VISUAL AIDS FOR TEACHING POWER SYSTEMS Don L. Stuehm Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58105ABSTRACT Power systems courses teach the analysis of power apparatus andintegration of the apparatus into a power system. Field trips to localinstallations are commonly used to illustrate apparatus to the students.Coordination of the information obtained from a field trip with class-room material is very difficult plus the students do not see a diversityof system designs. This paper presents a method of using visual aidsto enhance the students• conceptual understanding of power systems.Generating the visual aids for
students. In this case the schematics show thecompany with four branch cities A, B, C and D. In each branch city the number of equipmentand/or transmission mediums used depends on the factors including but not limited to the numberof employees, the distance between the cities and the type of the transmission medium and the cost. Proceedings of the 2008 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference The University of New Mexico – Albuquerque Copyright © 2008, American Society for Engineering Education Figure 3. Schematics of telecommunications infrastructure of a 4 branch city fictitious company based on the CoT’s Testbed
undergraduate student, Reddy [6] presents the FEM formulation forthe heat conduction with convection in a bar of variable transversal section is a very motivateand interesting problem to solve, this kind of problem is modeled by (1) d ⎛ d T ⎞ ⎡ h p(x )⎤ − ⎜k ⎟+ (T − T∞ ) − Q(x ) = 0 a≤ x≤b (1) d x ⎜⎝ d x ⎟⎠ ⎢⎣ A( x ) ⎥⎦ Proceedings of the 2008 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference The University of New Mexico – Albuquerque Copyright © 2008, American Society for Engineering EducationWhere A( x ) and p (x ) are the section transversal area and the perimeter of the bar,respectively, at any point x ; Q( x ) is the
commentary over a PowerPoint presentation• Lecture material delivered on Zoom’s Whiteboard – As can be seen in Figure 2, Zoom’s built-in “Whiteboard” option could be used to deliver a lecture. (a) (b) (c) (d)Figure 2 – Lecture Delivered as – (a) Overhead Projector, (b) Hand-written Notes, (c) Presentation and (d) Zoom Whiteboard5. Results and Assessment While these changes were implemented and the instructor routinely engaged with hisstudents to seek feedback on the style of instruction, the approach, and the renewed focus, it wasimportant to seek a formal assessment. In
for a single apparatus are shown below for the Base Station (Table 1), theSatellite (Table 2), and the YoYo Despinner optional accessory (Table 3). Values for custom partsare approximate and include material and manufacturing costs. Table 1: Base Station Bill of Materials Table 2: Satellite Bill of MaterialsTable 3: YoYo Accessory Bill of MaterialsReferences[1] B. Argrow, “Proactive teaching and learning in the aerospace engineering curriculum 2000,” Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, vol. Session 2793, pp. 1–15, 2002.[2] A. R. Seebass and L. D. Peterson, “Aerospace engineering 2000: An integrated, hands-on curriculum,” Frontiers of Computational Fluid
this chaotic time. The only problem is not being able to see the things on the white board. No suggestions Nope This is my first time going to CS118 on zoom, so I don't have any input on improvements. No I think you‚You're doing the best possible and I can tell that you really care and are trying harder than most of my other teachers! Good job :) No suggestions[1] Isong, B. "A Methodology for Teaching Computer Programming: first year students' perspective" I.J. Modern Education and Computer Science, pp. 15-21, September 2014.[2] “Why Colleges Suck at Making Programmers”, codeup.com Commentary, https://codeup.com/why-colleges- suck-at-making-programmers/, August 14, 2018.[3] Newton D., Another problem with shifting
courses for Pass/Fail (PS/FL) without the course impactingtheir overall GPA. Credit was received for passing a PS or P course; however, a traditional Fresulted in 0 grade points which lowered the student’s GPA. For graduate students, a passing gradeis considered an A or B, and for undergraduate students an A, B, or C grade. As shown in Table3, no graduate student received an FL grade. Pass (P) and Satisfactory (S) grades are primarilyreserved for thesis and dissertation courses. Graduate students performed slightly better during theCOVID pandemic months.For undergraduate students, the percentage of students who passed each semester was relativelyconsistent; see Table 4. Perhaps due to uncertainty with the fully remote learning environment,many
., & Leake, J. M., & Hall, W. B., Linking CAD and Metrology to Explain, Demonstrate, and Teach GD&T, The 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29, 2011, Vancouver, BC. 14[7]. Rios, O., An Example of Teaching Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) Concepts using 3D Printed Parts, The 2018 Gulf Southwest Section Conference, AT&T Executive Education, and Conference Center, April 4-6, 2018, Austin, TX 78705.[8]. Waldorf, D. J., & Georgeou, T. M., Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) Integration throughout a Manufacturing Engineering Curriculum, The 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29, 2016, New Orleans
