Conference Session

Out-of-School and Informal Activities

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yair Joseph Mega P.E., Northeastern University; Claire Duggan, Northeastern University; Daniel Sullivan, Northeastern University; Lauren Horn, Northeastern University; Charles A. Dimarzio, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering

students an opportunity to build relationships withuniversity students and faculty in addition to fellow participants. By providing the participantswith a tangible research setting, students are able to gain appreciation of the experience, andachieve a high level of comfort in networking and team relations. Working in a team settingallows the students the opportunity to gain real project experience in a workforce setting; over70% of the research was conducted in a team situation, which creates a nurturing socialcommunity for the students. The program also helped students feel more prepared for futurework in a similar lab and team environment. Feedbacks suggested the introduction to an adultworkplace has contributed to their experience as reflected

Conference Session

Distance Learning and Online Teaching Session

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shekar Viswanathan, National University; Mudasser Fraz Wyne, National University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

continuous interaction between students and instructors whiledelivering complex subject matter. Although it may be true that many entry-level courses that aretraditionally taught in vast lecture halls are often characterized by little to no individualinteraction between students and professors, the options to interact within a face to faceenvironment has to be made available while teaching engineering subjects online. In addition,complex subjects taught via the Web has to reflect an environment where student progress can bemonitored. The engineering laboratory exercises where students learn applications have to bemade available online. Finally, very effective online methodologies have to be put in place toensure the effectiveness of online learning

Conference Session

Future Directions of Continuing Professional Development

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stephen W. Crown, University of Texas, Pan American; Arturo A. Fuentes, University of Texas, Pan American; Robert A. Freeman, University of Texas, Pan American

Tagged Divisions

Continuing Professional Development

faculty.  Test your mettle (Knowledge and learner centered): Summative instructional events are now presented. A post-workshop survey was taken to assess learning outcomes.  Go public (Learner and community centered): This is a high stakes motivating component introduced to motivate the participant to do well. Difficulty: Faculty are asked to publicly document their CBI course development process and an outline of their CBI lecture and receive feedback from other participants. This step is where faculty provide insights for learning to the next cohorts and is termed “Leaving Legacies” and hence the name of the cycle.  Reflect Back (Not shown in the Figure) The participant is given the opportunity

Conference Session

Research in Assessment

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Peter M. Ostafichuk, University of British Columbia; Jim Sibley, University of British Columbia, Vancouver; H.F. Machiel Van der Loos, University of British Columbia

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

25.1031.2the additional time they can contribute to the assessment may be able to produce an equallyreliable and valid assessment; that is, the greater volume, frequency, and immediacy of feedbackmight compensate for any quality disadvantage.Peer-to-peer assessment has the students themselves evaluate the quality, value, or success of thework of other students. With students conducting the peer-to-peer assessments, the approach ishighly scalable to almost any class size. Moreover, the act of assessing other’s work requiresstudents to apply higher-level thinking skills, such as evaluation, judgment, and critical thinking,as well as a reflection on the student’s own work. Or, as noted by Topping, formative peerassessment is likely to involve intelligent

Conference Session

Research in Engineering Education I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rebecca Brent, Education Designs, Inc.

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

. AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by National Science Foundation grants DUE-0837612 and ADVANCEPAID (Partnerships in Adaptation, Implementation, and Dissemination) 0820013. This support isgratefully acknowledged. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation. Bibliography1. Patton, M. Q. (2000). Utilization-focused evaluation. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus and T. Kellaghan (eds.) Evaluation Models. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.2. Taylor-Powell, E., Jones, L., & Henert, E. (2002) Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models. Retrieved 1/2

Conference Session

FPD II: Hands-on Curriculum in the First Year

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Beverly K. Jaeger, Northeastern University; Susan F. Freeman, Northeastern University; Richard Whalen, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

