properly, and documented results as required. Page 26.414.7 • B: The project goals are “almost” there, or achieved perhaps more by accident than skill, and the documentation is good, but could be a little more complete, or just neater and more organized. • C: The project is not quite complete or functional, but at least one part is viable, and with a little more time or work students could have achieved the goal. • Failure: The project work plan is not viable, or the students gave up.When creating this grading rubric, the easiest level to define is the “A”. Defining the level ofwork for the “B”, “C”, and failure, is
is part of ProjectEngin’s curriculum units centered on globalissues. In this project, students focus on developing wind, flood, and earthquake proof housing,a problem confronting people in many parts of both the developed and the developing world.Workshop Description. Please provide a detailed description of the proposed workshop that, atminimum, explicitly addresses the following (maximum 4,000 characters): a. Learning objectives b. Hands-on activities and interactive exercises c. Materials that participants can take with them Page 18.4.3 d. Practical application for teachers and outreach staff“Building
2015 ASEE Zone III Conference (Gulf Southwest – Midwest – North Midwest Sections) Developing a Sustainable ABET Continuous Improvement Plan Byron Garry South Dakota State UniversityAbstractA sustainable continuous improvement process was required for use in the ABET-ASAC andABET-ETAC accreditation process for our Operations Management, Construction Management,and Electronics Engineering Technology programs. Considering the state of assessmentrequirements in higher education, ABET accreditation standards, and the tools of quality andcontinuous improvement, our Department of Construction &
9/8/2014 Section Last Name Chambers 1 A √ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Gonzalez 1 A √ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Martinez 1 B √ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Abdulla 1 B √ 1 2 3
). Available from URL http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~bwilson/training.html, accessed 18 December 2014.7. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., Holum, A., "Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible." American Educator 15 (3), 6-11 (1991). pp. 6-11.8. This description is paraphrased from the website of the American Modeling Teachers Association, URL http://modelinginstruction.org, accessed 18 December 2014.9. Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., Steinberg, R. N., “Student Expectations in Introductory Physics,” Am. J. Phys. 66, 212-224 (1998).10. Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., Fincham, F. D., “Curiosity and Exploration: Facilitating Positive Subjective Experiences and Personal Growth Opportunities,” Journal of Personality
, 2011. 111-128. 8. Hamon, C., and M. Dunlap Green. "B., Camburn, B, Crawford, R., Jensen, D., 2014 “Virtual or Physical Prototypes? Development and Testing of a Prototyping Planning Tool”." 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN June 15-18, (2014). Page 26.1318.11
college edition”, Public Purpose, American Association of State Colleges and Universities, January 20108. L.C. Wilcox and M.S. Wilcox, “A review and evaluation of engineering education in transition”, IEEE Proc. 8th international conference on computer science and education (ICCSE), Sri Lanka (April 26-28, 2013)9. J. Bishop and M. Verleger, “The flipped classroom: a survey of research”, paper 6219, Proc. 120th annual ASEE annual conference and exposition, Atlanta, GA (June 23-26, 2013)10. A. Sams, J. Bergmann, K. Daniels, B. Bennett, H. Marshall, and K. Arfstrom, “What is flipped learning: the four pillars of flip”, published by the Flipped Learning Network (2014), www.flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain
, students also learned fundamental multidisciplinary principles inorder to achieve a compact, portable, and an affordable system while taking consideration of cost,performance, and functionality.The final class grade confirmed effective learning outcomes of the project team. All five studentsof the team received class grade A or B while the course success was defined a grade C orhigher. In addition, a class survey administered to the team students showed the students' fullsatisfaction with the course on how their learning of multidisciplinary mechatronics engineeringimproved for their professional career development in the future. As a result, students learnedclear lessons on how a multidisciplinary engineering design project is implemented. In
, 2007 (Springer Science+Business Media, New York). 3. Dugan, John P., et al, Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership. International Leadership Association, November 2006, Maryland. 4. Herrington, J., et al, A Guide to Authentic e-Learning, 2014 (Routledge, London and New York). 5. Johrendt, JL., et al, A Learning Outcomes Survey of Engineering Cooperative Education Students: Preliminary Findings, 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, paper AC 2009-789, Austin, TX, USA. 6. Nelson, B. C., et al, Global channels of evidence for learning and assessment in complex game environments, 2011, British Journal of Educational Technology, 42:88-100. 7. Software Engineering
and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, pp. 157–169, 2000.9. Miville, M. L., Gelso, C. J., Pannu, R., Liu, W., Touradji, P., Holloway, P., et al., “Appreciating similarities and valuing differences: The Miville-Guzman Universality- Diversity Scale,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 291–307, 1999.10. Jesiek, B. K., Shen, Y., Haller, Y., “Cross-Cultural Competence: A Comparative Assessment of Engineering Students,” International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 144-155, 2012. Page 19.16.11
