Paper ID #42897Getting Started Teaching an Undergraduate Engineering LaboratoryDr. Rebecca Marie Reck, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Rebecca M. Reck is a Teaching Associate Professor of Bioengineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Her research includes alternative grading, entrepreneurial mindset, instructional laboratories, and equity-focused teaching. She teaches biomedical instrumentation, signal processing, and control systems. She earned a Ph.D. in Systems Engineering from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, an M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Iowa State University, and a B.S
Paper ID #38589Assessing Faculty Implementation of Laboratory Report WritingInstructional ModulesDr. Sean St. Clair, Oregon Institute of Technology Sean St.Clair is a Professor in the Civil Engineering Department at Oregon Tech, where he teaches struc- tural engineering courses and conducts research in engineering education. He is also a registered Profes- sional Engineer.Dr. Dave Kim, Washington State University, Vancouver Dr. Dave Kim is Professor and Mechanical Engineering Program Coordinator in the School of Engineer- ing and Computer Science at Washington State University Vancouver. His teaching and research have
laboratory coursesAbstractToday’s engineers need diverse technical communication skills that are not limited to preparingdetailed and long reports. However, classic engineering curricula lack courses that focus on theseskills. Engineering laboratory courses offer a unique opportunity to fill this gap. In this paper, wereview cases reported in science and engineering education literature that cover laboratoryassignments other than traditional lab reports. We discuss the use of modified reports, oralpresentation, poster presentations, and video reports as alternatives to conventional lab reports.Results from multiple studies indicate that, in addition to gaining technical communication skills,preparing alternative forms of lab assignments helps
include robotics, automation, and product design. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Use of Individual Lab Kits to Enhance Hands-on Learning in Electronic Circuits CoursesAbstractThe Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology degree program at Western CarolinaUniversity offers a series of lab-lecture courses covering DC circuits, electronic circuits withactive devices such as diodes and transistors, and AC circuits. These four credit hour coursesinclude one laboratory session per week. During the COVID-19 era, these classes were offeredremotely using lab kits consisting of an all-in-one pocket-sized data acquisition module, abreadboard, and a set of passive
. ● Renewable Energy education towards integration in traditional powering grids.These technical areas also allow one to discuss two delivery methods that use software and aphysical setup. Our Renewable Energy courses best emphasize the application of physical systems,while our Mechatronic courses best show the use of simulation software for SustainableEngineering Education.Mechatronic Education. Resources for SAET’s mechatronic laboratory were previouslycharacterized as physical training systems and software enabling process simulation [11].Regarding the sustainable engineering learning objectives, both choices provide excellentresources. However, the fundamental benefit of the software-based method is that it is bothaffordable and accessible to
preparation.2.1.1 Designing effective syllabiSyllabi serve as a contract between instructor and students. New faculty members should ensurethat their syllabi communicate course objectives, learning outcomes, grading criteria, and policiesin a transparent and accessible manner. Providing students with an alternative lecture schedulecan also show an outlining key date for assignments, exams, and other important milestones. Thisclarity enables students to plan their study schedule effectively, manage their time efficiently, andstay on track with coursework.2.1.2 Laboratory Design and real-world connectionDesigning laboratories with stronger connections to real-world examples and theoretical knowledgeinvolves several strategies, including selecting
Department Chair. Theprogram was delivered through the university's online course platform and facilitated by theinstructional coach. To select participants for the program, a promotional email was sent toECE graduate students and some GTAs were nominated by their supervisors and/or thedepartment. Out of the 20 GTAs participating in the program, six individuals with varyingteaching experiences volunteered to take part in this research study by sharing their insightsand experiences in a focus group and in follow up individual structured interviews. All sixparticipants were international students at different stages of their doctoral programs. Theyprimarily worked in laboratories where their roles ranged from being a principal laboratoryinstructor to
. IntroductionEngineering education faces the continuous challenge of incorporating the latestresearch findings into its curriculum to ensure graduates are well-equipped totackle current and future technological challenges. Traditional methods ofcurriculum development often struggle to keep pace with the rapid advancementof technology and emerging research areas [1, 2]. Current approaches tointegrating research into engineering education primarily involve the introductionof elective courses, predetermined laboratory classes, or the occasional inclusionof term papers from existing courses. However, these methods have limitations,including insufficient coverage of new technologies and the lag in updating coursecontent to reflect the latest research developments
of an ad hocrelationship between two or more individuals. Mentoring is important, and while newengineering faculty could become more effective by practicing it, these sources do not addressthe broader issues of establishing and leading a research group. One of the few publications thatdoes, At the Helm: Leading Your Laboratory [Barker 2010], is focused on the biological andhealth sciences rather than engineering. 13. Recruiting StudentsFirst, you need to consider the kind of research you will be doing. The number and kind ofpeople you recruit—their skills, background, and experience, will depend on your funded orpotentially fundable ideas. You will likely spend significant time developing ideas
academic institutions in Arizona, Utah, and Colorado), andis co-Director of the Southwest Integrated Field Laboratory (SW-IFL) project (a $25 Millioneffort recently funded by the Department of Energy to examine links between heat, aircomposition and water). She was recruited to ASU from the University of Florida’sEnvironmental Engineering Sciences department.Prof. Andino has past industry experience, working for two years at Ford Motor Company aspart of both the Chemistry and Chemical Engineering departments of Ford Research. Herwork at Ford focused on (a) characterizing the reactions taking place on novel materials to beused in catalytic converters, and (b) determining the ambient air quality impacts of fuels andalternative fuels by examining
