surfacemicromaching techniques.The last two challenges are works in progress. While we have worked to implement ourmicrofabrication processes using readily accessible laboratory equipment, several piecesof equipment are still needed. The notable exceptions have been the design of a spincoater (for deposition of photoresist), and a mask aligner (for exposure of the photoresistduring photolithography), amenable to construction Chile. Finally, much effort has goneinto finding sources of processing supplies for our Chilean operation, in particularsources for photoresist and developer. This paper describes the results of our efforts toovercome these four challenges.ApproachIn order to educate Chilean student in MEMS fabrication techniques, we began bydeveloping
requiredto take a materials science course. The course includes a laboratory component to help studentsgain hands-on experiences in materials testing. In traditional experiments, students are providedwith detailed instructions for completing the procedure, use equipment that has already been setup, and perform tests on samples that have already been prepared. This paper describes a self-designed experiment in which students handle almost everything on their own, includingmaterial selection, sample preparation, procedure design, test setup, data collection, and resultanalysis. Prior to undertaking the self-designed experiment, students have finished severalregular experiments such as material microstructure observation, Charpy test and tensile test
2. Sustainable Development 3. Campus and Laboratory toursTuesday, May 26 Field Trip to Volvo Group Headquarters, Gothenburg 1. Efficient transport systems 2. Safety & Environment Volvo truck factory tour in TuveWednesday, May 27 Train to Oslo; Free time in Oslo; Train to TrondheimThursday, May 28 Field trip to TEV Energivek; Trondheim Energi – Statkraft Field trip to Leirfossen Hydroelectric Energy Plant Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) 1. Carbon Sequestration 2. Renewable Energy Center 3. Master of
Student W ould like to learn more Develop additional lab Implement a testing lab Questionnaire through hands-on work to measure the that students conduct that laboratory experiences changes in mechanical will measure hardness and that complements the properties due to heat toughness of various heat theory taught in class treatment and tempering treat conditions of 4140 processes of 4140 steel steel. Have students plot
International Liquid Crystal Society Multimedia Prize. In 2003, he received a NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship to research NEMS/MEMS adaptive optics in the Microde- vices Laboratory at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Dr. Fontecchio received his Ph.D. in Physics from Brown University in 2002. He has authored more than 75 peer-reviewed publications.Eli Fromm, Ph.D., Drexel University (Eng.) Eli Fromm is the Roy A. Brothers University Professor, professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering and director of the Center for Educational Research in the College of Engineering of Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA. After his BSEE he was employment with General Electric and E.I. DuPont. He sub- sequently pursued graduate studies
discussedwhat they would like bioengineering undergraduates to know regarding problem solving,laboratory techniques, and modeling.ResultsThe major charges from industry regarding what bioengineering programs should teach theirstudents include: 1) oral presentation, team work, and communication skills, 2) stringent labdocumentation practices, 3) fundamentals of the FDA regulatory process, and 4) statisticalanalysis techniques.Assessing the New Curriculum: Current Student FeedbackFeedback sessions from 2009 and 2010 involving current seniors, already described, were usedto obtain qualitative data regarding student satisfaction with specific proposed curriculumchanges. A consensus was reached that the addition of a second Capstone option, where
he established an optical communi- cations laboratory for development and characterization of optical components, systems, and protocols for high-performance avionics data networks. Dr. Rosen is currently an assistant clinical professor at Drexel University, where he is responsible for developing and teaching courses in microprocessors, microcon- trollers, and FPGAs. Dr. Rosen has carried out research sponsored by the National Security Agency, National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, DARPA, the Office of Naval Research, and the Missile Defense Agency. Dr. Rosen is the author or coauthor of over 50 publications and conference proceedings and the holder of five U.S
K, A K K, A K, A K, A K K, A continuous improvement. Means the student is required to pass written quizzes orK exams. Refers to an application in which a student is evaluated onA the success and quality of a project, laboratory activity, written report of an experiment etc. Symbolizes synthesis or higher level of achievement whereS a student is required to solve a new problem with little or no help from the instructor.Figure 2. An example of the curriculum map.Identifying Assessment Measures and the Source of AssessmentAssessment measures were identified for each performance criteria. According to Rogers, anassessment method refers to
