, dynamics and heat transfer. He has always made an effort to incorporate experientiallearning into the classroom through the use of demonstrations, guest speakers, student projects and sitevisits. Dr. Kerzmann is a firm believer that all students learn in their own unique way. In an effort to reachall students, he has consistently deployed a host of teaching strategies into his classes, including videos,example problems, quizzes, hands-on laboratories, demonstrations, and group work. Dr. Kerzmann isenthusiastic in the continued pursuit of his educational goals, research endeavors, and engagement ofmechanical engineering students. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Creating Interdisciplinary Sustainability
Remote Laboratory to Enhance Engineering Technology Education”, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Vancouver, B.C. Canada, June 2011.7. Goeser, P.T., Flett, A., Kriske, J. and Panter, C. “MatLab Marina: Web-Based Tutorials for Teaching Programming Concepts using MATLAB”, American Society for Engineering Education Southeastern Section Annual Conference, Starkville, MS, April 2012.8. Gottfried, B.S., “Teaching Computer Programming Effectively Using Active Learning”, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Milwaukee, WI, June 1997.9. Chyung, S.Y., Moll, A., Marx, B., Frary, M. and Callahan, J., “Improving Engineering Student’s Cognitive
.). Page 23.1396.8 Figure 4. Partially Expanded node of Chapter 2 (Laplace and Modeling Review) with Equations Figure 5. Partially Expanded node of Chapter 4 (Time Response) with Equations Additionally, a Wiki to support programming activities using the MCU is hosted (e.g., athttp://matlab-nsfwiki.csc.tntech.edu/) and contains the following content: 1) Labs (including an introductory laboratory on the toolkit and Matlab toolbox) 2) Help files 3) Pre-labs (including pages on pre-requisite programming constructs, such as I/O, decision-making (if/else or switch), loops (for, while) and arrays) 4
Kazmer, University of Massachusetts, Lowell David Kazmer is a Professor of Plastics Engineering at UMass Lowell where he has previously served as Associate Dean. His academic work is motivated by industry experiences with teaching and research related to engineering education, design, manufacturing, and optimization.Dr. Olga Pierrakos, James Madison University OLGA PIERRAKOS is an associate professor and founding faculty member of the James Madison Uni- versity Department of Engineering, which graduated its inaugural class in May 2012. At JMU, Dr. Pier- rakos is the Director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering Education (CIEE) and Director of the Advanced Thermal Fluids Laboratory. Her interests in engineering
learning about diverse peers that occurs in formalinstructional settings like classrooms, lecture halls, and laboratories. Maximizing achievement ofthe educational benefits of diversity requires all forms of diversity and educationally purposefulengagement. It is not enough for students with different social identities to simply exist at thesame institutions; they must also be meaningfully engaged with one another in both curricularand co-curricular activities.7,8,9Racial/ethnic diversity is associated with a broad array of positive academic and social outcomes.For example, in a study of 594 Black college students, Strayhorn found that interactionaldiversity experiences were a positive, strong and consistent predictor of perceived studentlearning
postdoctoral research scholar at The Pennsylvania State University focusing on community informatics. She earned her PhD in computer science and applications from Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University (Virginia Tech), where she was a IBM Research Fellow and won an IBM Research Dissertation Fellowship. As a graduate student, her research and perspectives were featured in the New York Times and Computerworld. She is affiliated with the Coalition to Diversify Computing (CDC), based in Washington, DC. The CDC targets students and faculty with the focus of increasing the number of minorities successfully transition- ing into computing-based careers in academia, federal laboratories, and industry. As a CDC
ExternshipsAbstract Summer immersive experiences provide students the opportunity to explore the limits of theirengineering education and develop a depth in a field of study. For institutions that centrallymanage these experiences, ranging from experiments conducted at other academic locations toresearch and development with industry partners, to procurement and development withgovernment laboratories and program offices, it can be difficult to ensure that all participants arereceiving quality experiences. A survey had previously been administered to capture the value ofstudent’s summer immersive experience based on ABET Student Outcomes. Much of the dataproved inconclusive due to the structure of the questions. However the data was used as abaseline for