,immersive or integrated.Post-Survey. Reflection, review, feedback, assessment, and iteration are familiar elements to students inthe Northeastern University Engineering Program. As such, following completion of the machine scienceactivities in each section of the course, students again completed a survey to evaluate specific componentsof the machine science initiative. Likert-style and open-ended questions focused on amount learned, skillsacquired, pace of instruction and the learning experience, quality of support materials and tutorials,potential applications, the prospect of continuing the module in future course offerings, and suggestionsto improve implementation. Appendix B contains the full questionnaire.Results and DiscussionPre-Survey

Conference Session

FPD VII: Research on First-year Programs Part II

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mitchell Pryor, University of Texas, Austin

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

semanticsdictate – distinguish between procrastination, deferment, or scheduling issues. On area of futurework under consideration is customizing student surveys after each module to discern this datafrom the student. The survey questions could be modified to for students either rapidly or slowlycompleting different units. Such questions, could prompt students to reflect on their own withrespect to their pace and potentially self-improve behavior. It additionally could help coursedevelopers to generate a more complete picture of student effort and improve course content.Bibliography 1. Cuseo, J., 2007, “The Empirical Case Against Large Class Size: Adverse Effects on the Teaching, Learning, and Retention of First-Year Students. Journal of Faculty

Conference Session

Engineering Professional Development and Distance Learning Programs

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Craig G. Downing, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Continuing Professional Development

diverseopportunities for CPS. Over the next year the author hopes to develop an array of technical andnon-technical short courses that reflects the full academic offerings of the Institute in a truncatedformat. Once completed, the academic menu will be used to provide individuals the option tochoose engagements on a bi-monthly basis. Also, organizations will have the opportunity toselect from a menu of courses to build a seminar series relevant to their technical and non-technical training needs.In addition to expanding the course offerings of CPS, a comprehensive marketing plan will bedeveloped. The intent will be to devise a marketing strategy that better aligns with our targetaudience. This plan will deploy a dynamic strategy that matches not only the

Conference Session

Progress in Manufacturing Education II

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alister McLeod, Indiana State Uniersity; Jim Smallwood, Indiana State University

Tagged Divisions

Manufacturing

? Page 25.1134.8Results The results obtained from interviewing the company’s liaison reflected the changingdemands on employees at their facilities. A reorientation of manufacturing operations towardsmore robotic systems resulted in a marked improvement in the company’s bottom line allowingthem to exit from bankruptcy in 2005. In an effort to obtain a response from the intervieweeabout the use of robotic systems in the facility the first question was posed. The response elicitedfrom the question clarified that the machinery being used in the facility were actually robotic innature. For example, workers at the facility engage in remote level supervision for most of thehigh-volume production operations. The facility employed dedicated

Conference Session

Learning and Assessment I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David B. Benson, Kettering University

Tagged Divisions

Mechanical Engineering

learning as an acquisition and integration process, thisis further reinforced when the concept of a spiral curriculum is also considered. Kolb (2000) in his Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) highlights the necessity ofcyclical instruction. ELT divides the learning cycle in to four phases: experiencing, reflecting,thinking, and acting. As a model for education, this process is both planned (formatted) andresponsive to the situation and content/skills being learned: activities are structured and plannedbut flexible to include individual. The cyclical nature of ELT supports this project in thenecessity of revisiting concepts at various points, over time to solidify and deepen a learner’sknowledge or concept acquisition and mastery

Conference Session

Attracting Young Minds: Part I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert W. Whalin P.E., Jackson State University; Qing Pang, Jackson State University

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering

would respond that those in the 20-25 ACT Math category are especiallywell situated for success. Almost 100% of these students were products of the Mississippi publicschool system and had less than a stellar mathematics education in high school. Their scores maybe more reflective of their high school teachers than their ability to perform. Many of thesestudents have earned MS degrees and several will be awarded PhD degrees within the next 2/3years. Reference [1] presented rather compelling evidence of the success of these students intheir engineering careers and /or in graduate school. We would suggest that it is indeed a wiseinvestment for the US taxpayer since they will receive substantially more federal and state taxesfrom this group of new