ElectronicsII. The longer semester in China did permit inclusion of some topics from Electronics II in thiscourse specifically feedback, active filters, and frequency response of transistors. Electronics Icovers diodes, OpAmps, transistors, transistor amplifiers, and multiple transistor circuitsincuding amplifiers, current sources, and differential amplifiers.The grading was done using the U.S. instructor‟s method of including homework (15%), twomidterm exams (20% each), a final exam (35%), and the laboratory (10%). In this university, thefinal exam supposed to be at least 60% of the final grade, there is only one midterm, andhomework counts for little. In the U.S., this laboratory is a part of the course and is usuallytaught by the same instructor. In
efforts to use the web-conferencing software Elluminate-Live! for deliveringtutorials, discussion classes, and even laboratory practicals to groups of students studyingengineering off-campus, including students posted overseas. Examples are given from twodisciplines. We then compare student feedback across all engineering subjects over the years2012-2013. Our results show that students welcome web-conferencing as a very effectivemeans to deliver classes to distance students and improve their learning experience.introductionIn recent years there has been an increasing interest in delivering engineering courses throughnon-traditional means, such as by distance, on-line, flexible, and combinations/blends oflocated and on-line learning environments.1
Manufacturing and Automation Laboratory (MAL) at Stony Brook, he conducts research in the areas of Microsystems and MEMS, intelligent fault detection and diagnosis, robotics, intelligent contact interface, stiffness control, wafer manufacturing, and wafer slicing using wiresaw. Prof. Kao served as an Associate Editor of the IEEE Transaction of Robotics and Automation as well as the International.Dr. Yacov A. Shamash, Stony Brook University Dr. Shamash is Vice President for Economic Development and the Dean of the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Stony Brook University. As Vice President, Dr. Shamash supervises the University’s three incubators, two New York State Centers for Advanced Technology, the Center of
given way to an increasedlocal innovative policy and entrepreneurial climate that have generated significantcomputer, telecommunications and more recently, pharmaceutical and biotechnologyoutputs.While the it is unclear as to whether it is the local state governments or the privateentrepreneurs who have been more relevant to this process, most people agree that theabove two actors, large and small firms, universities and government laboratories have allhad a part to play.It has been advocated since long ago that government, private sector, universities andresearch institutions are important parts of a larger system of knowledge and interactionsthat allow diverse actors with varied strengths to come together around common broadgoals for
to introduce ergo-nomic programs as a way to increase efficiency and decrease the costs of injuries.Courses on ergonomics are still relatively rare in manufacturing programs, and there does notseem to be agreement as to how and where such a course should be taught. Some programsteach ergonomics at the graduate level,1 while other programs are willing to invest more re-sources into ergonomics so that they can include multiple courses, laboratories, and even minorsin ergonomics and safety.2-4 With the MESH course the ET Department at WWU has taken theapproach that all students in MET should be introduced to ergonomics, but there is also a realiza-tion that resources are very limited, so a course sequence or laboratory is not possible. As a re
regional campus of Purdue Universitylocated in northwest Indiana. It is primarily a commuter campus, and serves justover 9,000 students. PUC started a program in Computer Graphics Technology(CGT) in the Fall 2000 semester. The course curriculum development wasinfluenced by existing successful course offerings within the Purdue system, bynationally known universities, and by regional job demands, as well asinternational considerations. Figures 1 and 2 show the growth in credit hours andthe increase in students in the CGT program between 2001 and 2004. In the spaceof a few years, laboratories were built, faculty hired, and many new coursesdeveloped to meet this demand. In the face of all this growth, and the number ofchanges that were occurring
todisplay evidence of student work that can be used to assess that outcome. For example, thefollowing are the key courses for outcome (g) of the ME program: Page 9.976.3 Outcome (g) Graduates will have the ability to communicate effectively MAE 244 – Dynamics and Strength Laboratory: In this one-credit-hour sophomore-level course, students are required to write and submit laboratory reports for each one of the eight experiments carried out in this class. While grading the reports, the instructor provides feedback to the students and a steady improvement in written communication is expected. MAE 322 – Thermal