education,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 99, no. 1, Art. no. 1, 2010, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2010.tb01038.x.[2] E. A. Cech and H. M. Sherick, “Depoliticization as a mechanism of gender inequality among engineering faculty,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Tampa, FL, 2019, pp. 1–12, doi: https://peer.asee.org/32586.[3] G. Lichtenstein, H. L. Chen, K. A. Smith, and T. A. Maldonado, “Retention and persistence of women and minorities along the engineering pathway in the United States,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, A. Johri and B. M. Olds, Eds. Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp. 311–334.[4] E. A. Cech and W. R. Rothwell, “LGBTQ inequality in engineering
, May 2006, doi: 10.1080/00909880600573965.[11] D. Reeping, A. R. Taylor, D. B. Knight, and C. Edwards, “Mixed methods analysis strategies in program evaluation beyond ‘a little quant here, a little qual there,’” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 178–196, 2019, doi: 10.1002/jee.20261.[12] J. Walther, N. W. Sochacka, and N. N. Kellam, “Quality in Interpretive Engineering Education Research: Reflections on an Example Study,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 102, no. 4, pp. 626–659, 2013, doi: 10.1002/jee.20029.[13] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, pp. 77–101, Jan. 2006, doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.[14] C. Distefano, M. Zhu
, pg 758-765[8] Randy Elliot Bennett, Formative assessment: a critical review, Assessment in Education:Principles, Policy & Practice, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2011, 5–25[9] Kim Schildkamp, Fabienne M. van der Kleij, Maaike C. Heitink, Wilma B. Kippers, BernardP. Veldkamp, ‘Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacherprerequisites for classroom practice’ International Journal of Educational Research 103 (2020)101602[10] O. A.B. Hassan, Learning theories and assessment methodologies – anengineering educational perspective, European Journal of Engineering Education, 36:4, 2011, pg327-339, https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2011.591486[11] National Academy of Engineering, Infusing Real World Experiences into EngineeringEducation
Claire, WI: PESI Publishing & Media, 2017.[6] M. Price and et al., “Effectiveness of an Extended Yoga Treatment for Women with Chronic Posttraumatic Stress Disorder,” The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 300–309, 2017.[7] T. Gard, N. Brach, B. K. Holzel, J. J. Noggle, L. A. Conboy, and S. W. Lazar, “Effects of a yoga-based intervention for young adults on quality of life and perceived stress: The potential mediating roles of mindfulness and self-compassion,” The Journal of Positive Psychology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 165–175, 2012.[8] C. Smith, H. Hancock, J. Blake-Mortimer, and K. Eckert, “A randomised comparative trial of yoga and relaxation to reduce stress and anxiety
) Empathy and Kindness; and 3) Helping. Finally, we discuss our future work andpotential implications for enhancing motivation and interest in engineering statics courses.Motivation, Utility Value, and Success in Engineering EducationMotivation, as defined here, is informed by Eccles’ Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT) (Wigfield &Eccles, 2000). EVT posits that an individual is motivated to engage in a task when they (a) expectto succeed on that task (i.e., expectancy for success) and (b) perceive that task as useful to theirpersonal goals (i.e., task value). This framework has been used in a range of engineering educationcontexts to examine the ways different students derive motivation from their experiences in andbeyond the curriculum (Matusovich
years as an Apple Distinguished Educator. Professor Yerrick is also a founding Member of the Science Educators for Equity, Diversity and Social Justice. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Engineering Problem Typology Based Reflection and Communication ofUndergraduate Engineering Experiences: Professional Engineers’Evaluation of Students’ Mock Interview ResponsesAbstractStudent consideration of technical and professional competencies often occur in disconnectedcontexts, leaving students underprepared for discussing their experiences. Development oftechnical competencies occurs in the context of the classroom while consideration of professionalcompetencies is
] Board of Delegates Engineering Area Delegation, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs.” ABET, pp. 5–6, 2019.[20] “ISO/IEC/IEEE International Standard - Systems and software engineering -- Life cycle processes -- Requirements engineering,” ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2018(E). pp. 1–104, 2018.[21] Software Engineering Institute, “CMMI for Development, Version 1.3,” Softw. Eng. Process Manag. Progr., no. November, pp. 1–520, 2010.[22] R. Stevens, Systems Engineering: Coping with Complexity. Prentice Hall, 1998.[23] B. Nuseibeh and S. Easterbrook, “Requirements engineering: A Roadmap,” in Proceedings of the conference on The future of Software engineering - ICSE ’00, 2000, vol. 1, pp. 35–46.[24] T. S. E. Maibaum
