based on average test scoreswith partial credit. In my implementation, the course topics were grouped into categoriescorresponding to grade levels D, C, B, and A. Each category has 3-5 topics [D1-D5, C1-C4, B1-B3, and A1-A3], and the corresponding grade is earned if a short test for each topic (or in somecases, a pair of topics) in the category is “Approved”. A grade of Approved is earned fordemonstrating A-quality work (only minor errors permitted). A grade of “ConditionallyApproved” is earned for demonstrating B-quality work, with full approval being earned throughwriting corrections. A grade of “Not Yet Approved” is assigned for demonstrating C or lowerquality work, with full approval requiring another test of the same topic to be taken. In
andstyles, but there was no attempt to unify any of the classes. The primary point of similarity wasthat all the surveys and exam questions administered in this study were the same and were madetogether. All the exam questions were presented in a multiple-choice format to reflect the mostcommon method of questioning on the FE exam.University A required students to take the FE exam and students were reimbursed for the examcost if they passed. At University A, most senior students (approximately 75% or more per year)in civil engineering take the FE review course and depend on it as their sole source ofpreparation for the exam. Universities B and C strongly encouraged students to attempt the FEexam prior to graduation. At University B, review sessions
Paper ID #33179A Capstone Experience Through the Development of a Powder CompactionSystem During COVID-19 PandemicDr. Byul Hur, Texas A&M University Dr. B. Hur received his B.S. degree in Electronics Engineering from Yonsei University, in Seoul, Korea, in 2000, and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, in 2007 and 2011, respectively. In 2017, he joined the faculty of Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. USA, where he is currently an Assistant Professor. He worked as a postdoctoral associate from 2011 to 2016 at the University
] Peterson, M., Kraus, B. & Windham, T., 2005. Striving toward equity: Underrepresented minorities and mathematics. Society for Industrial and Applied Math, 38(3), Retrieved January 10, 2011, from SIAM: http://www.siam.org/news/news.php?id=50.[5] Alexander, B. B., Lyons, L., Pasch, J. E., & Patterson, J.,1996. Team Approach in the First Research Experience for Undergraduates in Botany/Zoology 152: Evaluation report. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, LEAD Center.[6] Foertsch, J. A., Alexander, B. B., & Penberthy, D. L.,1997. Evaluation of the UW-Madison’s Summer Undergraduate Research Programs: Final Report. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Madison, LEAD Center.[7] Alexander, B. B
), a weighted system familiar to many in higher education. The two primaryvariants are the `straight’ scale (i.e. A, B, C, D, F) and the somewhat more granular `plus/minus’scale (i.e. A+, A, A-, B+, etc.), both used widely. Despite research on cumulative GPAs, gradeinflation, and academic performance, there is a dearth of research correlating grading systemsdirectly to students’ passion, interest, or motivation toward their coursework.In this work, we consider another GPA system using a continuous scale in which students’numerical course grade (0-100%) would map directly to their course GPA (0-4). The approachallows the GPA to provide infinite grade differentiation among peers. No prior literature hasconsidered student attitudes about such a
latter group was found to have higher finalexam grades implying greater improvement.Juhler et al. [7] examined the test and retest scores for 1,314 students who completed anintermediate algebra course. For each of seven chapter tests, if the student achieved less than a Bgrade, they could opt to take a retake. The score on the retake replaced the original test score,regardless of whether it was an improvement, but was limited to a B grade. On average, studentswere eligible to take 5.30 retakes and opted to take 2.31 retakes. The majority (88-95%) ofstudents who took the retake improved their score. However, there was no significant correlationbetween the number of retakes and the final exam score.Abraham [8] offered 150 students in intuitive
. Students will use the design process as a tool to address user needs and create innovative solutions B. Students will create design solutions that reflect an appropriate balance of internal and external constraints C. Students will enhance or develop effective communication skills necessary for success in the discipline of product development D. Students will demonstrate agency as problem solvers when faced with ambiguous situations E. Students will grow as a member of this class, a member of the engineering community, and as global citizens3. Learning OutcomesNext the instructors identified learning outcomes for each course goal. As many readers willknow, learning outcomes
