing the atomicarrangement of common crystal structures and planes. This two-part module is built upon theICAP framework [1], with students first completing an individual constructive activity, wherethey mentally visualize and manipulate crystal structures. The second part is an interactiveactivity in which students work together to view and manipulate crystal structures using OVITO,an open-source software tool. At the end of the exercise, students evaluate their previousindividual work using the solutions from the group. This
for future iterations of this module and adaption to otherinstructors’ classrooms.INTRODUCTIONAs defined by Merriam-Webster, engineering is “the application of science and mathematics bywhich the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people” (1).The technical nature of this definition continues into the canon shaping the engineeringcurriculum. While engineering education has traditionally focused solely on the technicalskillset, there is a growing industry and academic demand for engineers who possess social andglobal values to better align with the changing industry (2) (3) (4) (5). Terminology such as‘socio-technical’ engineering is becoming more common, as is the blending of the social with
strategies, modifying content, giving instructor feedback on muddiest points, andcreating class activities that address IBS. Uncovering and addressing such IBS makes teachingboth more challenging and rewarding with the opportunity of improving the classroom experiencefor both students and instructors.IntroductionResearch has shown that the combination of active learning through student engagement combinedwith frequent formative feedback is more effective than traditional knowledge transmission bylecture for achieving improved student attitude, persistence, and achievement (1-5). In student-centered learning, students engage with one another in relevant activities that promote conceptualdevelopment by defining and using vocabulary, discussing and
data and correlations extracted from this course to addresswhether project-based learning aids in enhancing student appreciation for materials science andengineering and how the utilization of different mentoring types enhances the effect.Introduction:Materials science is a field of study that is instrumental to large-scale problem solving in society[1-2]. The importance of the field is often apparent to students choosing to major in the field; theunique contribution of materials science principles to engineering as a whole is often less obviousto non-majors. In part, this is due to the societal tendency to champion a final product (or individualcarrying out a heroic act), rather than the engineers, scientists, and technicians who made
. Page 24.273.2 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Characterizing and Addressing Student Learning Issues and Misconceptions (SLIMs) in Materials Science with Muddiest Point Reflections and Fast Formative FeedbackAbstractWell-designed formative feedback has the potential to enhance both instructor teaching andstudent learning. Initially, developing a formative feedback process takes some effort, but onceestablished, requires little effort. The process includes four steps: 1) acquiring data from studentreflections; 2) assessing and characterizing student responses in order to diagnose the learningissues that can impede students from achieving their learning goals; 3
following semester provides insights into themotivations and backgrounds of distance students in the program. Implications of the findingsfor distance engineering course design are discussed.IntroductionThe University of North Dakota (UND) offers ABET-accredited undergraduate distanceengineering programs in chemical, civil, electrical, geological, and mechanical engineering. Theprograms began with industrial collaboration in the early 1990s and have grown to compriseapproximately 1/3 of the total enrollment in the UND College of Engineering and Mines. Theyenroll students from across the country and around the world. While originally developed forworking professionals with technical experience looking to finish a degree, increasing numbersof
”, letting studentsaccess only a computer monitor and a sample holder.The Virtual laboratory for studying X-ray powder diffraction and the application of the methodsin materials science, chemistry, physics, geology, metallurgy, biochemistry and engineering isdescribed and discussed below. Figure. 1 Screenshots of a virtual experiment developed to introduce students to the design and functionality of an X-Ray powder diffractometer and its major parts, as well as to help them better understand relevant science laws and engineering implementations. The learner is able to select a part (e.g., scintillation detector – bottom left) and explore in detail its design, major components, and basic parameters. Students will also learn the