thatchange is needed is when the company is in dire straits. There appears to be great satisfactionamong (E&T) academicians that the status quo of teaching, research and service is achieving allrequired purposes7 while simultaneously lamenting indicators that STEM education in Americais in decline, enrollment of females and minorities is lagging and other nations are creatingengineering professionals at rates this country experienced prior to the availabilities of federalgrant monies. Kerr7 labeled this phenomena “…the folly of rewarding A while hoping for B”.There is a call for changes in P&T processes among some members of the engineeringprofession. Part of that call recognizes involving communities with scholarship in the form
of these topics in engineering educationfor many years. Yet, engineering programs continue to struggle with the development of bestpractices for teaching communication and teamwork principles that are contextual, meaningful,and applicable. The purpose of this paper is to highlight a curricular revision that foregroundsteamwork instruction in a freshman Introduction to Robotic Systems Design course. First, wehighlight our approach to teamwork instruction to prepare students to be effective interpersonalcommunicators and collaborative writers. Next, we assess our efforts through (a) studentfeedback via course evaluations, comparing this year’s data with last year’s; (b) students’ peerevaluations; (c) students’ team progress reports, assessing
: Exploring Effective Mixtures of Technology, Teaching,and Learning by Bonnie B. Mullinix and David McCurry , The Technology Source Archives atthe University of North Carolina, September/October 2003 7[10]- Classroom Assessment Techniques in Asynchronous Learning Networks by TomHenderson, The Technology Source Archives at the University of North Carolina,September/October 2001[11]- Creating Online Courses: A Step-by-Step Guide by William R. Klemm, The TechnologySource Archives at the University of North Carolina, May/June 2001[12]- Distance Learning and Synchronous Interaction by Joel Foreman, The Technology SourceArchives at the University of North
Engineers hostsCareer Day for Girls, a one-day event for girls in grades 7-12 to get girls excited about science,engineering, and technology. Through laboratory demonstrations, interactive multimedialectures, and hands-on activities, girls meet positive role models (both female and male) and getto think about the possibilities they have for careers in the technical fields.Many Career Day participants and their parents expressed a need for a multiple-day programheld over the summer--a kind of engineering day camp for girls to get more information andexperience with engineering, and to form relationships with female engineer role models.Undergraduate members of the Society of Women Engineers at Northwestern Universitytherefore went about designing
., Elmore, B., Bradley, W., “Mentoring New Faculty: What Works and What Does Not Work”, Proceedings of the 2006 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, June Page 15.1384.13 18-21, 2006.11. Boyle, P., Boice, B., “Systemic Mentoring for New Faculty Teachers and Graduate Teaching Assistants”, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 22, No.3, Spring 1988.12. Sands, R.G., Parson, A., Duane, J., “Faculty Mentoring Faculty in a Public University”, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 62, No. 2, Mar/Apr 1991
MultinationalDesign,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 24-27, 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii.12 Powell, A., G. Piccoli and B. Ives, “Virtual Teams: A Review of Current Literature and Directions for FutureResearch,” DataBase for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 35, No. 1, Winter 2004.13 Martins, L. L., L. L. Gilson, M. T. Maynard, “Virtual Teams: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go FromHere?” Journal of Management, 30(6) 805-835, 2004.14 Bray, Susan, “Meeting the Challenges of Cross-Cultural Virtual Work Teams, Workshop presented at 12th AnnualColloquium on International Engineering Education, Oct 2009. Contact: suebray@mindspring.com15 Ferraro, Gary P., The Cultural Dimension of International Business, Fifth Edition. Pearson
for prediction or 2. there are systematic sampling errors, to wit: a. the students who showed up for were not representative of the FI, or b. the faculty who responded were fundamentally different from those who did not answer the survey questions, or 3. both 1 and 2.We can rule out 2a since the students’ own estimate was that 69% would be admitted. We testedhypothesis 2b by comparing the estimates given by students of responsive vs. nonresponsivefaculty, with the results shown in the Figure 9 below. Page 15.1221.15 Figure 9. Likely scenario for student