Conference Session

Research Informing Teaching Practice I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shanna R. Daly, University of Michigan; Cynthia Finelli, University of Michigan; Ameen Basim Al-Khafaji, College of Engineering at the University of Michigan; Martha Jane Neubauer, College of Engineering at the University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

the National Science Foundation under GrantNumber 0941924. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this Page 25.1190.14material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.  References1 National Academy of Engineering. (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century.Washington, DC: National Academy of Engineering.2 National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2007).Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future.Washington, D.C

Conference Session

Problem-based and Challenge-based Learning

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Leema Kuhn Berland, University of Texas, Austin; William F. McKenna, University of Texas, Austin

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

than the relevant math and science.Instead, they discussed things like their intuition, wanting to reflect the real world, and logic. Infact, students both discussed the relevance of particular math and science concepts and identifiednon-science/math criteria in their decision making process in 12 of the 19 interviews, suggestinga tension or ambivalence regarding the role of this content, on the part of the students. Page 25.1191.5

Conference Session

Four Pillars of Manufacturing Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Paul Nutter, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

Manufacturing

understanding of business and lean manufacturing. Based upon nearly 100 intern visits to companies, bachelor degree students need four things: first-technical skills; second-lean manufacturing; third-interpersonal (communications) skills; and fourth-leadership skill to get things done (accomplish projects) with minimal supervision.”Resulting Curriculum AdjustmentsIn response to the priorities reflected in this and the referenced prior surveys several topicspreviously included in my manufacturing management, quality assurance, work measurement,and digital manufacturing courses have been eliminated or reduced in emphasis. Some havegotten increased emphasis. The reductions are largely in response to course consolidationsduring

Conference Session

Stimulating Broader Industrial Participation in Undergraduate Programs

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Annie R. Pearce, Virginia Tech; Christine Marie Fiori P.E., Virginia Tech; Kathleen M. Short, Virginia Tech

Tagged Divisions

College Industry Partnerships

Characterizing the Environment for Sustainability (SLICES): Im-proving Understanding of Real World Systems via Direct Observation/Reflection. The opinionsexpressed are those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by NSF. The authors gratefullyacknowledge the contributions of the 54 undergraduate interns who collected industry data andprovided important feedback about involving undergraduates in research to improve the SLICESprogram.Bibliography1 Rothman, H. (1992). "You need not be big to benchmark." Nation's Business, December, 80(12), 64-65.2 Fisher, D., Miertschin, S., and Pollock, D.R. (1995). “Benchmarking in construction industry.” J. Management inEngineering, 11(1), 50-57.3 Mitra, C., Pearce, A.R., and Fiori, C.M. (2011). “Developing

Conference Session

ADVANCE and Related Faculty Issues

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Karen Chang Yan, College of New Jersey; Lisa Grega, College of New Jersey; Suriza VanderSandt, College of New Jersey; Diane C. Bates, College of New Jersey; Elizabeth Borland, College of New Jersey; Karen Elizabeth Clark, College of New Jersey; Amanda Norvell, College of New Jersey

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

individual—change. “Organizational catalysts” and “institutional intermediaries”6 can take action oncampuses to challenge policies and practices that produce and reproduce gender inequality.Institutional Background The College of New Jersey (TCNJ) is a highly selective, public, primarily undergraduateinstitution (PUI) that has earned national recognition for its commitment to excellence. Foundedin 1855, TCNJ has become an exemplar of the best in public higher education and is consistentlyacknowledged as one of the top comprehensive colleges in the nation. With about 300 membersof the full-time teaching faculty and roughly 6200 undergraduate students, TCNJ prides itself onits teacher-scholar model. At TCNJ, gender equity issues reflect

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Barbara Greene; Connie Dillon; Billy L. Crynes

4.79 1.09 62 2.00 6.00 - I am confident I have the ability to use the electronic communication 5.15 .93 62 1.00 6.00Learning Approaches: Self-regulation 4.28 .83 61 2.17 5.83 .80 - Shallow 4.54 .78 62 2.67 6.00 .49 - Sequential Style 5.11 .64 61 3.67 6.00 .83 - Active Thinking Style 4.59 .85 62 2.33 6.00 .73 *A value over 0.50 reflects internal statistical reliability.**The 0.83 is a composite of all the efficacy subcategories. In Table 6 the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Teodora Shuman; Greg Mason

