the reports. For example, this was a statement in oneof the discussions of hardness testing of metals: “The original hypothesis stated that if theAluminum 2024-T351 specimens were harder than the Steel C 1010 specimens, then the moreforce would be needed to indent the aluminum specimens.” The issue with this statement is thatin the Rockwell Hardness B scale test performed in the lab, the magnitude of the force isconsistent for all the specimens, and the hardness is correlated with the level of indentation.3.2.Technical ContentThe themes in the Technical Content domain are those that are concerned with correctapplication of the technical standards and theory. Students’ writing revealed the two themes of“Accurate and precise explanation of
. (a) (b) (c) (d)Figure 1. Schematic of commonly used engineering mechanisms a) rock crasher b) transfer mechanism c) mechanism to turn over cartons d) reciprocating saber saw [15]The first year data was used as the baseline for the study. During the second year, PBL approachwas used to introduce students to design project. Students worked on a series of projects on aself-paced schedule and reported their work at the end of semester as a group presentation. At thebeginning of semester, students were allowed to self-select team members (four members perteam). In the third year implementation of PBL, project management
,these problems were modified to utilize computational modeling techniques and presented asprojects to the students in the Computational Modeling course. The students worked in groupsof two on these projects. Page 12.957.4The first problem was taken from the Statics course textbook8. Based on Figure 1, the studentsdeveloped a MATLAB program to study the variation in M0 due to T=120 lbs as the position ofpoint B varies from (0,0,0) to (0,14,0). Figure 2 shows a plot of the variation in the x, y and zcomponents of M0 vs. the y-coordinate of point B. Figure 1. Variation of moment problem taken from Meriam and Kraige8
exploreaccelerations, angular velocities, and position in real-time with relative ease makes them aperfect in-class demonstration. The system is easy to use in class, and the students seem toengage better than with traditional in-class examples. PocketLabs promises to be a powerful toolfor teaching dynamics.References[1] A. C. Estes, R. W. Welch, and S. J. Ressler, “The ExCEEd Teaching Model,” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, vol. 131, no. 4, pp. 218–222, Oct. 2005, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2005)131:4(218).[2] A. A. Ferri and B. H. Ferri, “Blended Learning in a Rigid-Body Dynamics Course Using On- Line Lectures and Hands-On Experiments,” presented at the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Jun
particles A and B that are, say, assumed to be moving in the sanle direction before aswell as after central impact with absolute velocities VA and VB' respectively, the linear impulseon the particle during restitution, r~dt 'd rId , divided by that during deformation, Jo Fd (t )dt is calledthe coefficient of restitution (COR) and given the symbol e [3]. e= (3)Here, FrCt) and Fit) are the resultant forces that are applied instantaneously to the ball during therestitution and
0 20 37.7% (b) Agree 10 5 5 (c) No opinion 2 5 4 11 20.8% (d) Disagree 6 4 8 22 41.5% (e) Strongly disagree 0 3 1 Table 2 the survey results on survey question #2 Question #2: How does the flipped classroom help you in learning the material? Choices Class I Class II Class III Totals Percentage (%) (a) Much better than traditional 0 0 0 9 17.0% (b) Better than traditional 1 3 5 (c) The same as
length prediction will befairly sensitive to any variation in or . This conclusion is consistent with a qualitative fact wellknown to golfers: fast greens are hard to putt on. Note that the coefficient of restitution can bedetermined from the well known drop test ( e ? h1 h2 , where h1 is the drop height and h2 isthe bounce back height) provided that proper support of the club head is available. If not, theball can be dropped onto a flat surface made of a material that possesses a similar elasticmodulus to that of the club head. Lastly, observe that for the limiting case of a perfectly elasticcollision (so e ? 1 ) with a heavy club head so that m / M B 0 , xmax B 4h / or .A summary of major requirements for student design teams is as follows:1
relevance (specific to an engineer’s required understanding of the subject) 4. Evaluate for creativity (is the question contextualised? Authentic? Realistic? Higher order? Is this an excellent way to assess this knowledge/ability? Is the wording ideal?) 5. Solve – what answers might students provide? What is acceptable? What if any partial credit will be awarded? 6. Provide feedback: a. Identify and state the problem/s with the item b. State why it is a problem c. Suggest how the item could be rephrased d. State how the revised suggestion is better than the original 7. Pairs then review and evaluate the items brought to the workshop. Pairs decide whether the item would be suitable as
following questions: a) Did you receive my e-mail while you were at work? If not, why? b) Did you read and understand the contents of this e-mail? c) Do you think that this e-mail information is important to you? Why? Why not? d) Did you attempt to read the Statics review material that was e-mailed to you? Why? Why not? e) Has the Statics review material helped you to remember and to better understand the material covered when you took the Statics class? f) Did you attempt to solve or practice the sample questions e-mailed to you? g) Did you order the Solids textbook, and if so, did you get a chance to start
bodydiagrams (FBDs). The instructional faculty were charged to identify pedagogical methods toimprove student performance in Statics and the retention of key concepts. Two novel approacheswere implemented over the 2016 academic year in the Statics course and continue to be used. Amnemonic device to remember the key components of free body diagrams was developed anddemonstrated consistently in class. The device is referred to as “The ABC’s of FBD’s”. The firstfour letters of the alphabet identify an item that must be included in FBDs. The letter “A” standsfor “All reactions and applied loads”, “B” stands for the “Body”, “C” stands for the “CoordinateSystem” and “D” stands for “Dimensions”. It is then stressed that the equilibrium equations or“E” comes
command of the material.Requiring extra instruction between the second and third attempts at a concept was one of twosignificant changes made during the semester this scheme was used. The other was a broadeningof the retake criteria. After the first exam cycle, the “Almost Correct” score window was widenedto include the high B, making its floor 88% – still higher than possible on the second attempt, butalleviating some of the grading burden (at a school with no graduate teaching assistants). Table 1: Exam scoring scheme (initial) Attempt at Problem Assessment 1st
indeterminate problem. Using the load-displacement relationship, aswell as the fact that the relative displacement between the bone and nail is 0, the followingrelationships can be developed:where F is force, L is the length, A is the cross-sectional area, % is the percent of bone loss, E isthe elastic modulus, and σ is the stress. The subscript B represents values of the bone, and thesubscript N represents values of the nail. Synthes, the producer of the nail and screws, uses atitanium alloy Ti–6Al–7Nb.[6] Therefore, the elastic modulus used for the nail was 114GPa,[7]and the elastic modulus for the bone was 18.6GPa.[8.9] Due to their complex geometries, thearea of the nail was calculated as an area formed by 2 concentric circles, while the area of
(eds). Using Reflection and Metacognition to Improve Student Learning: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy.pp. 18 – 48. Sterling, VA: Stylus.10. R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.APPENDIXTable A1. Quiz Wrapper Questions. 1. Approximately how many hours did you spend in total preparing for this quiz? 2. What percentage of this time was in the 24 hours prior to the quiz? 3. What did you consider your level of preparation for the quiz: a. Excellent (participated in class, completed homework, solved / re-solved problems) b. Good (attended class, completed homework, looked over worksheet solutions
and satisfaction. The research questions are as follows:1) How do the types and quality of teaching methods used for statics impact students’ (a)knowledge of statics; (b) satisfaction with the learning environment Types of teaching methods were evaluated by classroom observations (in tandem with answering research question 2 below). Item (a) was evaluated via comparative course grades in statics, and pre/post performance on a concept inventory. Students’ satisfaction (b) was evaluated using and focus groups with students, the Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) online survey, and end of semester evaluations.2) What do statics faculty report were: (a) their background in and motivations for adoptinginnovative teaching
curriculum, student performance during the summer2009 semester of Statics (115 students) was compared to performance in seven prior coursestaught by the author between 2005 and 2008. At the University of Louisville, student co-opexperiences are required and thus three full semesters are conducted each year. As such, whenstudents are in sequence, Statics is normally scheduled for the summer semester of theirsophomore year.Figure 4 displays a comparison of the grades for the previous courses and for the Summer 2009session. As shown in the figure, it appears that there was a significant shift of students to highergrades. Many of the “B-C” students appear to be in the “A-B” range. Unfortunately, the “F”students appear to have benefited little from the
