Paper ID #20079Measuring the Factors Associated with Student Persistence in the Washing-ton State STARS ProgramMs. Katherine C Tetrick, Washington State University Katherine directs the STARS program at Washington State University. She obtained her bachelors in mathematical sciences from Montana Tech of the University of Montana in 2013 and her masters in mathematics with a teaching emphasis from Washington State University in 2015.Dr. John B. Schneider, Washington State University John Schneider is an associate professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) and the Associate Dean for
engineering coursework and the design process of undergraduate students in project-based courses.Dr. Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of the U.S. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). http
related to that lesson or previous unit lessons. The Unit 2 Lesson6 Class Activity handout is shown in Appendix B. If the instructor felt that a specific student wasnot working productively during class, they could lower the class activity score for that day, andstudents were warned of this. The instructor had to warn a few students, but never had to alter aclass activity score.3.5 CALC-II-2TThree changes were made to CALC-II-2T: 1) the number of semester exams was reduced byalmost 50%, and 2) the instructor switched to an online system for administering RATs and 3) ateam component was added to the RATs.The number of semester exams was reduced because the instructor saw that each day most of thestudents were fully engaged with trying to
Lecture Award from the Computers in Education Division of ASEE (1998, 2005, and 2010), and the Brigadier General Roland E. Thomas Award for outstanding contribution to cadet education (both 1992 and 1993) at the U.S. Air Force Academy. He is an active ABET evaluator and an NCEES PE exam committee member.Dr. Thad B. Welch, Boise State University Thad B. Welch, Ph.D., P.E. received the B.E.E., M.S.E.E., E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Postgraduate School, and the University of Colorado in 1979, 1989, 1989, and 1997, respectively. He was commissioned in the U.S. Navy in 1979 and has been assigned to three submarines and a submarine repair tender. He has
Paper ID #19676Elementary School Use of the Sidekick Basic Kit for TI LaunchPadTMMs. Tara N. Kimmey 5th grade teacher in Manassas, Virginia. She earned her Bachelor’s of Science in Liberal Studies from Longwood University in 2011 with a concentration in Elementary Education. She then went on to earn her Master’s of Science in Curriculum and Instruction in Special Education K-12 in 2012.Dr. Thad B. Welch, Boise State University Thad B. Welch, Ph.D., P.E. received the B.E.E., M.S.E.E., E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Postgraduate School, and the University of
Paper ID #18251Material Testing as an Opportunity for International Collaboration and Un-dergraduate ResearchDr. James B. Pocock, U.S. Air Force Academy James Pocock is a professor in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the United States Air Force Academy. He spent the 2016-2017 academic year on sabbatical with Engineering Ministries International as a research specialist in their Uganda field office. His paper is based on some of his research collaborations during his sabbatical.Lt. Col. Anthony Barrett, U.S. Air Force Academy Lt Col Barrett is the Deputy Department Head and Senior Military Faculty in
Paper ID #17677Turbocharge General Education Requirements with Science of External andInternal ExcellenceDr. Pradeep B. Deshpande, University of Louisville and President, Six Sigma and Advanced Controls, Inc. Pradeep B. Deshpande is Professor Emeritus and a Former Chair of the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Louisville. He served on the ChE faculty there for thirty-three years (1975 – 2008). Post retirement, he has continued his research into the pursuit of perfection in human endeavors and teaching and consulting in advanced process control and six sigma. He is an author or co-author of more than
for the College of Technology, a seamless pathway in technology and engineering from all 12 public community colleges to 8 public and private universities. Dr. Wosczyna-Birch has expertise with both the recruitment and persistence of under represented populations, especially women, to pursue ca- reers in engineering and technological disciplines. She has presented at numerous conferences throughout the United States and was an invited speaker at the international Gender Summit in Belgium in 2016.Mrs. Charlotte B. Forrest, Charlotte B. Forrest currently serves as Project Manager and Co-Principal Investigator for the National Science Foundation (NSF), Advanced Technological Education (ATE) funded program-Mentor-Connect
characteristics of the program has the potential to be transportable toother institutions.AcknowledgmentThe authors gratefully acknowledge support of this work by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No. 1524527.References1. Freeman, S., Eddya, S. L., McDonough, M., Michelle, K., Smith, B., Okoroafora, N., Jordta, H., and Wenderotha, M. P., (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics, PNAS, 111, 23-30.2. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.3. Krause, S., Baker, D., Carberry, A., Alford, T., T., Ankeny, C., Brooks, B.J
Paper ID #19872Elementary Student Engagement with Digital Engineering Notebook Cards(Fundamental)Kristen B. Wendell Ph.D., Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of
Engineering. Dr. Callahan received her Ph.D. in Materials Science, M.S. in Metallurgy, and B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Connecticut. Her educational research interests include leadership, institutional change, engineering and STEM retention, and engineering, materials science, and mathematics education.Ms. Jocelyn B. S. Cullers, Boise State University Jocelyn B. S. Cullers is a Data Analyst at the Institute for STEM & Diversity Initiatives at Boise State University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Calculus Reform – Increasing STEM Retention and Post-Requisite Course Success While Closing the Retention Gap for Women and