, prototypes considered, reasons forchoosing the final design, and an evaluation of the final display design. The learning objectivesfor this project are given in Figure 4. The other three MME 181 projects build on the learningobjectives for the first project outlined above and has a similar set of their own learningobjectives (not shown herein).Finally, the teaching objectives for both MME 105 and MME 181 courses are outlined in Figure5. They are the same because they are only used to assess general teaching quality. Theseobjectives are derived from the Universities standardized end of term assessment survey, but aremodified to reflect the experiential learning nature of the courses.The educational objectives of Figures 2-5 were then used to

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Terry Armstrong; Paul Rousseau; Katharine Fulcher; Carlo Felicione; Steve Beyerlein; Donald Elger

appropriate or best goal or combination of goals. The goal should be concrete. That is, the goal should be presented with enough specificity so different people would agree when the goal is reached.4. Generate ideas. Generate many possible ways to reach the goal. Analyze these ideas, and then select the best idea or combination of ideas.5. Prepare a plan. Carefully plan the steps needed to make the best idea a reality.6. Take action. Implement the plan.7. Review and Reflect. Check the solution to assess quality. Analyze the problem solving approach in order to identify what worked and what did not work. Seek ways to refine or improve one’s problem solving approach. Clarify what was learned during the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Steven Myers; Kathleen Nunnally; Catherine Blat; Patricia Tolley

three or more sessions as the benchmark, itwas determined that the more stringent standard would lend credibility to results and perhapsprevent allegations that students were more likely to attend only before tests.Figures 1 and 2 compare the percentage of students, by gender and ethnicity, respectively,attending SI five or more times versus those who do not. The data reveal that that there is virtuallyno difference in terms of who attends SI. It is interesting to note that the demographics of thestudents who attend SI are reflective of the demographics of general population of the college. Figure 1 SI* vs. Non-SI by Gender 100

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Robert Montgomery

that your sabbatical objectives reflect a realistic load, and so that you don’t return to anangry department head or dean. If students ask about contacting you while on sabbatical, useyour head as well as your heart in answering, and if you expect to be writing letters ofrecommendation for your students while on sabbatical, factor this activity into your plans. All ofthe above activities involve a time penalty, and will exact a corresponding hit on your writingoutput.• Take into account differing departmental or campus “cultures” – Some are better thanothers for productivity in writing and research, particularly with regard to collaboration withpeers and the like. During negotiations with the dean at the host institution, be certain to

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Lisa Ritter; Barbara Lazarus; Susan Ambrose

Session 2492 Surviving and Thriving in Engineering and Science: A Woman’s Guide to Navigating the Ph.D. Barbara B. Lazarus, Lisa M. Ritter, Susan A. Ambrose Carnegie Mellon UniversityAbstractThis paper is based upon findings from the authors’ recent book, The Woman’s Guide toNavigating the Ph.D. in Engineering and Science.1 Here, we present some typical challenges thatwomen may face in engineering and science doctoral programs, and share some insights,reflections and strategies from women who are working toward or who have completeddoctorates in engineering or

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Richard Seagrave; R. Vigil; Debra Hawker-Schreiner; Charles Glatz

appliedrapidly. The content and format of the course evaluations was modified to reflect EC2000.Specifically, the first seven questions come directly from the previously used college prescribedform and provide information with regard to instructor teaching effectiveness, instructoravailability, appropriateness of course materials and classroom environment. The remainingquestions are based on the primary outcomes to which the course is expected to contribute, asdefined in the course description. The evaluations are completed on multiple choice bubblesheets each semester in each of the undergraduate courses. Room for comments is also providedand often used for additional questions posed by the instructor. The Testing Services group atISU completes the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Elizabeth Berry; