errors. Exceptionally detailed Detailed and engaging Presentation was not and engaging presentation. appropriately detailed. presentation.Fig. 2. Examples of student projects designed in TinkerCAD. (a) Medmory; (b) Smart AlarmClock; and (c) Pet Provider.Three student projects we highlight in this paper are as follows (see Fig. 2): Medmory (a) – An assistive pill dispenser for individuals with memory loss. Smart Alarm Clock (b) – A smart alarm clock for busy people has 3 different alarm settings, varying in pitch. Pet provider (c) – A device to feed, exercise and entertain pets while owners are away.The students found the projects to be both exciting and
participants to accomplish the agents’ desired goals. In today’sfunding world, paid graduate teaching assistants are becoming less viable. Instead, faculty mustmotivate undergraduates to be the active teaching assistants that are needed to run a successfulflipped classroom [1]. By improving undergraduate TAs’ competence, supporting theirautonomy, building environments that allow for interpersonal relationships to flourish,relatedness, socialization, and positive outcomes, faculty can motivate their TAs to improve theircourses. Our long-term goal is for faculty to use this work to make their teaching assistantshipprograms more rewarding for their undergraduates serving as TAs.References[1] Van Veen, B. (2013). Flipping signal-processing instruction [sp
Average Change: +1.4% +15.5% +8.7% +7.8% Change from Best Previous -1.2% +10.6% +3.6% +2.8% Table 2: Various grade score and grade statistics.Figure 1(a) shows the grade distribution of the current approach. Figure 1(b) shows thepercentage of students who took and who counted each possible total number of quizzes (out of10 offered). This figure shows that over 80% of students took all quizzes, and over 90% ofstudents took at least eight quizzes. Normalized Grade Distribution % Students Taking & Counting Quizzes 25
provided insight into some of the challenges that will be faced whenimplementing a larger scale EEG study within a real-world learning environment. Particularly,this study has shown the challenges in identifying whether focused brain activity is in fact,focused on the “right” content, and has suggested a related avenue for future work in identifyingthe unfocussed EEG activity of students as a way of providing potentially valuable real-timefeedback on the effectiveness of various teaching methods.References[1] E. L. Park and B. K. Choi, "Transformation of classroom spaces: traditional versus activelearning classroom in colleges", Higher Education, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 749-771, 2014. Available:10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0.[2] M. Prince, "Does Active
accompany the design artifactperformance with pie radar charts that describe the degree to which students made iterationsthrough moving the buildings (Move Building) to or changing the size of the buildings (SizeBuilding), tried to understand the systems through multiple seasons (Change Date), and testedthese efforts (Solar Analysis).Case A: Best Systems FocusFigure 1 - Student E2. (a) Example Urban Design (b) Design Actions for their first and second designStudent E2’s design 1 is shown in Fig. 1 (a); they placed their two high rises between other tallbuildings to the east and the west. Their radar plot shows they resized their buildings and ranmany analysis of their energy performance of their buildings for both their first and seconddesign. They
have regarding work zones and TTCprimary components, an illustration of a TTC zone with a stationary right lane closure on adivided highway was presented (see Figure 2). The text of the warning signs was shown inSpanish as required by local statutes. Lines A, B, C, and D refer to strategic points in the TTCzone. Line A identifies the start of the advance warning area (i.e., the position of the firstwarning sign shown to drivers). Line B was positioned at the last sign of the advance warningarea. Line C represents the beginning of the transition area (i.e., the start of the right-lanemerging taper). Line D marks the start of the activity area. Using these four lines as references,subjects were asked to identify: where the construction work zone
like to thank Colleen Halpin for their assistanceduring the early stages of this project.References[1] M. Davis, “Teaching Ethics across the Engineering Curriculum,” in International Conference on Ethics in Engineering and Computer Science, 1999.[2] L. Fan, “Decision-making models for handling ethical dilemmas,” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., vol. 156, no. 4, pp. 229–234, 2003.[3] B. Bero and A. Kuhlman, “Teaching ethics to engineers: Ethical decision making parallels the engineering design process,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 597–605, 2011.[4] M. Rogerson, M. Gottlieb, and M. Handelsman, “Nonrational processes in ethical decision making.,” Am. Psychol., vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 614–623, 2011.[5] A. Tjeltveit and M