. Fraction of correct answers on individual questions on the diagnostic quiz, pre (blue)and post (red).Table 1. Final survey questions and percent of students providing each answer. Question a b c d e1. If you were to do only only one physical 3 physical more than 3this again, would physical simulations experiment experiments physical experimentsyou rather run: experiments and many and many and fewer simulations simulations
add-on script necessitatesthe use of easily-evaluated question types, including multiple-choice, matching, true/false, andshort answer. Student averages for the past three years’ assignments are: 2016-17 exam = 73%,homework = 66% (students given 2nd homework attempt = 84%); 2017-18 exam = 74%,homework = 68%; 2018-19 exam = 73%, homework = 71%.This consistent performance drop is troubling given all the afforded homework advantages. Inaddition to the homework’s aforementioned selected-response question style (most examquestions are free response), students are a) permitted to work with classmates, b) encouraged toask TAs and instructors for help, c) given a week to complete the assignment, and d) reminded toreview their notes and the fall
the quality of the accomplishments, the better the score. Forexample, up to 10 points can be earned for high quality documentation. All procedures will havea header block that describes a) what the procedure does, b) the procedure’s inputs, c) theprocedure’s outputs, and d) what functions or procedures are called. Significant action blocks ordata definitions will have adequate comments if they are not self-documenting. (e.g. NOMATCHDB “Strings do not match.” is an example of a self-documenting data definition.) Page 4.39.1All errors are identified on graded laboratory exercises, and only the first two exercises are notcollected and graded
), developed by R. Chabay and B. Sherwood at North Carolina StateUniversity, is an innovative introductory physics curriculum that emphasizes fundamentalphysical principles, the microscopic structure of matter, a more coherent formulation linkingclassical and modern content, and modeling complex systems through computation. We discussour motivations for introducing the curriculum, implementation issues, and ongoing assessment.IntroductionThe calculus-based introductory physics course is a key component of the educational mission ofthe Georgia Institute of Technology, due to its status as one of the nation’s leading universities inengineering education, and due to the sheer number of students that take the course. Nearlyevery student at Georgia Tech is
Asian Arm/claw 3 2 2 1 2 0 Male Female White African American Hispanic Asian Wheels 2 1 1 0 1 1 Total 11 10 7 4 5 5Figures 3—5 depict three sets of drawing by three teachers. In the pretest (see Figure 3(a)), teacherA drew a fixed base robot whereas in the posttest (see Figure 3(a)), the same teacher drew awheeled robot. The pre and posttest drawings of Figures 4(a) and 4(b), by teacher B, show that
inone of the following categories: concept, calculation/estimate, measurement or fabrication tool,device or structure, technology at the state of the art, history, and skill (e.g., technical writing,critical evaluation, etc.)1. Introduction and Scaling Laws a. Define the term “nanotechnology” and discuss potential impact, challenges, and risks. b. Recall the historical milestones in the development of nanotechnology, including contributions of key figures like Richard Feynman. c. Estimate how the characteristics of a system will change as its dimensions change using common scaling laws.2. Nanophysics a. Recall the key historical insights needed to reach our current understanding of atoms
Paper ID #12126Implementing and Evaluating a Peer Review of Writing Exercise in a First-Year Design ProjectDr. Kathleen A Harper, The Ohio State University Kathleen A. Harper is a senior lecturer in the Engineering Education Innovation Center at The Ohio State University. She received her M. S. in physics and B. S. in electrical engineering and applied physics from Case Western Reserve University, and her Ph. D. in physics from The Ohio State University. She has been on the staff of Ohio State’s University Center for the Advancement of Teaching, in addition to teaching in both the physics department and college of
Conference (A) (B) Figure 5. Effect of parameters Kp and Ki on controlling the current dynamics: (A) Kp was changed with Ki = 5; (B) Ki was changed with Kp = 10In the load change, a pulse disturbance was introduced to the MFC system by increasing ordecreasing of the inlet substrate concentration by 5% during Day 91. The pulse disturbance onlylasted for one day. For each disturbance stimulation, multiple Kp values (Fig. 6) and Ki values(Fig. 7) were tested using the same approach as the one for the set point change. As shown byFig. 6, a higher Kp value had a smaller overshoot/undershoot during the disturbance. As