Session #1526 Design and Development of a New Wireless Cell Site for Powertel: A Multimedia Case Study Chetan S. Sankar, Department of Management P.K. Raju, Department of Mechanical Engineering Auburn University Abstract The Laboratory for Innovative Technology and Engineering Education (LITEE) atAuburn University develops multimedia case studies that bring real-world issues intoclassrooms. These case studies are currently being used at different universities in order to showthe
) exam. This certification is a valued and attractive electiveaddition to the Computer Engineering Technology (CET) program. The four CCNA courses areoffered in an accelerated format complete with extensive laboratory experience. In order tofacilitate this program, a new computer networking laboratory was created complete withswitches, routers, and a full array of test equipment. In order to start this academy instructors hadto be trained and certified by Cisco. This included completing an extensive set of instructors’courses along with passing Cisco’s instructor exam. Taking charge of this process and beginningthis new academy was a time consuming, demanding and yet very gratifying experience.Planning for a new program in electrical engineering
Using Problem Solving Preferences to Promote Teaming in a Mechanical Systems Design Course James M. Widmann California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CAAbstract At California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, MechanicalEngineering students are required to take a course in Mechanical Systems Design. It is ajunior level course where students learn the fundamentals of machine components (gears,bearings, screws, etc); furthermore, the students gain experience in the integration ofthese components into complex Mechanical Systems during a weekly 3-hr laboratory.During the laboratory portion
Page 10.346.1students.Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference * Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Education As shrinking budgets cause an ever greater part of undergraduate laboratory education to becomputer centered, and as a greater percentage of students enter the curriculum withoutpractical experience in mechanics or a familiarity with tools and tooling, there is a strong needto expose aerospace engineering students to these realities of the aviation workplace, aworkplace that traditionally has inspired a passionate intensity. The Aerospace EngineeringDepartment at Cal Poly is trying to provide hands-on skills and foster this intensity
. Misconceptions about graduate school and research careers are common among theundergraduate population. This lack of knowledge proves to be a real barrier that prevents manyundergraduate students, and female and minority students, in particular, from consideringgraduate school. The Graduates Linked with Undergraduates in Engineering (GLUE) programprovides an innovative opportunity to expose undergraduate engineering students to research bylinking them with graduate engineering students working on research projects in the College ofEngineering. The program consists of a semester-long research experience in the laboratory thatis coupled with a structured interdisciplinary seminar course for the undergraduate participants.The program is primarily intended
) have provided seven techniques, often called declarative learning. Several, or all of these techniques help the instructors to assess prior knowledge. The principle to emphasize on the “value-added” nature of university higher educational methodologies.4. Self Assessment : Sally Brown, Phil Race & Brenda Smith provide several techniques for implementation of Self-Assessment. (Brown, Race and Smith, 1996). The students should be provided with an opportunity to express their “satisfaction-rating” of courses, laboratory experiences and the educational experience as a whole. This serves as a very useful tool and provides valuable assessment data upon which the department can take appropriate action to stay at the “edge of
Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationQuality versus Quantity Other important questions must also be addressed during the online curriculumdevelopment process. After the online system is “up and running”, it becomes much moredifficult to implement changes for students who are currently enrolled in the system. Forexample, the development must consider what educational elements can be (or should be)integrated into the online experience. How should laboratory experiences be handled, or do welimit the types of courses available online to a subset of those required in a given discipline?Can an online degree program satisfy the standardization and performance
Session 3129 Course Management Systems: Expectations and Outcomes Debra T. Burhans1, Carl Alphonce2, Helene Kershner3, Barbara Sherman 4, Deborah Walters5 1 Canisius College/ 2,3,4,5University at Buffalo (SUNY)In the 1999-2000 academic year, an ambitious overhaul of a large, introductory computerliteracy course at the University at Buffalo (SUNY) was initiated with the help of a grant fromthe Pew Learning and Technology Program1. This course enrolls approximately 1200 studentsper year, divided into lecture sections of 200 and laboratory sections of 20-40