learning stylethat is the result of neuroscience research on how the human brain processes and retains newinformation”. 1Introduction“Acknowledging that students learn at different speeds and that they differ in their ability tothink abstractly or understand complex ideas is like acknowledging that students at any given agearen’t all the same height: It is not a statement of worth, but of reality”.2 In a differentiatedclassroom and laboratory, the teacher proactively plans and carries out varied approaches tocontent, process, and product in anticipation and response to student differences in readiness,interest, and learning needs. According to Tomlinson, our teaching style “can influence astudents’ IQ by 20 points in either direction, that’s a 40
. Dr. Thole has published over 180 peer-reviewed archival journal and conference papers and advised over 50 theses and dissertations. She founded the Experimental and Computational Convection Laboratory (ExCCL) which is a Pratt and Whitney Center of Excellence for heat transfer. She is a Fellow of ASME and serves as the Chair of the Board of Directors for the International Gas Turbine Institute, as the Chair of the ASME - ME Department Head Executive Committee, as a member of the Vision 2030 Committee, and as the Chair of ASME’s Committee on Honors. She has been recognized by the U.S. White House Champion of Change for recruitment efforts in STEM and by Penn State’s Rosemary Schraer Mentoring Award.Ms. Melissa
Paper ID #9892Promoting Research-Based Instruction in Statics and Dynamics: A VirtualCommunity of PracticeDr. Brian P. Self, California Polytechnic State University Brian P. Self obtained his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Engineering Mechanics from Virginia Tech, and his Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Utah. He worked in the Air Force Research Laboratories before teaching at the U.S. Air Force Academy for seven years. Brian has taught in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo since 2006. During the 2011-2012 academic year he participated in a professor exchange, teaching at the
Paper ID #9848Research Experience for Teachers Site: A Work-in Progress ReportDr. Vikram Kapila, Polytechnic Institute of New York University VIKRAM KAPILA is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering. His research interests are in control system technology, mechatronics, and K-12 STEM education. He directs an NSF funded Web-Enabled Mechatronics and Process Control Remote Laboratory, an NSF funded Research Experience for Teachers Site, and an NSF funded GK-12 Fellows project. He received NYU-Poly’s 2002, 2008, and 2011 Jacobs Excellence in Education Award
, James Madison University OLGA PIERRAKOS is an associate professor and founding faculty member of the James Madison Uni- versity Department of Engineering. At JMU, Dr. Pierrakos is the Director of the Center for Innovation Page 24.1043.1 in Engineering Education (CIEE) and Director of the Advanced Thermal Fluids Laboratory. Her interests in engineering education research center around recruitment and retention, engineer identity, engineering design instruction and methodology, learning through service, problem based learning methodologies, assessment of student learning, as well as complex problem solving
: AnApplication of the Four-Component Instructional Design Model to Cad Instruction.25 Kirstukas, S. (2013). A Preliminary Scheme for Automated Grading and Instantaneous Feedback of 3D SolidModels. Proc. Midyear Conf. Eng. Design Graphics Division of the Am. Soc. for Eng. Education, pp. 53-58, 2013.26 Devine & Laingen(2013 midyear)27 Branoff, T.J. (2004). Constraint-Based Modeling in the Engineering Graphics Curriculum: Laboratory Activitiesand Evaluation Strategies. Proc. Midyear Conf. Eng. Design Graphics Division of the Am. Soc. for Eng. Education,pp. 132-138, 2004. Page 24.1093.1428 Ault, H. K. (1999). Using Geometric
thegrade breakdown shown in Table 1. Table 1: First year engineering grade breakdown for the first semester course. Grade Category % of Grade Preparation Assignments 10% Application Assignments 20% Laboratory Assignments 21% Journals 3% Design Project 5% Extra Weekly Assignments BONUS 3% Quizzes 6% Midterm Exams 20
judgment on the new, industry experiencedfaculty member during the tenure process. Additionally, few practicing engineers have hadformal instruction in being an effective teacher and, despite the occasional student request in theother direction, no amount of good stories alone will ensure students effectively learn the coursematerial needed to be successful in their future endeavors.23,24Value in ResearchUnless the experienced candidate spent their industry time in a Research and Development roleor working in a laboratory setting, it is difficult to imagine that others will see their experience asvaluable for the research component of the typical academic appointment. However, thosemaking the transition should not despair, for there is a great
. Page 24.1219.13 17. Wikipedia, “Fossil-fuel power station,” found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_power, Dec 2013. 18. Wikispaces, “How Coal Power Works,” found at http://coalpower.wikispaces.com/How+Coal+Power+Works, Dec 2013.19. Duke Energy, “How IGCC Works,” found at http://www.duke-energy.com/about-us/how-igcc-works.asp, Dec 2013.20. National Energy Technology Laboratory, “Pinon Pine IGCC Power Project ,” Project Fact Sheet, Process Flow Diagram, found at http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/cctdp/project_briefs/pinon/pinondemo.html, Dec 2013.21. Discover Physiks, found at http://fisikamir.blogspot.com/2012/02/change-of-phase.html, Dec 2013