throughout the semestercompared to learning facts, theories, and equations (e.g., static equilibrium equations) that couldbe presented and then practiced in one activity.With these goals and methods in mind, the TA can begin designing in-class activities. Severalresources summarize the variety of active learning techniques, and we refer the reader to theseexcellent guides.10-13 Deciding which in-class activities to use depends on the activity goals.Regardless of the technique used, many of the following questions, posed by the “ActiveLearning in STEM Courses” mini-course, should be considered when designing a newassignment: 1. Preparation a. How will students prepare for the in-class work? b. Will this preparation be
., Zoghi, B., Morgan, J., Zhan, W., " Product and System Development: Creating a New Focus for anElectronics Engineering Technology Program,” 2012 American Society for Engineering Education AnnualConference, San Antonio, TX, 2012.[4] Zhang, J.A., Burbank, K., Adams, R., “A Systems Approach to Teaching “Introduction to ElectronicCommunications” for ECET Students,” 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, SaltLake City, UT, 2004.[5] Porter, J.R., “Teaching Applied Electromagnetics to Engineering Technology Students,” 2004 American Societyof Engineering Education Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, June 20-23, 2004[6] Beasley, J.S., Hymer, J.D., Miller, G.M., “Electronic Communications: A System Approach”, Prentice Hall
ABET Outcomes (d) and (e) are the most supported by the Innovation Sandbox Program.While these results should be expected at the intersection of engineering and a program such asInnovation Sandbox, we find this table to be extremely useful in communicating the value of theprogram to the various engineering disciplines at our university. Mapping Between ABET Outcomes and Sandbox Outcome Sandbox Outcomes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, (a) science, and engineering X X Ability to design and conduct experiments, as (b) well as
Conga LineThe fourth lab was also based upon light sensing and required the students to implementBraitenberg vehicles. This was a demonstration of reactive control and creating photophobic andphotophilic animal-like behaviors based upon excitatory and inhibitory connections between thesensors and motors. Based upon the wiring connections, the robots would demonstrate love,aggression, fear, and explorer behaviors. The wiring and the lab demonstration images areshown in Figures 3 and 4. (a) (b) (c) (d) Figure 3: Valentino Braitenberg Vehicles Figure 4: Braitenberg Vehicles LabIn the fifth lab, the students were required
Paper ID #11126Civic Engagement as a Component of Engineering EducationDr. Shoba Krishnan, Santa Clara University Dr. Shoba Krishnan is an Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at Santa Clara University. She has a strong interest in engineering education, and is involved in several community based activities to increase the participation of underrepresented groups in engineering. She collaborates with non-profits that are in need for technical expertise and with K-8 schools in need of STEM programs. She helped es- tablish the IDEAS (Interdisciplinary Design Engineering And Service) program and developed the course
Applied not 40% Did not Matriculated apply Admitted matriculate 51% 60% 87% 39% (a) (b) (c)Figure 1. (a) Application to TAMU; (b) Admissions to TAMU; and (c) Matriculation to TAMU.Factors - Graduate School SelectionParticipant responses on factors that influenced their selection of a graduate school were codedinto four categories based on previous research10. The categories included institutional factors,department factors, faculty factors and personal factors. Response percentages for
Instructional Support in the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education at Penn State. She holds a doctoral degree in educational psychology emphasizing applied measurement and testing. In her position, Sarah is responsible for developing instructional support programs for faculty, providing evaluation support for educational proposals and projects, and working with faculty to publish educational research. Her research interests primarily involve creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship education.Irene B. Mena, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Irene B. Mena has a B.S. and M.S. in industrial engineering, and a Ph.D. in engineering education. Her research interests include first-year engineering
shown in Figure 5.Figure 3: AC unit shown on the support frame. The support frame can be modeled by a pin at theleft end and a single vertical reaction at the right end due to the rigid vertical strut. The AC unitwas assumed to be supported at the four corners.Figure 4: Sketch of an AC support beam showing the AC unit placed at an arbitrary location andwith non-symmetric loads due to the AC unit. Page 26.983.6Figure 5. 3D Model of beam displacement under specific boundary conditions: (a) cantilever; (b)fixed at both boundaries; (c) fixed (left) and pinned (right) boundaries; and (d) simply-supported.Roof Truss Analysis and Solving Systems of
Page 26.805.12 transformative learning: A dialogue between John M. Dirkx and Jack Mezirow.” Journal of Transformative Education, 4(2), 123–39.2. Downey, G. L., Lucena, J. C., Moskal, B. M., Parkhurst, R., Bigley, T., Hays, C., … Nichols-Belo, A. 2006. The globally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who define problems differently.” Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 1–16.3. Downey, G. 2011. Epilogue beyond global competence: Implications for engineering pedagogy. In G. L. Downey and K. Beddoes (Eds.), What is global engineering for? The making of international educators (pp. 415–432). Morgan & Claypool.4. Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. 2010
, etal.18 The two statistical tests explored in this paper are the Chi-square test and the t-test toanalyze retention rates and students’ GPA respectively. B. Statistical OverviewThe Chi-square test is used to compare frequency of occurrence for those results that come fromcategorical (discrete) data, such as retention rates. A specific version of this test is the Pearson’s Page 26.34.4Chi-square test that compares the expected value of an occurrence to the actual occurrence rate.Retention rate data is discrete because a person can only be in a state of ‘Yes’ (the person wasretained) or ‘No’ (the person was not retained). Alternatively term