Adobe Connect Pro was the best software solution for use in ourdistance learning circuits laboratory course. Unfortunately, the Virginia Techadministration has not made a commitment as of yet to purchase the softwarelicense. Although monthly and pay-for-use plans are available for individual users,it was not clear if there exists a means within the Electrical and ComputerEngineering Department to fund the necessary licenses long-term and, therefore,there was a substantial risk that the investment of the faculty’s and staff’s time andeffort to incorporate Adobe Connect Pro into the distance learning circuitslaboratory course would only be of value for a few semesters. a) b) Figure 3: Examples
described in this paper and the National Science Foundation for the two grantsthat support this research (EEC-0835992 & DUE 0817394)References: 1. Weilerstein, P., & Shartrand, A. (2008). Proceedings from the American Society for Engineering Education annual meeting. A decade of technological innovation: A retrospective view of the first decade of the NCIIA. Pittsburgh, PA. 2. BankBoston. (1997). MIT: The impact of innovation. Boston, MA: Author. 3. Vesper, K. H., & Gartner, W. B. (1997). Measuring progress in entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(5), 403-421 4. Levie, J. (1999). Entrepreneurship education in higher education in England: A survey. London: London Business
AC 2010-118: SUPPORTS AND BARRIERS THAT RECENT ENGINEERINGGRADUATES EXPERIENCE IN THE WORKPLACESamantha Brunhaver, Stanford University Samantha Brunhaver is a second year graduate student at Stanford University. She is currently working on her Masters in Mechanical Engineering. Her research interests include engineering education and design for manufacturing. She earned a BS in Mechanical Engineering at Northeastern University in 2008.Russell Korte, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Russell Korte is an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is currently a Fellow with the iFoundry project in the College of Engineering at
were also asked to compare their online experience in the Circuits class with otheronline courses that they have taken.3. Results3.1 Class Performance ComparisonTable 3 shows a comparison of the performance of the online and on-campus students. For thiscomparison, retention rate is defined as the percentage of students who did not withdraw fromthe class, and hence received a grade of either A, B, C, D, or F. Success rate is defined as thepercentage of students who received a passing grade (A, B, or C). The retention rates are almostthe same with four students dropping from each group. The success rate of 80.0% is identical forthe two groups. The online group had slightly higher Homework Average, Final Exam, andFinal Course Grade, and a
. Electronic Industries Alliance: “An interdisciplinary approach encompassing the entire technical effort to evolve into and verify an integrated and life-cycle balanced set of system people, product, and process solutions that satisfy customer needs. Systems Engineering encompasses (a) the technical efforts related to the development, manufacturing, verification, deployment, operations, support, disposal of, and user training for, system products and processes; (b) the definition and management of the system configuration; (c) the translation Page 15.1162.2 of the system definition into work breakdown structures; and (d) development of
student learning and in academic development to improve thedesign of the tutorial activities and to devise a training program for the tutors running thesetutorials.Bibliography1. Baillie, C. (1998). Addressing first-year issues in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 23(4), 453-463.2. Bernhold, L. E., Spurlin, S. J., & Anson, C. (2007). Understanding Our Students: A Longitudinal- Study of Success and Failure in Engineering With Implications for Increased Retention. Journal of Engineering Education 96(3), 263-274.3. French, B. F., Immekus, J. C., & Oakes, W. (2005). An examination of indicators of engineering students
included the creation of anEntrepreneurial Application Center.Relationship of Course to Program Outcomes - meets the intent of ABET a-k OutcomesOutcome Support Rating Rationale for Rating a 3 Student will use knowledge, techniques, skills, and Page 15.252.8 modern tools learned in their previous courses. b 3 Students will apply current knowledge and applications of mathematics, science, engineering, and technology for their projects. c 2
coffee. A similar statement aboutbrewing coffee, something which is unproblematically categorized as a process, will be taken torefer to the duration of the process. In order to develop conceptual understanding of electricityor heat, therefore, students have to become aware of the need for recategorization before evenbeginning the difficult process. Chi states that developing awareness of when conceptual changeis necessary may be the most important barrier to conceptual change. She writes, “[b]ecausestudents are able to generate predictable responses to questions and systematic explanations ofphenomena, they don’t notice that their model is incorrect”19.Implications for Engineering Education PracticeAs argued above, engineers need conceptual