detailed outline which describes the contents of each chapter to some levelof detail.Pack and Barrett believed that a strong, detailed outline was the key to writing a goodbook. They spent considerable time deciding on the content of the text, the order thatconcepts would be covered, examples to be included in each section, and theaccompanying laboratory exercises. They worked on their own portion of the outline,combined the portions into a single outline, reviewed the overall product, and then put itaside for awhile. After 7 to 10 days they took a fresh look at the outline, madeimprovements, and completed a final draft. They provided the draft to colleagues in the
Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering Education Session 1566remained practically unchanged since around 1970, albeit for the piecewise and uncoordinatedintroduction of a number of new subjects such as computer science into traditional curricula. Dueto lack of equipment and support, laboratory work has been eliminated or confined to specialtycourses and design has taken the back seat to analysis. The perceived quality of engineeringundergraduate programs has shifted from excellence in education to accomplishment in research.However, since the 1980s, many warnings have been sounded regarding the inadequacy
laboratory sessions of two hours duration on theUniversity athletic fields. Experience showed that approximately eight launches and recoveriescould be conducted in a two-hour session. Winds were first measured with a hand heldanemometer to insure they were below 9 m/s. Wind compensation requires tilting th e launcherrod into the wind, but this decreases altitude and the accuracy of the altitude measurement, not tomention problems with wind drift causing loss of the model. Altitude is measured with an“altitracker,” a large pistol-like sighting device that measures the angle of elevation at apogee,and allows calculation of altitude when combined with a ground-measured distance from thelaunch site. The student conducts a countdown and actuates a firing
very busy schedules and came with a cost to ourroutine activities. The mechanism that we adopted was adding a new ritual to our yearlyschedule, a focussed retreat to measure progress, review curriculum issues, analyze the datagathered and set future plans. Performing these functions in a venue away from offices andclasses seemed to be the only mechanism that would allow us a chance to adequately address ourTC2K challenge.One additional outcome in our program’s way of doing business involved planning a significantupgrade in our senior laboratory. TC2K’s Criterion 4 addresses facility issues. With the additionof a new member to the EET program, we had an excellent opportunity to upgrade one of ourlabs. Our college dean was presented with a
artificial intelligence. She is an assistant professor in industrial engineering and director of the UCF Human-Centered AI Research Laboratory, a cross disciplinary team dedicated to investigating artificial intelligence from a human-centered context. Prior to that, she served as the director of the UCF’s Research Technology Office. Her areas of research are applied machine learning in drug discovery and molecule design, social media analysis, social cybersecurity, social and economic networks, network science, and evolutionary computation.Dr. Laurie O Campbell, University of Central Florida Laurie O. Campbell, Ed.D., is an Assoc. Professor in Learning Sciences and Educational Research, at the University of Central
opportunities for vetting new ideas, providing updates, and sharing points of pride. b) Group meetings: The chair meets monthly for coffee/dessert with untenured faculty as a group. In addition to the chair’s mentoring, there is much peer mentoring and learning that takes place at these meetings. The chair also meets with groups that are formally defined or informally emerge periodically throughout the year. These groups may be focused with a desire to try something new in the curriculum, in our laboratory facilities or be focused on a research proposal/initiative. The chair’s role might be to help with brainstorming creative ideas, help to surmount roadblocks, make connections in or outside of the department
, knowledge of domain, intellectual style,personality, motivation, and environmental context. Creative performance ensues from aconfluence of these six elements.6-8 Introduction to Chemical, Food, and EnvironmentalEngineering Design is a 3 credit required course for CE, FE, and EE. Course content andclassroom activities are divided into two, 75-minute sessions (Concepts, and Laboratory) perweek. Students have three different facilitators (an instructor and two teaching assistants).Course main goal is to introduce students to the Engineering Method, this is accomplished byfocusing on six course objectives: self-regulation, communication, working cooperatively andcollaboratively, problem solving, modeling, and quality. Introduction to Chemical, Food