theIEEE Region-5 competition platform during the first part of the semester. In addition to thetheoretical coverage of the course subjects and hands-on design preparations, the teams werefurther asked to a) develop and submit a project design, timeline and a required component listfor the robot assembly based on the 2011 IEEE Region-5 competition guidelines, deadlines andobjectives; b) participate in the mentorship program; and, c) to establish an official robotics club.All robot design components were obtained by the project management based on the teamproposals. The students enhanced their robotics educational experiences significantly byproviding mentorship to a number of middle-high schools teams during the local BEST middle-high school
: (a) DC analysis (for BJT and FET transistors),and (b) AC analysis for the calculation of small-signal amplifier parameters for both typeof transistor circuits.In the next two subsections the sub-menu items corresponding to these two groups arediscussed.3.1 DC Analysis. There are two menu entries related to DC analysis of transistor biascircuits, namely BJTDC and FETDC. The following list shows all the sub-entries Page 3.227.22 The program shows the circuits, but does not allow the user to draw them.3 The database is easily expandable to satisfy the needs of an instructor. Figure 1. Main Ecalc Windowof these items
student team calculated the shading percentage itproduces in comparison to the (conventional) arrangement shown in Fig. 1b for various angles ofthe sun, and various angles of the assumed square PV cells (see Fig. 2a), allowing for somesun-tracking imprecision. This was a straightforward yet good exercise on the subject ofTrigonometry for them, and the percentage differences between the shaded areas per cell aredisplayed in Fig. 2b. Pivot rod PV cell (a) (b) Fig. 1. Five-cell by three-column illustration of the (a) ‘diamondback’ cell arrangement, and
efforts target outcomes when aggregate student scores are below 3.0.Attachment B is an example of a class assessment. This particular course, which is one of thefirst engineering technology courses the students take, the data gathered, showed that as a wholethe students are slightly below the average of 2.5, with respect to understanding reciprocals. Thedata for this particular class will be compared with the data collected for the other classes toanalyze the overall results. If there seems to be consistency between data from other groups, thefaculty, with input from the IAB, will decide what changes will be made to try to improve thescores. Information collected in a course included both direct and indirect methods on eachstudent in the
course when controlled for course content and instructor? 2. What psychosocial dimensions were most impacted by the flipped pedagogy? 3. What do these results indicate about student motivation in a flipped classroom?One group of students (Group “A”) had just completed the flipped course. The second group (Group “B”)consisted of students who had just completed the same course, but taught in a traditional format. This wasto control for the effect of the course material on student’s motivation and interest. The third group(Group “C”) consisted of students who had just completed a different engineering course taught by thesame instructor in a traditional format. This was to control for a different instructor. The groups wereanalyzed
presentations and key note lectures and serves as referee for journals, funding institutions and associations.Camila Zapata-Casabon, Universidad Andres Bello, Chile Master in Marketing and Market Research from the University of Barcelona, Spain. Industrial Civil Engineer from the Universidad del B´ıo-B´ıo. She has three diplomas in the areas of coaching, digital marketing and equality and empowerment of women. Her professional experience is linked to higher education as a project engineer and university management in the public and private area. Teacher at different universities in matters of entrepreneurship, business plans and marketing. She currently works as a teacher and academic secretary at the Faculty of Engineering
typical of aerospace use. Students are often surprised by the significant strength difference between these alloys and this experiment helps reinforce the importance of material selection. (a) dimensions (b) prior to instrumentation (c) following instrumentation Figure 2: Dimensions of stress concentration specimens used to evaluate the stress distribution near a concentration. Specimen is ¼ inch thick.Part 2: Stress Concentrations under Quasistatic LoadingThe second part of the experiment investigates stress concentration factors under quasistaticloading. • A large specimen containing a circular hole (Figure 2) is loaded in axial tension. Loads are kept low enough so that yielding does
