memory and a new programming environment15-17. Moreover, it offers a microSD card slot which can add up to 32GB extra storage space. A USB host port and a Linuxoperating system bring allow greater flexibility in expanding the robot‟s capabilities. Forexample, a wireless connection can be achieved through a Wi-Fi dongle instead of a Bluetoothconnection. Consequently, the new LEGO Mindstorms EV3 became a possible choice forupgrading the current lab to a new platform. Currently, most of the online evaluations on the newEV3s come from either technical reviewers18-22 or customers (e.g. parents23). How collegestudents perceive this new device is still unknown. According to the well-known ABETCriterion 3, Student Outcomes k, engineering graduates
Paper ID #49597A YOLO-Based Semi-Automated Labeling Approach to Improve Fault DetectionEfficiency in Railroad VideosDylan Lester, Marshall University Dylan Lester is a third-year Electrical and Computer Engineering student and research assistant at Marshall University, with a research focus on machine learning.Prof. Pingping Zhu, Marshall University Prof. Pingping Zhu is an assistant professor in the Department of Computer Sciences and Electrical Engineering at Marshall University.Dr. Husnu Saner Narman, Marshall University Dr. Husnu S. Narman is an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Sciences and Electrical
errors, in turn, resulted inusers obtaining inaccurate responses. Examples of successful and unsuccessful problem solutionsare included below. Full solutions from ChatGPT are included in Appendix B.• Example problems for which ChatGPT provided correct responses: o Statics ➢ The bending moment on a beam is given by 𝑀 = −4𝑥 3 + 3𝑥 2 − 23𝑥 + 5 N.m, calculate the shear force at 𝑥 = 3 m. (Correct Answer: V = 113 N; ChatGPT answer: 113 units [whatever the units of the bending moment are]) o Dynamics ➢ The position of a particle is given by 𝑠[𝑡] = 𝑡 3 − 12𝑡 2 + 44𝑡 + 11 m, calculate the acceleration value at 𝑡 = 5 s. (Correct Answer: a = 6 m/s2; ChatGPT answer: acceleration at t=5s
easily used by others. complicated for other students. (1) (3) others. (2) Table 5: Rubric for the SBP-Analytica/Design Track Proficient Developing Beginning Organization The project/product is The project/product is not The project/product is not and neat or has fluency. quite neat or has fluency. neat or does not have Visualization Pictures/graphs/annotation Pictures/graphs/annotation fluency. Minimal s are used properly in the s are partially used in the Pictures/graphs/annotation
explanations, opinion, judgment, etc Ind Individual thinking/problem solving. CG Discuss clicker question in groups of 2 or more students WG Working in groups on worksheet activity OG Other assigned group activity, such as responding to instructor question Prd Making a prediction about the outcome of demo or experiment SP Presentation by student(s) TQ Test or quiz W Waiting O Other – explain in comments Instructor is Doing Lec Lecturing RtW Real-time writing on board, doc. projector, etc. Fup Follow-up/feedback on clicker question or activity to entire class PQ Posing non-clicker question to students (non-rhetorical) CQ Asking a clicker question AnQ
the literature. A full exploration of that literature is beyond the scope ofthis paper; however, the following paragraphs report on terminology, benefits of inmateeducation, opportunities for improvements in inmate education, and gaps between what is knownand what is unknown about teaching university-level engineering education to incarceratedstudents.1.1.1 TerminologyThe U. S. correctional system is a collection of correctional institutions, including prisons andjails, whose purpose is to punish for the purposes of rehabilitation, incapacitation, specificdeterrence, general deterrence, and denunciation [1]. In 2019, federal and state prisonsincarcerated more than 1.4 million adults and released more than 600,000 individuals to return totheir
rate for computer science students,”ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 103–106, Jun. 2005, doi: 10.1145/1083431.1083474.[6] K. J. Bunker, L. E. Brown, L. J. Bohmann, G. L. Hein, N. Onder, and R. R. Rebb,“Perceptions and influencers affecting engineering and computer science student persistence,” in2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2013, pp. 1138–1144.[7] B. Burd et al., “The internet of things in undergraduate computer and information scienceeducation: Exploring curricula and pedagogy,” Jul. 2018. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/3293881.3295784.[8] M. Felleisen, R. B. Findler, M. Flatt, and S. Krishnamurthi, “The structure and interpretationof the computer science curriculum,” Journal of Functional Programming, vol. 14, no
-line course structure? 15. Do you consider yourself skilled enough in computer literacy to succeed in an on-line environment? 16. Did you encounter technical problems due to the on-line environment?References[1] M. Abdous and M. Yoshimura, "Learner outcomes and satisfaction: A comparison of live video-streamed instruction, satellite broadcast instruction, and face-to-face instruction," Computers & education, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 733-741, 2010.[2] J. M. Allen and F. Vahid, "Experiences in Developing a Robust Popular Online CS1 Course for the Past 7 Years," in ASEE Annual Conference, 2020.[3] S. F. Shady, "Approaches to teaching a biomaterials
historicallyunderrepresented students. To initiate this pursuit in your classroom, reference Arif et al.’s (2021)Ten simple rules for supporting historically underrepresented students in science. Lastly, exploration of positionality can help facilitators pick content that is relevant to thestudents. In the case of our intervention, the undergraduate students were primarily in their secondyear of college. Due to their current experience level as engineers, we found that most students feltthe questions posed in the workshop pertaining