, and other in-class activities. Be prepared forvalue-added participation by reading the assigned material, developing notes, and speakingthoughtfully and candidly about the assigned reading. Be prepared to identify, compare, andcontrast opposing perspectives. Page 15.1172.10Grading Scale: A = 93-100% A- = 90-92.9% ExemplaryB+ = 87-89.9% B = 83-86.9% B- = 80-82.9% GoodC+ = 77-79.9% C = 73-76.9% C- = 70-72.9% SatisfactoryD+ = 67-69.9% D = 63-66.9
commitment many times created successful people, where giftedindividuals had faded. They looked at IQ and personality as predictors of success, from pastresearchers, and found that these may not have the validity of grit. The first step was developingthe grit scale; extensive work and testing created the highly tested and validated questionnairecurrently in use.5 Refer to Appendices A and B for the survey tool used to identify and score gritlevels.Once the grit scale was created and vetted, numerous studies on grit were conducted. A majorresearch project gathered data through the web on over 1500 participants. One result of this largedata set was that grit increases with age, but monotonically, so a 35 year-old is not significantlygrittier than a 30
. Hawken, P., Lovins, A., and Lovins, L. H., “Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution,” BackBay Books; 1st edition (October 2000) ISBN: 03163530008. Gardiner, K. M., “Discovery, Learning and Research in a Classroom Factory,” Proceedings, ASEE Mid-AtlanticSection Fall Conference, Temple University, 2007 (CD).9. Alava, J., and Gardiner, K. M., “The Development of the First Year Engineering Experience," Proceedings, Fall2010 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, October 15-16, 2010, Villanova University (CD).10. Landis, R. B., “Studying Engineering – A Road Map to a Rewarding Career,” Discovery Press, Los Angeles,CA., Third Edition, ISBN 978-0-964-6969-2-1 Fall 2010 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, October 15-16, 2010, Villanova
for Workforce Development.Prepared for: The New Jersey Commission on Higher Education, March, 2005.7. National Association of Manufacturers, and Deloitte Consulting LLP, “2005 Skills Gap Report-A Survey of theAmerican Manufacturing Workforce”, Manufacturing Institute’s Center for Workforce Success, 2005.8. The Conference Board, “Are They Really Ready to Work?” Employer’s Perspectives on the Basic Knowledgeand Applied Skills of New Entrants to the 21st Century U.S. Workforce”, A Report by the Corporate Voices forWorking Families, The Partnership for 21st Century Skills, and the Society for Human Resource Management,October 2006.9. B. Yalvac et al., “Promoting Advanced Writing Skills in an Upper-Level Engineering Class”, Journal ofEngineering
College Students,” College Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1-9.3. Ames, C., 1992, “Classrooms: Goals, Structures, and Student Motivation,” Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 84, No. 3, pp. 261-271.4. Wolters, C. A., Yu, S, Pintrich, P. R., 1996, “The Relation between Goal Orientation and Students’ Motivational Beliefs and Self-Regulated Learning,” Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 8, pp. 211–238.5. Dweck, C., Leggett, E., 1988, “A Social Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality,” Psychological Review, Vol. 95, pp. 256-273.6. Elliot, A. J., 1999, “Approach and Avoidance Motivation and Achievement Goals,” Educational Psychologist, Vol. 34, pp. 169-189.7. Yang, C., Tsai, I, Kim, B, Cho, M
. Farrington-Darby, T., & Wilson, J. R. (2006). The nature of expertise: A review. AppliedErgonomics, 37(1), 17-32.21. Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4 (2), 122-143.22. Günther, J., Ehrlenspiel, K.,& Konstruktion,L.F.,(1999). Comparing designers from practice anddesigners with systematic design education. Design studies, 20, 439-451.23. Hales, C. (1991). Analysis of the engineering design process in an Industrial Context. Eastleigh,UK: Grants Hill Publications.24. Hokanson, B. (2000). Accelerated thought: Electronic cognition. Digital image creation andanalysis as a means to examine learning and cognition. University of Minnesota.25. Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem
questions were used in quizzes and tests in 2007 and 2009. A comparison of the Page 15.614.7percentage answering each question correctly is provided in Table 3. The correct answer to eachquestion is shown in bold type. The percentage of students answering the questions correctly in2009 was slightly higher than in 2007, which indicates some improvement in student learning.Table 3. Comparison of Three Multiple Choice Questions Question 2007 2009 Chemical weathering is most effective in which combination of 83.3 84.4 conditions? a. cold and arid b