., © American Society for Engineering Education, 2021 2021 ASEE National Conference vol. 111, no. 7, pp. 1317–1330, 2019, doi: 10.1037/edu0000344.[24] B. H. McAnulty, C. A. O’Connor, and L. Sklare, “Analysis of Student and Faculty Opinion of Academic Advising Services,” NACADA J., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 49–61, 1987, doi: 10.12930/0271-9517-7.1.49.[25] A. W. Al-Khafaji and F. E. Rebholz, “The Quest for Excellence and Faculty Assessment,” J. Constr. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 43–56, 2000.[26] D. S. Cottrell, “Outreach scholarship: A valuable key to promotion and tenure,” ASEE Annu. Conf. Proc., pp. 12707–12725, 2003.[27] K. A. O’Meara, Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship in faculty
%20Low_Code%20Development%20Platforms.pdf?submissionGuid=83 c10178-9f4a-4980-8d27-2f20a0fcdaa1[8] D. Rani and R. Ranjan, “A Comparative Study of Saas, PaaS and IaaS in Cloud Computing,” International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, vol. 4, no. 6, Jun. 2014.[9] B. P. Hehl and N. Saxena, “Applicability of RAD,” CS 575, Drexel University, 2005. [Online] Available: https://www.cs.drexel.edu/~bmitchel/course/cs575/classpres/w1/SaxenaHehlPaper.pdf[10] R. Jain, A. Chandrasekaran, and L. Castro, “Identifying Suitable Projects For Rapid Development: Some Proposed Selection Criteria,” International Journal of Management & Information Systems (IJMIS), vol. 19, no. 2, 2015
. Sorensen, B. R. Swan, and D. K. Anthony, “A Survey of Capstone Engineering Courses in North America,” in Journal of Engineering Education, [Online] 1995.[11] J. W. Thomas, “A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning,” The Autodesk Foundation, San Rafael, California. [Online] 2000.[12] M. Gagné and E. L. Deci, “Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation,” in Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 26: 331-362. [Online] 2005.[13] D. S. Yeager and C. S. Dweck, “Mindsets That Promote Resilience: When Students Believe That Personal Characteristics Can Be Developed,” in Educational Psychologist, vol. 47(4): 302-314, [Online] 2012.[14] S. Viswanathan, “Implementation of Effective Capstone Projects in
] Donaher, S., & Dancz, C. L. A., & Plumblee, J. M., & Gordon, A. S., & Patel, K. (2017,June), Reviewing the Current State of Grand Challenge Scholars Programs Across the UnitedStates Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio.10.18260/1-2--28806[4] Dancz, C. L. A., & Plumblee, J. M., & Bargar, D., & Brunner, P. W., & High, K. A., &Klotz, L., & Landis, A. E. (2016, June), A Rubric to Assess Civil Engineering Students' GrandChallenge Sustainable Entrepreneurship Projects Paper presented at 2016 ASEE AnnualConference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.26432[5] Carter, D. F., Ro, H. K., Alcott, B., & Lattuca, L. R. (2016), Co-Curricular Connections
thecomputational domain is 12H in X-direction, 7H in Y-direction, and 5H in Z-direction. In thisregion, governing equations (i.e., 3D incompressible Navier–Stokes (NS) equation) are solved toobtain flow field details around the building. Mesh and geometry generations are explained by © American Society for Engineering Education, 2021 2021 ASEE Midwest Section ConferenceVerma et al. [1]. The grid spacing size is 0.1H in each of X, Y, and Z-direction as shown in Fig 4.The total number of cells in the mesh of the computational domain is 419,000. Fig. 4. Mesh of computational domain in (a) XZ-plane at y = 3.5 (b) XY-plane at z = 0.5.2.1.1. Boundary ConditionSetting correct boundary conditions is
. Seven students agreed to participate.Table 1 contains the demographic information for the seven participants. Students weredeidentified and assigned a pseudonym A-G. All students are considered “in-state” and lived oncampus at the time of the interview. All seven participants were 18-24 years old and single,never married. None of the participants had religious affiliations. There was one femaleparticipant and six male. Student B identified as Asian-American and the other six participantsidentified as Caucasian. None of the seven participants were first-generation college students. Allof the students had two parents with bachelor's degrees or higher and reported a householdincome of over $40,000.Table 1: Demographic information for the seven
Paper ID #34701The (Augmented) World Is Our CampusMr. David S. Pixton, Brigham Young University David Pixton is a subject liaison at the Harold B. Lee Library at Brigham Young University. In this role, he is responsible for providing research training and assistance to students and faculty within the majority of engineering and technology fields offered at the university. He holds degrees in Mechanical Engineering and Library and Information Science. David’s current research is focused on improving learning in a library environment, including the use of augmented reality for educational purposes, and a pedagogical