corporate partnership opportunities to get Analytics & Visualization experience with real world dataBenefit for GE Course Outline• Masters Students analyze trends & create new viz’s ALY 6000 – Introduction to Analytics (Fall B) Build• Opportunity for future projects ALY 6030 – Data Warehousing & SQL (Fall B) Foundation• Free & Flexible to meet corporations’ needs ALY 6015 – Intermediate Analytics (Winter A)Current Scope: Cyber Security alerts data
laboratory experiments, the coefficient of static friction is determined by conducting a standard experiment. In the second part, two slender rods AC and CB (shown in fig. 4.) are pin-connected at one end. Rod BC‘s end is attached to block B, which is resting on a rough surface. Rod AC’s other end is attached to a fixed support. Starting with AC making an angle of 30° with the horizontal surface, a downward vertical force F is applied at C. Students determine the maximum vertical force F for which equilibrium is maintained. They repeat the exercise at angles of 45, 60° and 75° and observe the impact of angle on magnitude of the vertical force. The laboratory experiment is designed to reinforce topics such as Theory of
Session 1620 Systems Projects for a Computer Science Course Mohammad B. Dadfar, Sub Ramakrishnan Department of Computer Science Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, Ohio 43403 Phone: (419)372-2337 Fax: (419)372-8061 email: datacomm@cs.bgsu.eduAbstractIn this paper we discuss some practical and useful projects for our operating systems / datacommunications course. Most of our projects are assigned in a UNIX platform. The projects dealwith a
original lab on your own before attempting this quiz.You are allowed to run the Wireshark while completing this lab.The following questions are similar to Network+ type of questions and are relate to trace named:http-ethereal-trace-1.1. If you set the http filter, how many packets you will see: a. 3 b. 4 c. 5 d. 62. If you set the SNMP filter, how many packets you will see: a. 3 b. 4 c. 5 d. 63. For HTTP packet number 10 (Frame 10), ), the total size of the packet is: a. 555 b. 439 c. 541 d. 13954. For HTTP packet number 10 (Frame 10), the requesting user agent is: a. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 b. User-Agent: Firefox/5.0 c. User-Agent: Chrome/5.0 d. User
Engineering Education, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 69-70, 1997.[4] L. J. Shuman, M. Besterfield-Sacre and J. McGourty, J. “The ABET “Professional Skills” – Can they be taught? Can they be assessed?” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 94, no. 1, 41-55, January 2005.[5] R. Stevens, A. Johri and K. O’Connor. “Professional engineering work,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, A. Johri, B. M. Olds, Eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 119-138, 2014.[6] R. F. Korte, S. Sheppard and W. C. Jordan. “A study of the early work experiences of recent graduates in engineering,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2008.[7] R. Korte
the fall semester, 2017. The goal we have for this paper is toeconomically describe at the 10,000-foot level (a) our reasons for the systemic changes weestablished, (b) the core architecture of our revised FYEP, (c) a selected subset of ourpreliminary findings and observations regarding our revised FYEP, (d) a special observationconcerning the ease of transition from face-to-face operation over to complete internet operationof FYEP while maintaining the integrity of our revised operational model all in the context of aglobal pandemic (coronavirus), and (e) a thumbnail description of our plans for the future.Introduction: Framing of the Goals for an Enhanced First-Year Engineering Program.The common first-year engineering program at MTU was
has integrated the capability of displayingDSP omputation into a Simulink R block. In addition, DIP switches on the DSK board can beengaged to introduce different levels of noise. The student would have to write a Matlab Rprogram to generate different levels of noise, but would not have to be concerned with thecoding of interrupt hardware. Matlab R has integrated the interrupt handling capability into aSimulink R block of the DIP switches.Fig. 5. A/D conversion example using a sampling rate of 1 sample per second and an encoding resolution of 3 bits per sample.(a) Graph of the original signal, sample-and-hold output, and quantizer output. (b) Resulting output bits generated by the binaryencoder as a function of time.Application in a
project functions listed below.The outline of topics includes: A. Project Identification a. Project Name b. Owner c. Location B. Project Scope a. Type of construction i. Materials types ii. Primary structural and finish systems b. Mechanical and Electrical systems c. Contracting plan i. Labor proclivity (union, or non-union) ii. Self-performed work and why iii. Subcontracted work and why C. Scheduling a. Describe project schedule b. Identify critical path activities c. Discuss manpower loading and leveling options D. Project Administration a. How will safety and OSHA requirements