equal to the sum of the self-induced drags of each bird and as many mutuallydrag as there are permutations of their wings in pairs. The total induced drag for n flocking migratorybirds is expressed as: 𝑛−1 𝑛 2 (1) 4𝐷𝐼11 2𝑎 𝐷𝐼 = 𝑛 × 𝐷𝐼11 + 2 ∑ ∑ log [1 − ( ) ] 𝜋 |𝑖 − 𝑗|(𝑏 + 𝑠) 𝑖=1 𝑗=𝑖+1where DI11, b, and s are the induced drag of a bird, wingspan, and distance between adjacent birdperpendicular to the flight path, respectively
. A. J. Mohr and E. S. Mohr, "Understanding Generation Z Students to Promote a Contemporary Learning Environment," Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 , Article 9, 2017[2] M. K. Eagan et al., The American freshman: Fifty-Year trends, 1966–2015, Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA, 2016[3] J. Selingo, J., The New Generation of Students: How colleges can recruit, teach, and serve Gen Z, Chronicle of Higher Education, 2018[4] M. B. B. Magolda and P. King, Learning Partnerships: Theory and Models of Practice to Educate for Self-Authorship, Sterling, VA: Stylus, 2004[5] K. Masterson, “How to Make Orientation Stick,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, August 22
,” in Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research: Volume 34, M. B. Paulsen and L. W. Perna, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 39–97.[4] C. Puritty et al., “Without inclusion, diversity initiatives may not be enough,” Science, vol. 357, no. 6356, pp. 1101–1102, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1126/science.aai9054.[5] A. Peixoto et al., “Diversity and inclusion in engineering education: Looking through the gender question,” in 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Tenerife, Apr. 2018, pp. 2071–2075, doi: 10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363494.[6] L. M. Maclean, Cracking the code: how to get women and minorities into STEM disciplines and why we must. Momentum Press, 2017.[7] M. A. Armstrong and J
Machining, HVAC, Power and Green Energy Technology,Mining, Oil & Gas etc. Figure 1(b) shows a random PLC troubleshooting equipment at the trainingfacility. (a) (b) Figure 1: (a) First batch of students receiving FANUC training certification in Engineering Technology department at SHSU and (b) PLC troubleshooting station at Amatrol Training.CNC Training and Certification:According to the 2018 Deloitte [1] and The Manufacturing Institute skills gap and future of workstudy’, programming skills applied to industrial robots and automated manufacturing system suchas computer numerical control (CNC) machine are one of the five critical skills expected to beneeded to succeed in the future
ferrite, etc. Even though the textbook presents the picture of dryclinker (Figure 1a), it would be more helpful to show crystalline structures of alite, belite, aluminate andferrite in micro scale. In addition, the textbook published by Cengage only provides a picture of anhydrousPortland cement in figure 1b. The SEM image of Portland cement could be beneficial for students. (a) (b)Figure 1: 1. Pictures of (a) dry clinker and (b) Portland cement [1]Figure 2a shows SEM images of alite, belite, aluminate and ferrite in clinker [6]. With advances in imageprocessing and optical technology, we can provide students visualization of the micro-structures of thesecrystal
introduce topics. In addition to in-class activities, this classrequires several assignments and group projects outside of class; each student is required tosubscribe to TopHat for attendance, lecture questions, discussion, and to help instructorsassess and measure student learning and understanding. A variety of participants were involved (n=80), comprised of 15 female students and65 male students. Of the total sample, 56% are classified as computer science majors and44% non-computer science majors. Approximately half of the class was sophomores(51.2%), while 22.5% were seniors, 17.5% were juniors, and 8.8% were freshmen. Thecourse had two sections (A and B) with 40 participants registered in each section wherestudents are not the same in
undergraduate engineering courses, principally in the following ways: a. Close-Ended versus Open-Ended Problems: The capstone experience should by design be structured so that students deal with an open-ended design problem. b. Unique Answers versus Multiple Solutions: Solutions to problems in core courses of the engineering curriculum are unique, i.e., permitting a single correct answer, with the solution typically found in the instructor manual. In contrast, by its natural variance, the design process of the Capstone admits multiple possible solutions. c. Individual Work versus Teamwork: Core courses typically require individual effort by students on all assignments, laboratory projects
at each iteration based on feedback received and growth in their own andthe collective group’s understandings. Each group assignment extends the work from theprevious, culminating in a SOAR Portfolio. The portfolio includes: 1. Project vision and summary – This assignment requires students to: a. Briefly describe what the product-in-development is and what it can do. b. Examine what they need to do, how they are going to do it, what they will need to accomplish it, and then define what success looks like. They will be required to list several goals for their group to collectively envision the path to completion. c. Describe who will be impacted by the product. Think beyond the client and