300 pharmaceutical, chemical,biotechnology, and medical device companies. His remarkable productivity in medical field hasearned him a nickname of “Edison of Medicine” [21]. Another pioneer, Donald A. B. Lindberg was committed to his visionary ideas ofapplying computer technology to healthcare. A pathologist by his medical training he was avisionary and became a leader in the use of computers in medicine. He was instrumental inestablishing the American Medical Informatics Association and became the Founding President.His pioneering work in biomedical research and health information has contributed globally inmedical informatics, patient care, cancer research, molecular biology, and other educationalprograms. He served as a director of
and pressure at the end must be known. For the exitsin a reservoir or a tank, the final elevation is considered to be on the surface of the fluid. B. Difficulty selection.Before a system could be generated, different difficulty levels needed to be identified to ensurethat a student new to the topic would receive a reasonable problem, and a more practiced studentcould be given a more challenging problem [6], [7]. There are several factors that affect thedifficulty of these problems. First, problems with either an unknown flow rate or an unknownpipe diameter are the most difficult since they require an iterative approach to finding the Darcyfriction factor, with having an unknown diameter being somewhat more difficult than anunknown flow rate
Paper ID #32964The Educative Design Problem Framework: Relevance, SociotechnicalComplexity, Accessibility, and Nondeterministic High CeilingsDr. Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico Dr. Vanessa Svihla is a learning scientist and associate professor at the University of New Mexico in the Organization, Information and Learning Sciences program and in the Chemical and Biological En- gineering Department. She served as Co-PI on an NSF RET Grant and a USDA NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revolutionizing Engineering Departments
; introducing digitalmodulation, especially OFDM as quickly as possible. Highlighting communication systemdesign trade-offs was also a focus of the ebook. This ebook combined with the Emonanet*TIMS FreeWire experiments provided an avenue for offering lectures and a laboratoryexperience to a combination of in-person and on-line learners.References[1] A. B. Carlson and P. B. Crilly, Communication systems : an introduction to signals and noise in electrical communication, 5th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2010, pp. xx, 924 p.[2] L. W. Couch, Digital and analog communication systems, 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson, 2013, pp. xxi, 762 p.[3] S. S. Haykin and M. Moher, Modern wireless communications. Upper
of the QA strategy,engineering choices, and conclusions. Learning outcomes pertaining to analysis (see above) are hence assessed by assignment sheets,and learning outcomes pertaining to design and development are assessed by the project. Amidterm and a final exam assess a selection of all learning outcome categories. In the face-to-facecourse, all exams were completed on paper, while projects and assignments sheets were preparedand submitted digitally. In-class examples were facilitated using a combination of digital slidesand physical dry erase board, as appropriate. B. HyFlex Implementation Approach The SQA course taught during fall 2020 enrolled 17 students. Course meetings took placeTuesdays and Thursdays for 1 hour and 20
stereotypes around computing and computer science, particularly when it comes to creatingcode [5].To counter these stereotypes and to increase interest and diversity in computing, new courses andopportunities that infuse computing with creative disciplines, such as the arts, have beendeveloped and made available to K-12 audiences [6-8]. In this paper, we describe a competitionpiloted in the 2019-20 school year using EarSketch [9, 10], a learn-to-code through musicremixing platform where high school students were invited to submit original remixes of songsby Grammy award-winning R&B artist Ciara. Students coded in Python or JavaScript andcreated entries that conformed to the competition rules. In this paper, we present the details ofthis pilot
-7_7Mobach MP (2008) Do virtual worlds create better real worlds? Virtual Real 12(3):163PWC (2016). http://www.pwc.com/us/en/industrial-products/next-manufacturing/augmented- Proceedings of the 2021 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference Baylor University, Waco, TX Copyright © 2021, American Society for Engineering Education 14 virtual-reality-manufacturing.htmlParsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions:2006-07. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department ofEducation.Jaggars, S. S. and Xu, D. 2013. Predicting online student outcomes from a
picture” Proceedings of the annual meeting of theAmerican Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference a, 12 – 15 June, Portland, OR,2005.[6] R.M. Marra and B. Bogue, “Women engineering students' self efficacy-a longitudinalmultiinstitution study”. Women in Engineering ProActive Network, 2006.[7] R.M. Marra, K.A. Rodgers, D. Shen, and B. Bogue, “Women engineering students andselfefficacy: A multi‐year, multi‐institution study of women engineering student self‐efficacy,”Journal of engineering education, vol. 98, no. 1, pp. 27 – 38.[8] J. Moore, C. D. Lovell, T. McGann, and J. Wyrick, “Why involvement matters: A reviewof research on student involvement in the collegiate setting,” College Student Affairs Journal,vol 17, no. 2, pp