groups passed through an ‘overcoming discomfort period’ trying to get toknow each other and build rapport between team members.Based on motivation and class performance. In another semester of the highway engineeringcourse, student groups were assigned based on their motivation levels and class performance atthe transportation engineering class that was a prerequisite for the highway engineering class.Highly motivated students with Transportation Engineering course grade “A” or “B”, wereassigned in groups with less motivated students with grades “C”, and “D”. It should be statedthat, here, highly motivated students were all the ones who expressed an interest in transportationengineering and wanted to do well in the related courses. Also, all
delivery Instructor Google This file recorded instructor availability for covering each contact info Spreadsheet section in an emergency, contact information of each with multiple instructor, instructor expertise, office hours attendance, grade sheets averages, grade disputes for common tests, and more. Feedback Google This file shared feedback regarding each class lesson. We about classes Documents asked instructors to voluntarily complete: A) Suggestions of things to consider before teaching B) Feedback from those who have already taught
recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography 1. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropouts from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent literature. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89-125. 2. Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 3. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Retrieved on June 1, 2014 from: http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/kuh_team_report.pdf 4. Bedard, K., & Kuhn, P. (2005). Where class size
of recordings. Hence, a full version of the application was purchased which eliminatedall the aforementioned limitations. Figure 2 shows a snapshot of AudioNote interface at an instancewhere instructor is talking about and highlighting the support reaction at point B on the beam. Thesoftware highlights each letter, lines, dots, characters step by step so that it can be clearly seen bystudents. Also, students have the ability to play, pause, fast forward, rewind the video so that theycan recite or revise any section of the video. Figure 2 AudioNote Interface Highlighting Text [12]AudioNote required a touch screen to write and record. Hence, an iPad was used to record thesevideos using the application platform. The
Environmental Quality (VDEQ), (2006). Upper Stroubles Creek Watershed TMDL Implementation Plan Montgomery County, Virginia, Blacksburg, VA, USA.10. Clarke, H., McDonald, W.M., Raamanathan, H., Brogan, D., Lohani, V. K., and Dymond, R.L. (2013). Investigating the Response of a Small, Urban Watershed to Acute Toxicity Events via Real-Time Data Analysis. Proceedings of Research, NSF/REU Site on Interdisciplinary Water Sciences and Engineering, Virginia Tech.11. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ). (2012). 305(b)/303(d) Water Quality Assessment Integrated Report. Richmond, VA, USA.12. Basu D., Purviance, J., Maczka, D., Brogan, D. S., Lohani. V. K. (2015).Work-in-Progress: High- Frequency Environmental Monitoring
us to put ourselves in the students’ shoes so we could come up with challenges they might face while the faculty instructor was there to help us navigate.” “I think a big part is prioritizing the meetings every week. Just an hour a week isn't much, but using the whole thing to go over homework and review the upcoming week's material can be really helpful. When these meetings are not used to the fullest or are skipped entirely, this makes the teaching quality suffer.”2.5.2 Positive Interdependence “I think the common goal was clear, in that we wanted students to succeed in a) learning how to run the experiments hands-on, b) maintaining safety, and c) applying fundamental chemical
. (2015). Attack Bullying Without Being Attacked, Human Resource Magazine, Vol. 60 (5), pp. 116-119.23. Williams, W. (2015). Williams: Better Watch What You Say On Campus, Retrieved on August 31, 2015 from www.goupstate.com/.../ARTICLES/150819781/-1/magazineCached.24. Reichman, H. (2016). Civility and Free Speech, Retrieved on March 8, 2016 from https://www.thefire.org/civility-free-speech/.25. Vargo, B. (2013). Human Interaction is Crucial to Teaching, The Times Newspaper, Vol. 105 (22) and Vol. 102 (348), p. C1.26. Green, E. (2014). Building a Better Teacher, Parade Magazine, Vol. 105 (366) & Vol. 103 (326), pp. 6-9.27. Deiter, R. (2000). The Use of Humor as a Teaching Tool in the College Classroom, NACTA Journal