WOMEN ENGINEERING FACULTY ( “Navigating Your Journey on the Academic Sea”; NSF ADVANCE Conference, Over 60 URM Women Engineering Faculty @ Caltech Photo credit: B. Paz)AbstractAs they progress in their engineering faculty careers, Underrepresented Minority Women (URM)women are very familiar with unique issues at the intersection of race and gender (DeCuir-Gunby, Long-Mitchell, & Grant, 2009; Ranson, 2005; Ronen & Ronen, 2008). This familiarityresults from their own personal experiences in the Academy and provides a broad set ofresponses ranging from leaving the professoriate to a single-minded pursuit of success no matterwhat obstacles are presented (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineering Curriculum, or How to Build a Dog House Carl A. Erikson, Jr, Department of Engineering, Messiah CollegeI.A.4. The Design Science/Global Solutions Lab: Interdisciplinary Problem/Project-Based Research and Learning Medard GabelSession I.B. AEC 315 - Innovative experiences in local/global/community learningI.B.1. Supporting and Assessing Service Learning of Engineers Without Borders Student Chapters Joshua H. Smitha and David Brandesb Departments of aMechanical and bCivil & Environmental Engineering, Lafayette CollegeI.B.2. Design of Sustainable Hand-Powered Water Pumps for Burkina Faso Timothy B. Whitmoyer, Messiah CollegeI.B.3. Educating ECE Majors for a Global Environment
From Design to Implementation with Simulink and LEGO NXT James C. Peyton Jones, Connor McArthur, Tyler Young Center for Nonlinear Dynamics & Control Villanova University, PA 19085The use of mobile robotics in teaching has the potential to be revolutionized by a) advances inlow-cost, computationally powerful target hardware, and b) automatic code generation or ‘rapidprototyping’ tools which allow these devices to be programmed directly from high-level Matlab /Simulink-based designs. This paper describes progress on a National Science Foundation andMathWorks sponsored project aimed at bringing all these elements together for practical use andbenefit in the
, New Jersey, and Faculty Research Scientist and Associate Director of the Robert B. Davis Institute for Learning of the Graduate School of Education in New Brunswick. Page 15.647.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 How and What Mathematical Content is Taught and Used by Engineering Students in their Final Course Project?AbstractThe purpose of this research was to investigate the transition from academic mathematicsto real-life, engineering situations. In particular, through a case study, we investigatewhat mathematics content Brazilian undergraduate engineering students at privateuniversity use
, and B. Maheswaran. “Teamwork is Academic: TheGateway Approach to Teaching Engineering Freshman.” Proceedings of the American Societyfor Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2005.Authors BiographyNathan Podoll: CDR is a Commander in the United States Coast Guard, a registeredprofessional engineer in the State of Florida and received his M.S. degree in Civil Engineeringfrom the University of Illinois. He is an Associate Professor at the United States Coast GuardAcademy, New London, CT. Nathan.A.Podoll@uscga.edu. Tel: (860)-444-8532.Kassim Tarhini: Dr. Tarhini received his PhD from the University of Toledo, Ohio inEngineering Mechanics. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Ohio, Nevada andConnecticut. He is currently a
cylinder; 2. Milling center: use milling to cut off a step from the block; 3. Drilling center: use drilling or milling to drill several holes. The sequence to build this virtual component is shown in figure 2 b). It is obvious that thesequence of features in the virtual component do simulate the manufacturing process of this part. 4The feature creation sequence in the virtual component does not have to be the exact same asthose in real manufacturing. However, by presenting it this way, students were forced to thinkabout the manufacturing during the design and have a significantly better understanding of howto manufacture the component after
. 5(4), Dec1995, pg 319-336.18 Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., and Donovan, S. S., "Effects Of Small-Group Learning On Undergraduates InScience, Mathematics, Engineering, And Technology: A Meta-Analysis." Review of Educational Research, Spr1999, Vol. 69(1), pg 21-51.19 Komerath, N.M., Smith, M.J., Bodo, B., "Aerospace Digital Library". Proceedings, ASEE 2000, St. Louis, MO,June 2000 Page 15.572.1220 Boehrer, J., “Teaching with Cases: Learning to Question,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 42, pp. 41-57, 1990.21 German, B.,“A Case Study Approach to Teaching Aircraft Performance: Reverse Engineering the SR
=4263. Blummer, B. A., & Kritskaya, O. (2009). Best practices for creating an online tutorial: A literature review.Journal of Web Librarianship, 3(3), 199-216. doi:10.1080/193229009030507993. Ganster, L. A., & Walsh, T. R. (2008). Enhancing library instruction to undergraduates: Incorporating onlinetutorials into the curriculum. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 15(3), 314-333.doi:10.1080/106913108022582324. Kearns, K., & Hybl, T. T. (2005). A collaboration between faculty and librarians to develop and assess a scienceliteracy laboratory module. Science & Technology Libraries, 25(4), 39-56. doi:10.1300/J122v25n04•045. Maness, J. (2006). Library 2.0 Theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries. Webology, 3(2), article