. Thisproject will provide the provide a visual, hands-on education that will provide students withexposure to complex parts and provide a foundation to improve their creativity in future projectdesigns.Mechanical dissection projects have been done several times and the product that has beendissected has ranged from simple children’s toys to more complex items such as engines [2, 3,4]. Commonly, the limiting factors to conducting a product dissection is the cost of the product,the laboratory/institute constrains on space and safety, and the handling of the waste once thedissection of the product has occurred [5,6]. Some of these issues can be addressed by obtainingsmall items that are meant to be assembled and disassembled multiple times. However
application of sustainable platforms for the purification and detection of biomarkers. Has made research internships at the Michael Smith Laboratories at the University of British Columbia and the Water Center for Latin America and the Caribbean. In 2018 she was Coordinator at the Writing Lab of the Institute for the Future of Education. She is the co-author of 29 ISI indexed scientific publications, 1 book, 2 book chapters, and co-inventor of 4 intellectual properties. She is a member of the Mexican National System of Researchers. Her contributions in the field of sustainability have been in biotechnology, cereal sciences, energy efficiency; and active learning in education. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1568-4954Vianney Lara
their career. The essential(E) and advanced (A) skills are still important, but they are not pre-requisite material for othercourses. If a student is able to master all the fundamental skills, they will have a C- and they willpass the class as shown in Table 2. While students who only pass the fundamental skills may notget as much practice with the essential and advanced skills, they will still be exposed to theseskills on instruction days and through homework and laboratory exercises. By achieving masteryon the fundamental skills, students should have a full understanding of these topics which theycan apply to future engineering courses. This is where mastery based learning and traditionalgrading differ—mastery-based learning prioritizes
Paper ID #38464Tips for Creating a Functional Personal Knowledge Management System inAcademiaDr. Rebecca Marie Reck, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Rebecca M. Reck is a Teaching Associate Professor of Bioengineering at the University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign. Her research includes alternative grading, entrepreneurial mindset, instructional laboratories, and equity-focused teaching. She teaches biomedical instrumentation, signal processing, and control systems. She earned a Ph.D. in Systems Engineering from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, an M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Iowa State
. Second,engineering researchers can narrowly isolate experimental variables and follow uniform andwidely-accepted laboratory testing standards. The results from engineering research are well-defined and replicable, and proposed models can be validated. Unlike engineering research,EER typically includes a broad range of uncontrollable confounding variables and a lack ofspecificity and guidance in the selection of appropriate theoretical frameworks and analyticalmethods [5,6].Since engineering faculty are often the initiators of EER studies, it is logical that faculty whoalready teach engineering courses and conduct engineering research may be inclined to pursueEER opportunities. Their motivation may be to either complement their ongoing
set within a liberal arts college. The course meets twice a week for eightyminutes with labs integrated into the class time. The intended learning outcomes are: • Develop a conceptual understanding of the properties of soil, water flow through soil, volume changes in soil and soil strength. • Develop problem solving competence for soil phase diagrams; engineering classification of soils; 1-d water flow in soils; flow nets and 2-d seepage; effective stress in soil for hydrostatic, 1-d flow, 2-d flow and capillary rise; stress distributions caused by various loading shapes; amount and rate of consolidation; shear strength of soil; and soil compaction. • Become familiar with laboratory soil tests and field sampling and
• Network Theory II • Instrumentation and Networks Laboratory • System Dynamics and ControlThe following learning support or assessment instruments have incorporated them to variousdegrees. • Homework • In-class exercise • In-class quiz • Midterm • FinalFor assignments, the author might set up the first few steps of a problem with unlimited onlineverification while the later steps do not have any support so that the students will know that theyare on the right track to solve the problem, and they still need to think independently.For quizzes, the problems are often short and direct. It is a quick way to assess the class’sprogress and help the students identify areas to improve.For exams, the students will sign an
variations of “there are none” for that survey item and a sixth leavingthat item blank. Of those who identified a disadvantage, four mentioned reduced ability toparticipate or ask questions. Three additional students praised the use of HyFlex formatting inthe class they attended but noted that the format might not be appropriate for all courses,particularly those that utilize laboratory equipment, advanced courses, or courses involvinghands-on design projects. While this study provides some interesting preliminary evidence of student perceptionsand possible utility of HyFlex course format, it is important to remember that this is a pilot studywith a low sample size. While the 26% completion rate for the survey is not surprising for asurvey in
resourcesavailable to support their work goals. This might include having adequate staff support to allowfaculty to excel in their teaching and scholarship work: The staff critical from every perspective. They support … the advising side; we have laboratory facilities where staff are critical in making sure that the facilities are up and running and information technology that everything is working the way it should. (Female faculty member, doctoral university)On the other hand, tight budgets or some management decisions left faculty feeling frustrated andunable to do their jobs in a way that was satisfying for pursuing their autonomy: So it’s a direct result of having resources cut and creating an almost toxic