courses in 3D modeling, virtual collaboration, 3D data interoperability, and graphics standards and data exchange. Professor Hartman also leads a team in the development and delivery of the online Purdue PLM Certificate Program and in the development of the next-generation manufacturing curriculum at Purdue focusing on manufacturing systems and the holistic product lifecycle.Amy B Mueller, Purdue University, West Lafayette Amy B Mueller is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the College of Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette campus. She received her BS in ME from Purdue University and her MBA in Information Systems from the University of Toledo. Before joining the faculty in 2012, Ms. Mueller spent over 30
engineering investigators focusing on their own personal experience and observations, all related to growing concerns about student motivation and learning. These are summarizedbelow:(a) Even though there exists rich empirical evidence about the success of student-centered approaches (e.g. project-based, inquiry-based, active learning, etc.) in improving student motivation and learning [1-5], most engineering instructors at FAU continue to follow traditional method of unidirectional lecture-based instructions.(b) In an effort to improve teaching and learning, Florida Atlantic University has sponsored more than twenty five Faculty
ASEE 2014 Zone I Conference, April 3-5, 2014, University of Bridgeport, Bridgeport, CT, USA. Reverse Engineering the Volcano CAN BUS Framework for Engine Control Unit Programming Robert A. Hilton Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Hartford West Hartford, Connecticut robert.a.hilton.jr@gmail.com Abstract— The goal of this project is to design a combination project is to create a generic programmer that can be used toISO 9141 (K-Line) and CAN BUS
what will happen. The studentsnext investigate the situation by experimenting with physical hardware that becomes the“authority”, thus forcing students to confront any misconceptions. Although the exact definitionof inquiry-based instruction varies somewhat between different investigators, this study uses thedefining features offered by Laws et al.14 and highlighted by Prince and Vigeant.11 The basiccontent of an IBLA is summarized in Table 1Table 1: Elements of Inquiry Based Learning Activities.(a) Use peer instruction and collaborative work(b) Use activity-based guided-inquiry curricular materials(c) Use a learning cycle beginning with predictions(d) Emphasize conceptual understanding(e) Let the physical world be the authority(f) Evaluate
presented and/or demonstrated.References1. Sabatier, Paul; Senderens, J.-B. “Direct Hydrogenation of Carbon Dioxide in the Presence of Diverse Metal Catalysts,” Comptes Rendus, Vol. 134, 1902, pp. 689-691.2. Cruden, Brett A.; Prabhu, Dinesh; Martinez, Ramon. “Absolute Radiation Measurement in Venus and Mars Entry Conditions.” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 49. No. 6, 2012, pp. 1069-1079.3. Zubrin, Robert; Price, Steve; Mason, Larry; Clark, Larry, “Report on the Construction and Operation of a Mars In-Situ Propellant Production Unit,” 30th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 94-2844, Indianapolis, IN, June 27-29, 1994.4. Zubrin, Robert; Frankie, Brian; Kito, Tomoko, “Mars In-Situ Resource Utilization
ASEE 2014 Zone I Conference, April 3-5, 2014, University of Bridgeport, Bridgeport, CT, USA. A Multidisciplinary Approach to Retrofitting a Vintage Pinball Machine with a Unique Fog Generation System Pinventions Richard Mendoza, Brian Stuckman, Anthony Melkonian, Alexander Gilman School of Engineering Computing & Construction Management Roger Williams University Bristol, RI rmendoza844@g.rwu.edu, bstuckman012@g.rwu.edu, amelkonian017@g.rwu.edu, agilman490@g.rwu.edu Abstract— An
on the document camera) B. In-class exercise completed as a team 10 minutes at each table C. Computer module completion 15 minutes D. Open lab time to work on all 35-40 minutes homework problemsAfter the students completed the in-class exercise, students (voluntarily) came up to the front ofthe room to share with the class how his/her team created the drawing. Also, while each tablewas working on the in-class exercise, the instructor and two Teaching Assistants (TAs) walkedfrom table to table to offer guidance and/or check that the students’ drawings were donecorrectly.Each module typically had four worksheets that represented
. Montfort, D. and S. Brown (2011). Building fundamental engineering knowledge: Identification and classification of engineering students' preconceptions in mechanics of materials. Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. 8. Andrews, B., S. Brown, D. Montfort and M. Dixon (2010). Student understanding of sight distance in geometric design: A beginning line of inquiry to characterize student understanding of transportation engineering. Transportation Research Record 2199: 1-8. 9. Davis, S., S. Brown, R. Borden and D. Montfort (In Press). Embedded knowledge in transportation engineering: Comparisons between engineers and instructors. ASCE Journal of