Inter-Disciplinary, Mulit-Cultural Teams: Lessons from the Field.”Construction Research Congress 2012, Construction Institute of ASCE, West LaFayette, IN.6 Yates, H.N. (2010), op cit.7 Caine, R.N. & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Association for Supervisionand Curriculum Development, Addison Wesley, Alexandria, VA, 80- 87.8 Learning Point Associates (LPA). (2010). “Constructivist teaching and learning models.” North Central RegionalEducational Laboratory, (August 22, 2010).9 Monson, C. (2011). “Concepts of inquiry, constructivist learning, and the potentials of studio in constructioneducation.” 47th ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings, Associated Schools of Construction, Omaha,NE.10
improve the self-efficacy of community college students as it relates to research andwhether this has an impact on their long-term career plans to pursue a STEM career.Transfer-to-Excellence Research Experiences for Undergraduates ProgramIn 2011, the University of California, Berkeley developed the Transfer-to-Excellence ResearchExperiences for Undergraduates program (TTE REU), a summer research program forcommunity college students that is catalyzed by early hands-on involvement in research projectsthat apply nanotechnology and biotechnology to address energy problems in a high caliberresearch environment. The program objectives are to: 1) provide challenging science andengineering research projects in leading edge research laboratories; 2
questions regarding the course. A detailed questions need to be surveyed in thefuture to recognize the importance and also how to improve different aspects of this course.In parallel with the self-evaluation of each course by the instructor, we also conduct a course evaluationby students. This topic is a part of the HVAC laboratory course. The course objectives introduced earlierin the course are again provided to the students at the end of the semester. The students’ input on whetherthe materials offered have met the objectives is then complied and used in the program outcomeassessment process. Results of instructor course evaluations (conducted by students) are reviewed by theDepartment Chair and the Dean and shared with the faculty
study approach an appropriate research method (8, 17, 20) because we areaddressing the general research question, "What is or is not engineering innovativeness?" toengineers who have successfully experienced the innovation process and demonstrated that theyare engineering innovators. We are also extending the understandings that emerged from ourengineering innovativeness pilot study (9, 17). Page 24.1247.8This study was conducted with a grounded theory analysis approach because the results of thisstudy were generated inductively from interviews of experienced and recognized engineeringinnovators rather than from experiments in a laboratory or from
. A major focus of this program is on tiered-mentorship, whereby graduate students alsomentor the undergraduates. In the model of graduate student mentors, the graduate student andundergraduate have periodic meetings with the faculty member to report their progress anddiscuss data/results. Depending on the structure of the laboratory, the undergraduate studenteither works directly with the faculty member or the faculty member assigns a graduate studentto work with the undergraduate student. Under the guidance of the faculty member or facultymember/graduate student, the undergraduate students conduct a research project focused onengineering approaches to study the treatment of diabetes or its complications
. For this reason, research teams comprised of engineers and scientists quickly respond after a major earthquake by traveling to the impacted cities to inspect the post‐earthquake status of its structures. They may also instrument the structure to measure the structure’s behavior to any potential aftershocks. One such research group is the NEES@UCLA Mobile Laboratory. (www.nees.ucla.edu). The NEES@UCLA team recently finished a field monitoring program in Christchurch, New Zealand following the 2011 earthquake. The team was able to set‐up instruments on several structures and measured several aftershocks. They have requested that you help them with data analysis since they are overwhelmed
hereinattempts to supply this much needed assessment data. The course was taught as a pilot to 130 on-campus students during the summer of 2013.Based on the feedback of the pilot group, the course was fine-tuned prior to offering it full-scalein Fall 2013. Over 16,000 students signed up for the open version of the course withapproximately 3000 students active in the course on a weekly basis. This research is based onthe modifications made to blended elements of the course (MOOC, in-class laboratory activities,in-class problem solving) from the pilot study and examines how students’ conceptualunderstanding of circuits topics changed over seven weeks.3. MethodologyDescription of Circuits and Electronics Course Circuits and Electronics is a 2