Region’s engineering educators to enablethem to assume the roles they are entrusted with. The purpose here is to offer a newway to think about the development of the professional engineering educator. In thisrespect the paper focuses on:(i) the cognitive processes that faculty would follow asthey grow and learn more about teaching and learning,(ii) the discipline-basedindustrial/practical experience they need to acquire in their locale to add to theirrepertoire as “practitioners” of engineering, and (iii) the institutional initiatives,including administrative support, encouragement, and resources. What is needed is tocreate a change in culture within the institution, i.e., the department or college, togenerate a comprehensive and integrated set of
after %.0f iterations.',x,count) What values of x and count will be displayed by the fprintf statement? A. x = _______________ ANS: 16 B. count = ____________ ANS: 4 Objective: Create and interpret repetition structures No Evidence Partially Achieved Fully Achieved Score: 0 pts Score: 4 pts Score: 8 pts x neither 8 nor 16 Answers are for previous iteration (x=8, x = 16, count = 4 count neither 3 count=3) nor 4 Either x = 16 OR count = 4, but not bothOn the other end of the complexity spectrum, some questions involved a much greater degree ofeffort, both in
are in industrial and manufacturing systems engineering, scheduling and logistics and engineering education.Mrs. Olgha B Davis, North Carolina State University Olgha B. Davis is currently a doctoral candidate at the department of Leadership, Policy, and Adult and Higher Education at North Carolina State University. She obtained her Bachelor’s degree in Biomedical Engineering from Boston University and worked in industry for 7 years prior to returning to graduate school. She earned her Master’s degree in Biomedical Engineering from North Carolina State University and the University of Chapel Hill. Ms. Davis’ doctoral research focuses on racial and mathematical iden- tities constructs and how they influence African
Paper ID #15666Adjunct’s Contribution in Bringing the Practice to the Classroom: A CaseStudyDr. Waddah Akili, Iowa State University Waddah Akili has been in the academic arena for over 40 years. He has held academic positions at Drexel University, Philadelphia, Penna (66-69), at King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (69-87), and at the University of Qatar, Doha, Qatar (87-00). Professor Akili’s major field is geotechnical engineering and materials. His research work & experience include: characterization of arid and semi arid soils, piled foundations, pavement design & materials
Paper ID #14458Status of a Summer Faculty Immersion Program After Four Years in Devel-opmentDr. Juan C Morales, Universidad del Turabo Dr. Juan C. Morales, P.E., joined the Mechanical Engineering Department at Universidad del Turabo (UT), Gurabo, Puerto Rico, in 1995 and currently holds the rank of professor. Dr. Morales was the ABET Coordinator of the School of Engineering for the initial ABET-EAC accreditation of all four accredited programs at UT. He is currently serving as ABET Coordinator once again for the 2016 ABET visit. Dr. Morales has been Department Head of Mechanical Engineering since 2003. His efforts to diffuse
Paper ID #16312Student Learning Materials for Ability Enhancement in an Engineering CourseDr. Kristine K. Craven, Tennessee Technological University Dr. Kris Craven is currently the Interim Director of the Basic Engineering (BE) Department and a tenured Assistant Professor of the same department at Tennessee Tech University (TTU). I have been employed by TTU since 2000 primarily teaching in the Basic Engineering Program. I have also been teaching junior level courses for the Mechanical Engineering department for several years. In addition to ASEE, I am a member of the Society of Women Engineers, American Society of
Paper ID #16800Using Failure to Teach DesignProf. Rob Sleezer, Minnesota State University, Mankato, Twin Cities Rob Sleezer currently serves as a faculty member in the Twin Cities Engineering program in the De- partment of Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University, Mankato. He earned his Ph.D. in Microelectronics-Photonics from the University of Arkansas after graduating from Oklahoma State Uni- versity with degrees in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering.Prof. Jacob John Swanson, Minnesota State University, Mankato Jacob Swanson is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Department of Integrated