informaladvancement structures in other labor market sectors.15-17 Of course, this does not imply thatovert and subtle processes of discrimination and bias are absent in federal agencies; just that (a)LGBT employees have baseline legal protections not guaranteed in other sectors, and (b) moreformalized advancement structures in federal agencies mean that, at least in theory, hiring,promotion, and disciplinary procedures are under greater scrutiny to align with anti-discrimination policies. As such, although organizations in the private, non-profit and educationsectors likely vary widely in their treatment of LGBT professionals, the differential experiencesof LGBT professionals in STEM agencies documented here may be equally if not more extremein other
: Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Items Agree (+4) (+2) (0) (-2) Disagree (-4) a. Compared to the traditional lecture and exams, two project reports/case studies helped me better understand the basic concepts of the design aspects of the water and wastewater treatment processes. b. Compared to the traditional lecture and exams, project reports/case studies helped me better understand the practical applications of environmental engineering. c. Compared to the traditional lecture and exams, project reports/case studies helped me better understand how to write a
, L.J., Ikeda, E.K., & Yee, J.A. (2000). How service learning affects students. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California Los Angeles. 5. Billig, S.H. & Waterman, A.S. (2003). Studying service learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 6. Blum, L. & Frieze, C. & Hazzan, O. & Dias, M. B. (2006) “ A Cultural Perspective on Gender Diversity in Computing” Proceedings of ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education 2006 7. Brainard, S.G. and L. Carlin (1998), “A six year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science,” Journal of Engineering Education, 87: 369-376. 8. Braxton, J. M., Hirschy, A. S., &
Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 167-174.17. Durden, G. C. & Ellis, L. V., (1995), “The effects of attendance on student learning,” American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 85(2), 101-112.18. Senior, B. A., (2008), “Correlation between absences and final grades in a college course,” Proceedings of the 44th Annual Conference of the Associated Schools of Construction, Auburn, Alabama, April 2-6, 2008, on CD- ROM.19. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R., (eds.), (1999), “How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school”, National Academy Press, Washington, D. C., Chap. 3, 39-66.Buckles, S. G. & McMahon, M. E., (1971), “Further evidence on the value of lecture in elementary economics,” Journal of
evaluating preparation in mathematics and physics, incor- porating non-traditional teaching methods into the classroom, and engaging her students with interactive methods.Miss Manisha Tripathy, Texas A & M University Manisha Tripathy is a Masters student in Computer Science and Engineering Department at Texas A&M University.Currently she is working as a Student Worker with Engineering Academic and Student Affairs at Texas A&M University.She did her B Tech in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from KIIT University,India . Prior to joining as a master’s student,she worked as an Assistant System Analyst at Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.Her work primarily included java development and application manage
Paper ID #13341The Touchstone Engineering Leadership Development ProgramDr. Jay B. Brockman, University of Notre Dame Dr. Jay Brockman is the Associate Dean of Engineering for Experiential Learning and Community En- gagement. He received his Ph.D. in Computer Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University and previ- ously worked for Intel Corporation. He is also a founder of Emu Solutions, Inc., a startup company that is commercializing research in the area of high-performance computing.Dr. Victoria E Goodrich, University of Notre Dame Dr. Victoria Goodrich is the Director of the First-Year Engineering Program at the
), the John A. Curtis 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 III P.E., 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
is the past chair of the IN/IL section. He is a fellow of the Teaching Academy and listed in the Book of Great Teachers at Purdue University./ He was the first engineering faculty member to receive the national Campus Compact Thomas Ehrlich Faculty Award for Service-Learning. He was a co-recipient of the National Academy of Engineering’s Bernard Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education and the recipient of the National Society of Professional Engineers’ Educational Excellence Award and the ASEE Chester Carlson Award. He is a fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education and the National Society of Professional Engineers.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette
Paper ID #12024Using Robotics as the Technological Foundation for the TPACK Frameworkin K-12 ClassroomsAnthony Steven Brill, NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering Anthony Brill received his B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Nevada, Reno, in 2014. He is currently a M.S. student at the NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering, studying Me- chanical Engineering. He is also a fellow in their GK-12 program, promoting STEM education. He conducts research in the Mechatronics and Controls Laboratory, where his interests include controls and multi-robot systems.Dr. Jennifer B Listman, NYU Polytechnic School
benefit 20% 0% a) Take more time to figure out 67% 73% the solution2. What is the challenges did you feel b) As freshmen, it is hard to work 20% 55% when the instructor used the on a problem from scratch problem-based learning (PBL) in c) No much challenge for me 20% 9% this course? d) Other 0% 0% a) Give more time to work on the 67% 27% problem if time is permitted3