, even though theseare rigorous courses for science, engineering, and mathematics majors, and most of the studentsare excellent).In the late 1960s, Columbia University had three distinct calculus sequences: Calculus SequenceA, supposedly the most computational and easiest; Calculus Sequence B, more theoretical andharder (primarily for engineers and physics majors); and Calculus Sequence C, for the mostinterested and talented students. As a physics major, I was in the calculus sequence B.In spite of (or maybe because of) the comments on my mathematics work, I eventually obtainedmy Ph.D. in mathematics. After a total of over thirty years of teaching calculus, and inobservance of my fiftieth year anniversary of having taken my first calculus course
Paper ID #18383Factors Related to Faculty Views Toward Undergraduate Engineering EthicsEducationMr. Andrew Katz, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Andrew Katz is a graduate student in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. He holds a B.S. in chemical engineering from Tulane University and M.Eng. in environmental engineering from Texas A&M University. Prior to beginning his studies at Virginia Tech he taught physics at a high school in Dallas, TX.Dr. David B. Knight, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University David Knight is an Assistant Professor and Director of
Paper ID #19818Strategies for Successfully Increasing Engineering Study Abroad Participa-tionDr. Cynthia B. Paschal, Vanderbilt University Dr. Paschal is associate dean of the Vanderbilt University School of Engineering and is a faculty member in the department of biomedical engineering. Her many areas of responsibility for the school include study abroad and international partnerships as well as industry relations. She has research experience in medical imaging and engineering education. Paschal earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in nu- clear engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the doctor
Paper ID #18531Investigating the Effect of Temperature in RFID TechnologyDr. Tae-Hoon Kim, Purdue University NorthwestDr. Lash B. Mapa, Purdue University Northwest Lash Mapa is a Professor in Industrial/Mechanical Engineering Technology at Purdue University Calumet (PUC). His undergraduate and graduate degrees are in Chemical Engineering. He has several years’ experience as a Chemical Engineer, Process and Project manager with European and U.S. manufacturing organizations. Currently, he is involved in the MS Technology program at PUC and has managed over thirty lean six sigma projects with manufacturing, service industry
Institute of Technology, 550 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02115Mr. Herb ConnorsProf. Vitaliy Victorovich Saykin, Wentworth Institute of TechnologyMr. Mohammed Khalid Alhuwayrini, c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 The Sagan Research Project for Exploring Statistical Parameters of Typical Mechanical PropertiesAbstractThe involvement of undergraduate students in research is very important for engineeringeducation. Research can not only significantly enhance student engagement and enrich studentlearning experience, but it is also useful as a tool to enhance undergraduate engineeringeducation. However, it is a big challenge for a small teaching institution to do this because
Paper ID #17634Design and Implementation of an Aspirational Ethics Laboratory CourseDr. Timothy A. Doughty, University of Portland Dr. Timothy A. Doughty received his BS and MS from Washington State University in Mechanical and Materials Engineering and his Ph. D. from Purdue University. He has taught at Purdue, Smith College, and is now an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Portland. From 2009 to 2011 he served as a Faculty Scholar with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories and has served as the Dundon-Berchtold Fellow of Ethics for the Donald. P. Shiley School of Engineering. His
primarily intended for students. However, it contains some useful resource information forinstructors who would potentially adopt this activity for a course with laboratory experiments, orfor a classroom demonstration conducted during a lecture session. This guide should be perusedat this stage of the article before proceeding with the discussions continued below.Sample Data Collected from a Laboratory SessionThe tables provided below contain sample data collected during a laboratory session along withvalues obtained or predicted for the period P and frequency ωn over a duration of n oscillatorycycles. This data corresponds to an aluminum half disk for which R = 1.875 in and b = 1.375 in .Table 1. Sample Data Collected for Half-Disk Oscillation
. Academic performance for both the groups was done using six assignments ten quizzesand three tests during the semester. The final grade was a weighted average of the assignments,quizzes, and tests. The assignments were worth 30 percent, the quizzes were worth 10 percent, andthe tests were worth 60 percent of the total. Total numerical grade obtained by a student wasconverted to letter grade using the system shown in Table 1.Table 1: Grading system Numerical grade in percentage Letter grade 90 -100 A 80-89 B 70-79
asked in the CT was different from the one in the first attempt. While CTs in general followed the same format, some competencies were evaluated as in-class quizzes. From Table I, Electrical Concept Application and Multimeter Skill were evaluated as in-class quizzes. Quizzes were not a. Checking if ‘x’ is less than ‘y’ b. Assign a value of 30 to variable p provided with
an Arduino microcontroller for a class project, not including ME 100L? 7a) If you answered “Yes” to question 7, were you required to Arduino or did you choose to use Arduino on your own?8) Have you used an Arduino microcontroller for a project unrelated to schoolwork? 8a) If you answered “Yes” to question 8, briefly describe the project below.9) How confident are you in using Arduino? (circle one) a) very confident b) somewhat confident c) neither confident or unconfident d) somewhat unconfident e) very unconfident f) I have never used Arduino10) How beneficial was ME 100L for your other mechanical engineering courses? (circle one) a) very beneficial
∆t 2 − DS [yi +1, j - 2yi, j + yi-1, j - yi +1, j-1 + 2yi, j-1 - yi-1, j-1 ]= 0 ∆x 2 ∆t or [ ] [ ] y i, j+1 = - c y i + 2, j + y i - 2, j + b y i +1, j + y i -1, j + a y i, j - y i, j-1 [ + d y i +1, j - 2 y i, j + y i -1, j - y i +1, j-1 + 2 y i, j-1 - y i -1, j-1 ] (5) 6EI∆t 2 4EI∆t 2 EI∆t 2
feedback mechanisms. (5) Allow the process to evolve (curriculum and/or ABET Criteria change). (6) Provide clear instructions to faculty members using the system.Objectives (1) Identify, efficiently collect, and analyze data that allows us to clearly assess the degree to which students attain each ABET Student Outcome (SO). (B) Collect and analyze data that allow us to determine that Student Outcomes (SOs) associated with courses are being targeted by assignments in those courses, (C) Use information from both (A) and (B) above to improve the curriculum, (D) Standardize the data analysis and feedback processes. (E) Allow the system to evolve in order to make it more efficient, simpler, more
” longof two. Each team is given a computer and is asked to submit string. They are also offered lab tools: a scissors, a 1/8” hole-the weekly deliverable after the lab. One graduate teaching punch, and a rivet gun as shown in Fig. 3 (B).First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference August 6 – 8, 2017, Daytona Beach, FL W1A-2 The properties of the straws are pointed out in the students are instructed to measure twice and cut once. Theylecture. Specifically, straws can tolerate high tension but very are also repeatedly reminded to count the number of memberslittle compression. In the lab, the
facilitateimproved student learning.The performance of the students in the flipped classroom format was comparable to previoustraditional format offerings. In 2015, the final student average was a B+, and the 2016 finalstudent average was between B/B+. This compares well to the previous 2014 average of a Bgrade. However, it should be noted that the grade breakdown varied between each offering: • In 2014: 50% final exam, 30% midterm exam, and 20% lab assignments. • In 2015: 40% final exam, no midterm exam, 15% quizzes, and 45% lab/project assignments. • In 2016: 40% final exam, 25% midterm exam, 5% quizzes, and 30% lab/project assignments.The grade breakdown was changed based on 2015 implementation results. The lack of
homework (significance at p < 0.05),and a Friedman ANOVA was used to compare student rankings with a post-hoc WilcoxonSigned Rank test using Bonferroni correction (significance at p < 0.005). Correlations betweenquestion scores were made using Kendall’s Tau-b. Of the 12 questions on the questionnaire, 3were significantly different between the MEA and homework. Specifically, students found theMEA to be more frustrating, had more choice in how to complete the MEA, and felt the MEAbetter related to their career goals. When ranking items, competence, purpose, and extrinsicmotivation were ranked significantly higher compared to community and autonomy. Correlationsindicated that students enjoyed the project more when they learned the content (τ
. (2014a) Education: Embed social awareness in science curricula. Nature 505, 477–478.Cech, E.A. (2014b). Culture of Disengagement in Engineering Education? Science Technology Human Values. 39(1) 42-72.Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051-1057.Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A.M., Brown, E.R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influence attraction to STEM careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 902
to measure what is the impact of the students receiving training andthe model, against the ones that didn’t. In addition, we will use a mixed methods approach tocollect data qualitatively. An interview protocol is being developed based on the preliminaryresults of this survey in order to better capture students’ experiences of receiving teamworktraining while developing a complex design project.ReferencesAdams, S., & Ruiz, B. (2004). A Framework for Team Training in the Classroom. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), 181-195.Adams, S. G., Vena, L. C. S., Ruiz-Ulloa, B. C., & Pereira, F. (2002). A conceptual model for the development and assessment of teamwork. American Society for Engineering
. Paper presented in 2016 ASEE Annual Conference (ed ASEE) (New Orleans, LA, 2016).4 Hatmaker, D. M. Engineering identity: Gender and professional identity negotiation among women engineers. Gender, Work & Organization 20, 382-396 (2013).5 Settles, I. H. & O’Connor, R. C. Incivility at academic conferences: gender differences and the mediating role of climate. Sex Roles 71, 71-82 (2014).6 Gazley, B., Tschirhart, M. & Hager, M. A. Engagement motivations in professional associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43, 39S-60S (2014).7 Fink, A. How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. (Sage Publications, 2012).8 Blair, J., Czaja, R. F. & Blair, E. A. Designing surveys: A
evaluating the impact that forming identity and managing access into makerspaceshas on student collaborative and independent efforts.AcknowledgementsThis work is supported by the National Science Foundation through Award No. DUE 1432107and 1431923. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of National ScienceFoundation.ReferencesBarrett, T., Pizzico, M., Levy, B., Nagel, R. L., Linsey, J. S., Talley, K. G., . . . Newstetter, W. (2015). A Review of University Makerspaces. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Seattle, WA.Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social