EM211A placement is SGPA with a weighting score, B, of -1.775. This is notsurprising in that SGPA indicates how a student performs in the current academic setting. Thesame is true of Calculus 1 and Chemistry 1 grades with the next highest weightings of -1.356 and-0.420, respectively. In contrast the least important significant predictor, SAT Math, with aweighting factor of -0.021, is a trailing indicator. Student Regression Predictor B Sig. ETHNICITY -.026 .597 SATV .002 .089 SATM -.021 .000
] Felicia, Patrick (2011). Handbook of Research on Improving Learning and Motivation through Educational Games: Multidisciplinary Approaches, IGI Global. ISBN 978-1-60960-496-7.[2] Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering Education. Felder, R. and Silverman, L. 7, 1988, Engineering Education, Vol. 78, pp. 674-681.[3] Kolb, D. A. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Pearson Education, Inc., 2014.[4] Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain.[5] Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook ii
ABET1 outcomes ‘b’ and ‘k’. Although it may be arguedthat the inclusion of more learning outcomes may overburden the students and require them toallocate more time for this course, the feedback from students for the last two semesters has beengenerally positive. This paper provides the details of the curriculum and explains the rationalebehind the changes in a critical course for ME and CE students. It is expected that the curriculumwill lead to a broader discussion on the need to revamp critical courses in the engineeringcurriculum in order to enhance student engagement, and in an attempt to improve studentretention in engineering.Keywords: Curriculum, Statics, Dynamics, Scaffolding.1. Introduction The relationship between student
measures after they saw the deformation of the J-beam in Figure 7.Figure 7: Screen shot from J-beam bending animationStudents were able to see on the screen thatthe points A and B had moved closer to thelocked midsection of the beam. After themoment of inertia demonstrations, studentsvolunteered that the shorter AC would bendmore than the longer BD. This animationdemonstrated that points A, B, C, and Dwhich were all in plane when the J-beam wasundeformed were no longer all planarafterwards. This experience gave somecontext to the homework question shown inFigure 8 where students were asked tocalculate the product of inertia for the beam. Figure 8: Homework problem to find product ofSuch an animation
𝑄 𝑄 𝑄 𝑈𝐼 = ∑ 𝐹𝑗𝑃 𝛿𝑗𝑃 + ∑ 𝐹𝑗 𝛿𝑗 + ∑ 𝐹𝑗𝑃 𝛿𝑗 (5) 2 2 𝑗=1 𝑗=1 𝑗=1where 𝐹𝑗𝑄 is the internal force in member j due to the load Q and 𝛿𝑗𝑄 is the change in length ofmember j due to 𝐹𝑗𝑄 . The third term in Equation (5) results from the fact that the load P is alreadyfully applied from t1 to t2, and the resulting member forces 𝐹𝑗𝑃 (due to load P) are multiplied bythe change in member length values 𝛿𝑗𝑄 (due to load Q) to account for this portion of the strainenergy. (Appendix B provides a detailed development of Equation (5) for the truss and
years the CPs have been offered in staticsat a large R1 university in the southeast (Institution B). The results that are provided are from statics forthe past two years and for dynamics and deformable solids for the past four years. The populationbreakdown for each course is given in Table 3. Table 3. Student population. Breakdown by course for the number of students that have completed the CPs, the number of semesters included in the sample, when instruction took place, and where instruction took place. Number of Number of Semesters Course Institution
, frame analysis B 𝑧 𝑥 A 𝑦 (b) (a) (c)Figure 1. Example vector activity. (a) System diagram. (b) Model. (c) Sample studentsubmission of photo demonstrating their understanding of coordinate direction angles.Figure 1 is an excerpt from a week 2 activity introducing basic 3D vector concepts and notation.Students perform calculations and answer concept questions related to
principles, SOLIDWORKS canalso take the place of physical equipment to create an opportunity for student discovery. In thisexample, students in MC364 used a SOLIDWORKS model (Figure 4(a)) to discover theprinciple of superposition for stresses due to combined loading. To assist in student visualizationof the problem, students were provided with a 3D printed offset link (Figure 4(b)) that wasprinted using the SOLIDWORKS model. In addition to enhancing student engagement, thisprovided an opportunity to briefly discuss current 3D printing technology. (a) (b)Figure 4 Offset link for MC364 combined loads exercise: (a) SOLIDWORKS model and (b) 3d printed component
. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn., vol. 4, no. 1, 2010.[12] H. J. Walberg, R. A. Paschal, and T. Weinstein, “Homework’ s powerful effects on learning,” Educ. Leadersh., no. april, pp. 76–79, 1985.[13] E. A. Howard, “Purdue e-Pubs How do Millennial Engineering and Technology Students Experience Learning Through Traditional Teaching Methods Employed in the University Setting?,” 2011.[14] D. B. Smithrud and A. R. Pinhas, “Pencil-Paper Learning Should Be Combined with Online Homework Software,” J. Chem. Educ., vol. 92, no. 12, pp. 1965–1970, 2015.[15] E. Hoover, “Spotlight on Retention,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 09-Mar-2015.[16] D. Glenn, “In Student Retention, Attitude Seems to Matter Most,” The Chronicle of
probe studentmisconceptions4. Coupling concept inventories with interviews to better understandstudent misconceptions is now emerging in engineering as well1,19.A few years ago, colleague Adeeb Rahman, student Josh Bostwick, and I conducted aseries of student interviews20. We did not publish the results, which I summarize here.We selected three students who had completed Dynamics whose final grades were A, B,and D (the D-student was viewed to be an under-achiever). Each student was asked tosolve four homework-type problems (one per week) from Statics and Dynamics in astructured interview format in our presence. Working under the premise that studentslearn, in part, through being allowed (and even encouraged) to pursue their ownerroneous
Figure 5. Examples of online questions for (a) identifying forces on a free body diagram, and (b) creating a free body diagram. Problem Statements are included at the top of each figure.In the second set of online exercises to be completed by the beginning of Week 5, the objectivewas to have the students learn a new concept about free body diagrams and apply it to a scenarioproblem. The concept presented was the use of more than one free body diagram in a singlesystem to solve for unknown forces, where just one diagram was not enough. In this set ofexercises, students learned how to create free-body diagrams for exiting structures by watchingtwo brief (3-7 min.) videos wherein a free-body diagram was created for a cantilever monumentand
Paper ID #5979Soup Can Races: Teaching Rotational Dynamics Energy-based SolutionsMr. Richard Brown Bankhead III, Highline Community College Richard B Bankhead III is the engineering department coordinator at Highline Community College. At Highline Richard is committed to developing the behaviors successful engineering students in transfer students as well as preparing them academically for the challenges of junior level engineering courses. Richard has taught at Highline since 2004 and was awarded the Faculty of the Year Award at Highline for the 2009-10 school year
. Page 12.244.7References[1] Flori, R. E., Koen, M. A., and Oglesby, D. B., “Basic Engineering Software for Teaching (“BEST”) Dynamics”, ASEE Journal of Engineering Education, 1996, pp. 61-67.[2] Philpot, T. A., Oglesby, D. B., Flori, R. E., Yellamraju, V., Hubing, N., and Hall, R. H., “Interactive Learning Tools: Animating Mechanics of Materials”, 2002 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Montreal, Canada, June 2002.[3] Gramoll, K. and Abbanat, R., “Interactive Multimedia for Engineering Dynamics”, 1995 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Anaheim, CA, June 1995.[4] Hubing, N. and Oglesby, D. B., “Animating Statics: Flash in the Classroom”, ASEE Midwest Section Conference, Manhattan, KS, March 2001.[5] Rezaei, A
). “Implications of Publishing eBooks on PCs and Mobile Devices for Engineering Technology Educators.” Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference, Vancouver, Canada. DOI: AC 2011-234511. Dhondt, G., & Wittig, K. Calculix: A Free Software Three-Dimensional Structural Finite Element Program. Retrieved from http://www.calculix.de/12. Rieg, F. Z88 Aurora. Retrieved from http://www.z88.de/13. Patzák, B. (2000). OOFEM project home page. Retrieved from http://www.oofem.org14. Baylor, J. (2011). bConverged. Retrieved from http://www.bconverged.com/15. Winder, J., & Tondeur, P. (2011). Papervision3d Essentials. Birmingham, UK: Packt Pub Ltd.16. Chandrupatla, T. R., & Belegundu, A. D. (2004). Introduction to Finite Elements in Engineering
ispresented. They are able to use their lecture notes when studying. Students are able to workmore challenging problems on the exams. Written comments received from the students at theend of the semester are very positive about this lecture method. Working with the high qualitygraphics during class makes the lecture more enjoyable for both the faculty and the students.The students learning experience with this lecture process is more beneficial and rewarding thanthe experience in a traditional classroom.References:[1] Anderson, R. (2004) Beyond Powerpoint: Building a New Classroom Presenter, Campus Technology, 6/1/2004, http://www.campustechnology.com/article.asp?id=9537.[2] Niederman, F. and Rollier, B. (2001) How are you going to keep