. Wilczynski served in fellowships at the MIT Charles Stark Draper Laboratory and at the Harvard School of Public Health, and was the National Director of the FIRST Robotics Competition. His professional interests are in the areas of data acquisition and analysis, mechanical design and virtual teams for product development. He presently serves on the Executive Advisory Board of the FIRST Foundation and on the Naval Engineering in the 21st Century Committee of the National Academy of Engineering. Previously he served as the Vice President of Public Awareness for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, as a national officer of the American Society for Engineering Education, and as an evaluator for the New England
STEM fields. The goal was to determine if exposing the students to a roboticworkshop would influence them to consider a career in a STEM discipline.The questionnaire used a Likert scale for the intrinsic motivation inventory (IMI) assessmentproposed in McAuley et al.8. IMI is used to measure participants' subjective experience as it isrelated to a specific activity in a laboratory setting, or as in our case, the robotics workshop. Thequestions in this survey measure four major dimensions of internal, or intrinsic, motivation.These dimensions are 1) interest/enjoyment, 2) perceived competence, 3) effort/importance and4) tension/pressure. The questions listed in the appendix are based on these four dimensions.With this questionnaire the
billing. He holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Dr. Steven Holland, Milwaukee School of Engineering Steven S. Holland (M ’13) was born in Chicago, IL, in 1984. He received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from the Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE), Milwaukee, WI, in 2006, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and computer engineering from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, in 2008 and 2011 respectively. From 2006 to 2011, he was a Research Assistant working in the Antennas and Propagation Laboratory (APLab), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst. He was then a Senior Sensors Engineer with the
assigned in the place of two weeks of laboratory in a Strength ofMaterials course. Students were in groups of 4-5 and were given four weeks to design andconstruct an interactive demonstration of an engineering concept, which was then presented onemorning at a local Middle School.The specific aims of the outreach project described in the project statement (Appendix A) were: 1. to excite middle school students about science and engineering and break down misconceptions about engineers, and 2. to instill in undergraduate engineering students the need for science outreach while giving them an opportunity to creatively teach course content.The learning outcomes were expressed as the following:: • identify a concept related to
to provide a first-level evaluation method that may determine whichsystems can fit general needs right out of the box. Platforms that are easy to implement are those that areadaptable to the wide range of laboratories, studios, or workspaces and have strong online and offlinetechnical support. Lastly, course/application relevance (CAR) is defined as how appropriate the systemis with respect to the goals of the course/application. This includes taking into account the HI and SIratings, ease-of-implementation (EI), and how well they are aligned with the nature of the problem-solving application. It is important for the designer/instructor to identify clearly the expectation of the course/application.If the goal is to make people think
developed (including oversight and assessment internal to therespective branch campus, and which may transition to a peer basis as shared governance isincreased), but which at the same time are aligned with the main campus by appropriaterelationships between the branch and home campus chairs that ensure upholding of the academicstandards.Another important point in the organizational structure, and one that has direct implication onaccreditation status, is the degree of curricular flexibility between the locations. Some degree offlexibility is needed due to the differences in teaching resources and laboratories, quality ofstudents, and qualification of faculty. This need can be difficult to embrace for departments thatpride themselves of a long
is like acknowledging that students at any given agearen’t all the same height: It is not a statement of worth, but of reality”.2 In a differentiatedclassroom and laboratory, the teacher proactively plans and carries out varied approaches tocontent, process, and product in anticipation and response to student differences in readiness,interest, and learning needs.According to Tomlinson, our teaching style “can influence a students’ IQ by 20 points in eitherdirection, that’s a 40 point IQ swing”.2 Key concepts of differentiated instruction include but arenot limited to: More qualitative than quantitative. Merely assigning more or less work based on a learner’s ability is typically ineffective. Rooted in assessment. Evaluation