Society (APICS) and a member of the Society of Women Engineers (SWE). She is a licensed Professional Engineer in Kansas.Dr. Cheryl B. Schrader, Missouri University of Science and Technology Cheryl B. Schrader became Chancellor of Missouri University of Science and Technology, formerly the University of Missouri - Rolla, in 2012. Prior to her current leadership position she served as Associate Vice President for Strategic Research Initiatives and as Dean of the College of Engineering at Boise State University. Dr. Schrader has an extensive record of publications and sponsored research in the systems, control and STEM education fields. She received the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and
Conference, San Antonio, Texas. https://peer.asee.org/21680 5. Davis, J. L., & McDonald, T. (2014, June), Online Homework: Does it Help or Hurt in the Long Run? Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana. https://peer.asee.org/228856. Stowell, C. (2012, June), Work-in-Progress: Challenges to Developing Online Homework for Upper-level Engineering Courses Paper presented at 2012 ASEE Annual Conference, San Antonio, Texas. https://peer.asee.org/222457. Pandian, P., & Gilbert, S. B., & Blessing, S. B., & Roselli, R., & Howard, L., & Raut, A. (2008, June), Integration Of An Intelligent Tutoring System With A Web Based Authoring System To Develop Online Homework Assignments
that has the potential to revolutionize how weassess student achievement in higher education. Acknowledgements This work was made possible by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF DUE-1503794). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. Bibliography 1. Postman, N. 1992. Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY.2. Sadler, D. 2005, “Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education,” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175-194.3. Broad, B. 2000, “Pulling you hair out: Crises of
Reflection in Engineering Education (CPREE), funded by a $4.4 million grant from the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. She was director of the NSF-funded Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE), a national research center that was funded from 2003-2010. Dr. Atman is the author or co-author on over 115 archival publications. She has been invited to give many keynote addresses, including a Distinguished Lecture at the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) 2014 Annual Conference. Dr. Atman joined the UW in 1998 after seven years on the faculty at the University of Pittsburgh. Her research focuses on engineering education pedagogy, engineering design learning, assessing the consid
process, (b) use of multiple sources of information, (c) interaction withpeers, (d) sufficient time for dialogue and interaction, (e) use of teacher self-ratings, (f) use ofhigh-quality feedback information, (g) examination of conceptions of teaching, and (h) setting ofimprovement goals.As will be described in the sections to follow, at Mines we set out to develop a peer teachingassessment program which relied heavily on the research described above, with the singular aimof improving teaching.Institutional ContextThe Colorado School of Mines is a small, public, engineering-focused university, withapproximately 4200 undergraduate students and 1200 graduate students. The university has twotracks for faculty: tenure/tenure-track faculty, which have
. 18(4): 454-490.2. Auzenne, A. M, A. T. Hanson, R. B. Jacquez, and C. Burnham. Understanding engineering design as an argumentative strategy. Science, Engineering, & Technology Education Annual Conference. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces. 2006.3. Melander, JR, Curtis, E, Adams, KA, and Arthurs, L. A cross-disciplinary, service learning-based approach to enhance communication skills. Proceedings of the ASABE 2014 Annual International Meeting, Montreal, QC, CA, July 2014.4. Adams, KA and Keshwani, JR. Preparing pre-service teachers to make connections between science and engineering concepts through teamwork with engineering students. 2015. Proceedings of ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, Washington.5
sectors as an engineer and/or project manager. A registered professional engineer and certified project manager (PMP), Dr. Banik has more than 40 refereed publications in the area of civil engineering and construction management. He has presented his research in several well-known and peer-reviewed conferences, such as ASEE, ASCE, ASC, WEFTEC and CIB, and published articles in those conference proceedings. He presented his research all over the world, including the United States, Canada, Greece, Italy, Brazil, and the Philippines. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Strategies and Techniques for Tenure-Track Faculty to Become Successful in AcademiaAlthough engineering and