degrees, either completing multiple degrees atHBCUs or only attaining their undergraduate degree at an HBCU before attending a differenttype of institution for graduate studies. As Crewe [3] further notes, depending on the institutionthat awarded the graduate degree(s), recognition of success may be framed around the alumni’snon-HBCU campus environments rather than how one’s undergraduate HBCU campusexperiences helped lay the foundation for academic achievement. Such narratives areproblematic and speak to the need to further highlight the critical and supportive role HBCUsplay in producing Black STEM professionals. Additionally, there remains a critical gap in theliterature that details the graduate school decision-making process for HBCU
78 Urban Geography Match 2 Mentee Black Male 36 Mechanical Engineering Mentor White Male 69 Mechanical Engineering Match 3 Mentee Black Male 38 Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Mentor White Male 74 Biomedical, Chemical, and Biomolecular Engineering Match 4 Mentee Black Male 31 Mechanical Engineering Mentor White Male 84 Mechanical Engineering Match 5 Mentee Black Male 35 Mechanical Engineering Mentor S. Asian Male 73 Mechanical Engineering Match 6 Mentee Black Male 54 Manufacturing Engineering Technology Mentor White Male 76 Manufacturing
Deep Learning and cloud computing. ● The GPSS team from the World Bank, for providing access to the data sets, expertise in architecture and community outreach, and assistance with the documentation of the overall projects.ReferencesAbadi, M., Barham, P., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Davis, A., Dean, J., Devin, M., Ghemawat, S., Irving, G., Isard, M., Kudlur, M., Levenberg, J., Monga, R., Moore, S., Murray, D. G., Steiner, B., Tucker, P., Vasudevan, V., Warden, P., … Zheng, X. (2016). TensorFlow: A system for large-scale machine learning. 12th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 16), 265–283. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/osdi16/osdi16-abadi.pdfAmazon
study abroad opportunitiesin Mechanics at PUWL and at our fellow engineering institutions both here, and abroad.AcknowledgementsThis study is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under GrantNo. DUE-1525671. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. This workwas conducted with oversight provided by the PUWL Institutional Review Board.References[1] Steif, P. S. and Dantzler, J. A. (2005). A statics concept inventory: Development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 363-371.[2] Vasquez, H., Fuentes, A. A., Kypuros, J. A. and Azarbayejani, M. (2015). Early
., “Engineering by the numbers,” American Society for Engineering Education, Washington D.C., 2017.[4] M. F. Fox, “Institutional Transformation and the Advancement of Women Faculty: The Case of Academic Science and Engineering,” in Higher Education, J. C. Smart, Ed. Springer Netherlands, 2008, pp. 73–103.[5] D. Bilimoria, S. Joy, and X. Liang, “Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness: Lessons of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and engineering,” Hum. Resour. Manage., vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 423–441, Sep. 2008, doi: 10.1002/hrm.20225.[6] S. R. Bird, “Unsettling Universities’ Incongruous, Gendered Bureaucratic Structures: A Case-study Approach,” Gender, Work & Organization
, is beingundertaken in order to provide an `inside out` view of their experience. These interviews will allow usto tell many stories – perhaps more importantly, a story that details the many different things we aredoing in order to produce sustainable change for our many constituents.References[1] C. Hill, C. Corbett, and A. St. Rose, Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, D. C.: American Association of University Women (AAUW), 2010.[2] S. Ceci, W. Williams, and S. Barnett, “Women’s Underrepresentation in Science: Sociocultural and Biological Considerations,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 135, no. 2, pp. 218–261, 2009.[3] J. Hyde, S. Lindberg, M. Linn, and C. Williams, “Gender Similarities
. Surveyresponse data was converted to a 100-point scale such that a response of all 3’s would yield anormalized score of 100% and a response of all 1’s would yield a normalized score of 0% asfollows: 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑦𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒 − 1 𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑦𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = (100%) 2 100% KS0 KS1 Exam 1 KS2 Exam 2 90% 80% 70%Score (Percent) 60% 50% 40
. Students were going to 6th grade (40.2%), 7th grade (31.5%), 8th grade (28.3%) duringthe summer. Additionally, the researchers randomly selected one or two students from eachgroup/table in camp 1 to 4. A total of 22 students presented their groups/tables to conduct in-depth interviews with us on the last day of each camp. Of the 22 interviewees, six were fromcamp 1, seven were from camp 2, five were from camp 3, and four were from camp 4. Allstudents and their guardians were required to sign consent letters.Instruments The instrument used in this study was the Middle/High School Student Attitudes towardSTEM (S-STEM) survey. This instrument was a useful tool in the evaluations of the university’soutreach projects and K-12 STEM initiative [46