be just goin there and repeat what I already know to the students, so mechanical. And the thing is thatafter I hear so many people - everybody’s issues - I feel that teaching itself is a lively thing. It’salive. Teaching is not just mechanics. It’s really dynamic. So, I think that’s the most - that is, Ithink, something influenced me most. And because of this change, this viewpoint change, I thinkmy way of approaching students is also different.We suggest our lessons learned paper be presented as a lightning talk in order to supportdiscussion with other participants who are also developing communities of practice.References[1] E. Wenger, B. Trayner, and M. de Laat, “Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a
student leadership development: A study exploring gender and ethnic identity," Journal of College Student Development, 2000.[6] K. Crenshaw, "Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics," U. Chi. Legal F., p. 139, 1989.[7] b. hooks, Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. South End Press, 1989.[8] H. Y. Choo and M. M. Ferree, "Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities," Sociological theory, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 129-149, 2010.[9] L. McCall, "The complexity of intersectionality," in
asking questions, defining problems, brainstorming, developing andtesting models or prototypes, analyzing and revising models, using mathematics andcomputational thinking, and communicating solutions to problems. Some benefits of teachingthe engineering design process (EDP) include helping students understand and improve theirworld, developing their problem solving skills and dispositions, and increasing motivation andengagement in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects [5].However, teachers mentioned the following challenges in terms of implementing EDP in theirclassrooms: (a) not having extra time to engage students in the design process, (b) limitedresources and materials, (c) ways to facilitate student’s varied
B), we asked them to also rate where they think they will have tobe when they graduate. Both surveys asked them to rate (on a scale from 1-5) their current orexpected future confidence and proficiency, defined here as students’ being able to identify theirown educational needs and also being able to develop ways to maintain their competence in thediscipline [3]. For lifelong learning, specifically, we asked students to identify personal areas ofstrengths and weaknesses; different ways to develop the strengths and eliminate the weaknesses;ways to develop broader knowledge; and ways to apply critical inquiry and analysis toengineering problems and to the communications that support the engineering work. On“working to develop broader
sameevaluation protocol as in the previous study where the RC circuits test was scored independentlyby the authors, and any differences were discussed and reconciled. Each question was given ascore of 0-2 based on the answer and the reasoning provided.We analyzed the results using the same metrics as for the previous study, using question number2 from parts (a) to (e) in the RC circuits test as a prompt for mathematical-oriented problem-solving skills. We used four different instruments as indicators of conceptual understanding: a)the second midterm excepting a problem that was on RC circuits, b) the RC circuits problem inthat second midterm, c) the post-test of the 12 ECCE questions and d) the qualitative part of theRC circuits test.ResultsFigure 1
1 Aquatic Nitrogen Monitor Jade Chapman; Gage Arter;Truc Le; Kevin Zhang Electronic Systems Engineering Technology Department Texas A&M University Professor Behbood B. Zoghi Electronic Systems Engineering Technology Department Texas A&M University AbstractWith an explosively growing world population, the need for an efficient, ergonomic, and extensivefood production process is at an all-time high. This is seen the most in
research. Teachers have brought up the value of being ableto speak to these issues in supporting the concept of resiliency in their own students. As wecontinue to improve and refine the program, we are interested in gathering stronger data toexplore how these concepts are transferred to classrooms and if they indeed promote increasedlearning and interest in bioengineering.REFERENCES[1] "NGSS: Developing the Standards." https://www.nextgenscience.org/developing- standards/developing-standards (accessed April 6, 2020).[2] M. S. Garet, A. C. Porter, L. Desimone, B. F. Birman, and K. S. Yoon, "What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers," American educational research journal, vol
Research in 2006,” Des. Res. Q., Sep. 2006.[2] E. Sanders, “An Evolving Map of Design Practice and Design Research,” Interactions, pp. 13–17, Dec. 2008.[3] IDEO, The Field Guide to Human-Centered Design. 2015.[4] C. B. Zoltowski, W. C. Oakes, and M. E. Cardella, “Students’ ways of experiencing human-centered design,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 28–59, 2012.[5] I. Mohedas, S. Daly, and K. Sienko, “Design Ethnography in Capstone Design: Investigating Student Use and Perceptions,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 888–900, 2014.[6] R. P. Loweth, S. R. Daly, J. Liu, and K. H. Sienko, “Assessing Needs in a Cross-Cultural Design Project: Student Perspectives and Challenges,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 36, no. 2, pp