a program. 2. Ambassadors must be trained to interact with first-year students in non-intimidating Page 24.1308.7 ways. a. Such topics as stereotyping, stereotype threat, and developmental challenges associated with transitions should be discussed. b. Training should focus on communication, interpersonal relations, perspective- taking, and features and characteristics of academic culture. 3. Ambassadors should be adequately compensated for their work. Payment helps to convey expectations of professionalism and ensures ambassadors have time to commit to tasks without distractions
minutes, tosign the consent form and answer questions about their biographical and educationalbackgrounds, as well as their previous research experience. Second, after completing the firstdraft of their research paper, participants were sent a link to the online survey questionnaire withmultiple choice and open-ended questions about their information related challenges (the onlinequestionnaire is included in Appendix B). The third step of the study was the second face-to-face interview, ranging from 45 to 60 minutes, which was conducted after participants completedthe online questionnaire. Interview questions were based on individual participants’ surveyresponses. The second interview was to gather further qualitative data about the challenges
hardwareexperiments.Bibliography1. Besterfield-Sacre, M., Atman, C. J., Shuman, L.J., " Characteristics of freshman engineering students: Models for determining student attrition in engineering," Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 2, 1997, 139-149.2. Grose, T. K., "The 10,000 challenge," ASEE Prism, 2012, 32-35. Page 24.608.93. Johnson, M. J., Sheppard, S. D., "Students entering and exiting the engineering pipeline-identifying key decision points and trends," Frontiers in Education, 2002.4. Olds, B. M., Miller, R. L., "The effect of a first-year integrated engineering curriculum on graduation rates and student satisfaction: A longitudinal
Paper ID #9625A Multidisciplinary Design and Analysis for a Green Roof InstallationDr. Brandon S Field, University of Southern IndianaDr. Kerry S Hall, University of Southern Indiana Kerry Hall teaches civil engineering materials and structural engineering at the University of Southern Indiana, Evansville. Page 24.74.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 A Multidisciplinary Design and Analysis for a Green Roof InstallationAbstractA
Paper ID #10409Helicopters as a Theme in a Machine Design CourseMr. Devin Turner, Marquette University DEVIN TURNER is a senior mechanical engineering student at Marquette University. He is president of the Marquette American Society of Mechanical Engineers and a member of the Student Advisory Board to the Department Chair. His professional experience includes working for the Space Shuttle Program at NASA Kennedy Space Center, UTC Aerospace Systems, Gulfstream Aerospace and Sikorsky Aircraft. He holds a private pilot license and has training in helicopters as well.Dr. Mark Nagurka, Marquette University MARK NAGURKA, Ph.D
24.638.74. van den Berg-Emons, H. J. G., Saris, W. H. M., de Barbanson, D. C., Westerterp, K. R., Huson, A., & van Baak, M. A. (1995). Daily physical activity of schoolchildren with spastic diplegia and of healthy control subjects. The Journal of Pediatrics, 127(4), 578–584.5. Betker, A. L., Szturm, T., Moussavi, Z. K., & Nett, C. (2006). Video game–based exercises for balance rehabilitation: A single-subject design. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87(8), 1141– 1149.6. Bjornson, K. F., Belza, B., Kartin, D., Logsdon, R., & McLaughlin, J. F. (2007). Ambulatory physical activity performance in youth with cerebral palsy and youth who are developing typically. Physical Therapy, 87(3
PollEverywhere and its impact on engagement. Thepurpose of the present study is to address this gap in the literature.III. MethodsDuring the fall semester of 2013, a pilot study was conducted in an introductory computingcourse for non-computer science majors. The purpose of this study is to investigate the influenceof PollEverywhere on student attendance and engagement with the course material in anintroductory computer science large lecture classroom (n = 291).PollEverywhere was used on a weekly basis within the lecture portion of the course. Examples ofthe polling questions include: (a) “What was the first product you purchased online?”[Open-ended], (b) “What year was the first email sent?” [Multiple choice], (c) “On a scale of 1 to 5 –how am I