traditionalstudents to leave school in their first year; 1) much less likely to earn a degree within five years;2) far more likely to have leave school without returning than their traditional counterparts.Why we need to examine nontraditional student experiences in STEM In the United States, STEM education at all levels remains a significant national priority basedupon concerns ranging from global competitiveness, national security, 21st century workforceneeds, and equal access. In 2018, U.S. science and engineering (S&E) bachelor’s degreescomprised only 10% of the global total, while India and China together produced almost half ofthe world’s S&E bachelor degrees during the same time period. The U.S. demand for graduateswith STEM degrees continues
objective function based on the KPIs and assigned weight (importance) to each criterion. We used twoseparate Likert scales with scores between 1 to 10 to determine the weights and assess the performancelevel, respectively, of each criterion through teacher surveys. We conducted the surveys at the end of eachweek (iteration), determined the objective function value, analyzed the outcomes, and took necessaryactions to enhance the objective function value in the next iteration(s). Here, the objective function valuecomputed in an iteration indicates the overall performance of that iteration. For the selected KPIs, weights,and scales, the maximum possible objective function value was 1,200. We assume that the objectivefunction value is the targeted
al., [11]) is Pulakos et al.’s taxonomy, which includes: solving problemscreatively; dealing with uncertain or unpredictable work situations; learning new worktasks/technology/procedures; interpersonal adaptability; cultural adaptability; physically-orientedadaptability; handling workplace stress; and handling emergencies/crisis situations [34]. There isno published instrument associated with this taxonomy; those authors taking it up have createdprocedures and instruments based on their own operationalization of the dimensions. Notably,this taxonomy focuses explicitly on observed behaviors, rather than on the metacognitive orcognitive skills and abilities identified in the rest of the literature, as being central to adaptiveexpertise, making
Systems Engineering Failures Finding(s) Causal Action Discussion/Explanation The mine operator Pike River Mine explosion: “The original mine plan specified decided to change an two main fans located on the mountainside next to a ventilation aspect of the ventilation shaft. Two planning changes were made. Pike decided to relocate system design
findings, Barba-S´anchez et al. [33] identified Financial Motivation as one of the leadingmotivational factors for industrial and computer engineering students. They further elaborate thatmoney is seen as a synonym for well-being, and reflects safety and a good standard of living forthe society. Having the power to act seems to be a strong factor for engineering graduates. Thegraduates value the power to make their own decisions but also to take responsibility. Previousresearch from Barba-S´anchez (2012)[12] identified ”do things my way” as one of the factors, rep-resenting the possession and execution of power. The participants talked about the reputation ofstarting a company and could appreciate additional visibility. A similar factor has been
resource-rich contexts.AcknowledgementsThis study is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under GrantNo. 1525671. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. This workwas conducted with oversight provided by the PUWL Institutional Review Board.References:[1] Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.[2] Gurmak, S., & Glenn, H. (2014). Barriers and enablers to adoption and diffusion of eLearning : A systematic review of the literature – a need for an integrative approach
to theirdiscussions. If electronic response units are used, the data should be reviewed in real-time. Basedon all of these observations, the instructor should work to address and clarify any misconceptionsand sources of confusion that were identified before moving on. Page 26.150.74.0 The Interactive Laboratories4.1 Peer Interactive Laboratory Summary ListTable 1 lists the interactive laboratories that have been developed for the engineering physics –mechanics course taught by the author. It also lists which class period(s) the activity occurs in.Note that at the author’s institution the course has 41 meeting periods, three of which are
advising quality) 12 Connection and sense of belonging to college Literature review 13 Opportunity to be independent Focus group Negative outcomes Participation in out-of-class activities does not always lead to positive outcomes. The review ofliteratures revealed that there are a number of unintended consequences or negative outcomesassociated with students’ involvement in out-of-class activities. Further, the researchers foundthat there are a number of factors that act as barriers to students from getting involved in certainout-of-class activities. To the best of our knowledge, no such survey(s) exist that assess studentson those negative
beunderstood or experienced [9]. The interpreter of the phenomenon is the participant, not theresearcher. In order to solicit a variety of experiences and to allow all relevant voices to be heard[10] , a highly varied sampling of participants is necessary. With a well-designed semi-structuredinterview, the participant can unveil the environment, the products, and the processes of theirprofessional experiences. The creation of hierarchical categories as part of the analysis mayuncover the development of mastery of the skill(s) under investigation. While there has been work that shows a one-axis increase of awareness or mastery of acertain phenomenon, there is an increasing use of phenomenography where the results oroutcomes are expressed in