. Kirshstein, L. Banks Amos, W. Jones, L. Espinosa, and D. Watnick, “Broadening Participation in STEM: A call to action,” Washington. DC, 2012.[7] B. N. Geisinger and D. R. Raman, “Why They Leave: Understanding Student Attrition from Engineering Majors,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 914–925, 2013.[8] G. L. Lichtenstein, H. G. Loshbaugh, B. Claar, H. L. Chen, K. Jackson, and S. D. Sheppard, “An Engineering Major Does Not (Necessarily) an Engineer Make : Career Decision Making Among Undergraduate Engineering Majors,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 227–234, 2009.[9] Ö. Eris et al., “Outcomes of a Longitudinal Administration of the Persistence in Engineering Survey,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 99, no. 4, pp
, seven students agreed to participate.The demographic information for the seven participants can be found in Table 1. Students wereassigned a letter identity A-G. All of the participants fit into the town or rural categories given bythe National Center for Education Statistics School Locale Definition [15] and are considered“in-state” students who were currently living on campus. All seven participants were 18-24 yearsold, single and had no religious affiliation. There were 6 participants who identified as male andone female. With the exception of student B, who was Asian-American, all participantsidentified as Caucasian. None of the seven participants were first generation college students. Allof them had two parents with bachelor’s degree or
engineeringjudgement to ensure that the right scientific theories have been applied properly.ConclusionThe three-model framework and its application to engineering problem solving is a useful toolfor helping students develop as engineers. The three models can help students better understandthe engineering problem solving format and make sense of the efforts of their educationalexperience in college. Ideally, each engineering graduate has developed an appreciation andrespect for reality, and mental models that intuitively understand how the world works, and theengineering/math models to quantitatively predict outcomes consistent with both their mentalmodel and reality.References[1] R. B. Landis, Studying Engineering: A Road Map to a Rewarding Career, 5th ed
qualitative approachprovides a deeper look into dimensions of this experience for women on the transfer pathway andtheir perception of factors contributing to success.Quantitative methodsSurvey data were collected from 414 students aged 18 or older at three community colleges inTexas between April and September 2019. Select demographics of the sample are shown in Table1, more detailed demographic information can be found in Appendix B. The survey capturedinformation on students’ self-efficacy, inclusion, motivation, and confidence in ECS usingpreviously-validated measures from the Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-Efficacy(LAESE) [12] and the Academic Table 1: Demographic characteristics of survey
College. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 WIP: Virtual Writing Group Participation: Surprises & Unintended Outcomes Dr. Lisa B. Bosman, Dr. Erin McCave, Dr. Molly Goldstein, and Dr. Kelli ChelbergIntroduction & BackgroundThis work-in-progress paper emerged from the shared experience of participation in a VirtualWriting Group (VWG) composed of early career engineering education researchers (EER) in avariety of positions at different institutions. In general, this particular group of EERs had limitedresources and access to a peer community at their respective institutions, therefore, the VWGwas formed with the intention to spur EER scholarly activity
National Cybersecurity AwarenessMonth in October. The module was delivered as follows: 1. Students were placed in teams of four, and first part of the ‘four corners exercise was introduced. Teams were asked to discuss whether it’s ethical to hack, and then add their names under one of the four statements given the phrase “It is Ethical to Hack”. (students did not have to come to a unanimous agreement in their teams): a. Strongly agree b. Agree c. Strongly disagree d. Disagree 2. Case studies were handed out; each group had a different type of case study, all related to ethical hacking and how the
Criterion 3. Note that the previous student outcomes (a) and (e) arecombined into a single student outcome (1) in the new criterion 3. Student outcome (b) in theprevious criterion 3 is equivalent to student outcome (6) in the new criterion3, except that thewording in the statement has been changed to remove some of the confusions. The ability todesign of experiment interpreted differently by various programs. A search on the Internet for“design of experiment” results in several different definitions. The proposed change of wordingto “an ability to develop appropriate experimentation,” makes it more clear that student not onlyhave to be able to conduct experiment following a given procedure, but they also have to be ableto develop experimentation on