in STEM Education with a focus on Engineering Education within the Department of Teaching and Learning at Ohio State. He studies topics including but not limited to cognitive development, learning, teaching, and the social contexts within which they occur. He is an experienced Graduate Teaching Associate with the First-Year Engineering Program. He is also currently the Outreach Chair of the OSU American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) Student Chapter. His research interests include: (a) technology, (b) diversity and inclusion, and (c) retention and success, with a particular focus on students in STEM fields. To contact Leroy, e-mail long.914@osu.edu.Mr. Michael Steven Williams, The Ohio State University
formulate it”, (b) “solutions to wicked problems are not computable throughoptimization calculations”, (c) problems are non-repeatable, and (d) wicked problems areaddressed in an open-ended temporal space (p. 133).2 Because wicked problems are by definitionnever solved, we discuss ‘responses’ rather than ‘solutions’ in this paper.Traditional examples of wicked problems include social issues such as homelessness or K-12education in the U.S. Most people would agree that a problem exists in these areas, but theappropriate response to that problem shows a large variation depending on individual values (e.g.charter schools, merit pay, increased public funding). Many challenges within the engineering
1989 from Westmoreland County Community College, the B. S. in Mechanical Engineering Technology in 1991 from Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, and the M. S. in Manufacturing Systems Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh in 1998. Mr. Nitterright is a senior member of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers SME, and a member of the American Society for Engineering Education ASEE . Fred Nitterright began his career as a machinist at Elliott Support Services in Donora, Pennsylvania in 1986. He was employed as a computer-aided draftsman at Powerex, Inc, a project engineering at Stanko Products, a process engineer at Ami-Doduco, Inc., and a project engineer and team leader at Classic Industries, Inc., in
satisfactory. We also observed that students' learningbehaviors are slightly different in some instances between the on-campus sections and the on-line sections. We believe that some observations call for further investigations, which mayprovide insights for developing more effective learning tools, especially for online learning.Bibliography1. J. T. Bushberg, J. A. Seibert, E. M. Leidholdt, and J. Boone, Essential Physics of Medical Imaging (2nd Ed),Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002.2. A. Louie, J. Izatt, and K. Ferrara, “Biomedical Imaging Graduate Education Programs: Imaging Curricula andImaging Courses”, the Whitaker Foundation Biomedical Engineering Education Summit, 2005,http://www.whitaker.org/academic/wrapup.html.3. C. B. Paschal, “The
exhibitedcommon characteristics such as not being calculus-ready. These general characteristics of theincoming freshmen are captured through a survey instrument. The data collected from the surveyare used as a benchmark and comparison tool to assess the efficacy of the cohort program in thesubsequent semesters.The following survey instruments were developed based on the objectives of the cohort: a) Student demographic survey instrument, used to collect the background details of the incoming freshmen registered in the STEM courses. b) Cohort experience survey instrument, used to collect the students’ experiences and their goalsThe survey instruments, included in the appendix, are distributed to the students in the first year
among the raters more closely, one of the reports was read by all of the SMEs.Finally, each report assignment was organized such that the SMEs did not read the same projectsin the same order. The distribution of reports is illustrated in Table 4. Table 4: Assignment of Reports to SMEs [NOTE: All identifying information was removed from each report prior its distribution] Team # SME 1 SME 2 SME 3 SME 4 SME 5 SME 6 SME 7 A 1 1 1 B 1 1 1 C 1 1 1
Know a. Systematic student evaluations of classroom teaching Proceedings of the 2014 American Society for Engineering Education Zone IV Conference Copyright © 2014, American Society for Engineering Education 225 b. Peer review of classroom teaching c. Peer review of syllabi, examinations, and other materials d. Self-evaluation or personal statement e. Evidence of student achievement f. Awards and/or formal recognition g. Participation in professional development activities h. Alumni opinions i. Other (please specify) 4. Regarding
Texas, ArlingtonProf. Stephen P Mattingly, University of Texas, ArlingtonZiaur Rahman, The University of Texas at Arlington Ziaur Rahman received his Bachelor of Science (B. Sc.) degree in Civil Engineering from Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology, Dhaka, in June 2007. After completing his Bachelor degree, he started his graduate studies in Civil Engineering at The University of Texas at Arlington in August 2008. He completed his Masters of Engineering (M. Eng.) degree under the supervision of Dr. Siamak Ardekani. He continued his graduate studies as a Ph. D. student under the supervision of Dr. Stephen Mattingly in Fall 2010. The author’s research interests include Incident Management, Operations and
achieving the course learning outcomes is trackedand monitored throughout the duration of a course using a Standards Achievement Report(SAR), shown in Appendix A. This report is used to provide a proficiency score andcomplementary feedback throughout the semester regarding the individual’s learning anddevelopment. Rubrics are employed as a guideline for the instructor to assess studentdevelopment toward achieving course learning outcomes relevant to particular student work.Student final course grades (i.e., A, B, C, etc.) are then determined based on their progresstowards achieving the course learning outcomes according to an established grading policy (seeAppendix A). This approach varies from the traditional approach of simply assigning scores
society. He also places thisunderstanding in the context of ABET criterion (b), “an ability to design and conductexperiments, analyze and interpret data” [6, p. 2], in that such ability is part of the scientificmethod, which has its foundations in the philosophy of science, and which together alsoconstitute one of the primary components of the course design for IDM and SMR.Splitt [7] interprets the demand on engineers as the “solution of problems involving humanvalues, attitudes, and behavior, as well as the interrelationships and dynamics of social, political,environmental, and economic systems on a global basis” [7, p. 182], restated in the conclusion interms of “problems involving … world cultures, religions, ethics, and economics” and
able to meet the demands of a economy increasingly globalized.To this end, the IE Department emphasize practical or experiencial learning throughout thecurriculum. For instance, the IE Department have implemented a number of changes in theundergraduate manufacturing courses that are linked and transfered to consecutive classes inorder to provide gainful hands on activities (IE 217, IE 152, IE 375, IE 467 and IE 478). Thisintegrative approach has helped to introdue a greater focus on injection molding, CAD/CAM andsimulation. As a consequence, these courses have reach a better integration and the enhancementof industry experience among IE graduates.II. Educational Model: B-Ready in EngineeringThe particular nature of industrial engineering
represented “StronglyAgree”. Lower numbers indicated a negative view towards science; whereas, higher numbersindicated a positive view towards science. The students were asked a list of questions from three categories to measure their interestin science: general interest, career interest, and enjoyment which listed in Appendix B. All thestudents displayed some positive levels interest in science both before and after the program, Page 24.63.10with their average median scores of 4.484, 4.584, and 4.954 in the three interests in science,respectively (general interest, career, interest, and enjoyment). In the REU program’s end survey, a
AmericanSociety for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT., June 2004. Page 24.220.97. Moor, S., Keyser, D., and Piergiovanni, P., “Design-Build-Test: Flexible Process Control Kits forthe Classroom,” ASEE Conference Proceedings (2003).8. Bequette, B.W., Aufderheide, B., Prasad, V., and Puerta, F., “A Process Control Experiment Designed for aStudio Course”, AIChE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, CA, November 2000.9. Smith, C.A., Corripio, A.B., Principles and Practice of Automatic Process Control, Second Edition, p. 566(1997
. Table 1: Engineering Economy Case Study Topics Engineering Economy Case Study Topics PART A (100 Points) PART B (100 Points) Roth IRA Investment Portfolio (Stocks/ Metals) Traditional IRA Financial Statement Analysis (Apple Inc.) 401k BondsIn part A of the case study, the students worked on both qualitative and quantitative (calculationbased) questions regarding retirement planning (i.e., traditional IRA, Roth IRA, and 401 (k)) andbond investing. In part B of the case study, the advisers helped the students to complete an indepth financial statement analysis on Apple, Inc. and also monitored stock and precious
to together develop a sharedunderstanding of and solution for an ill-structured problem.4 Teachers are redefined as coacheshelping students work toward a set of possible open-ended solutions, and students take someownership of their own learning through reflection. Typically, students learn about team skills inaddition to the course content. Engeström5 identified three stages characteristic of collaborativelearning. In his view, for learning to be truly collaborative, students must (a) work towards ashared problem definition, (b) cooperate to solve the problem, and (c) then engage in reflectivecommunication, reconceptualizing the process. Similarly, Johnson et al.6 argue that there arefive basic elements critical for cooperative work to be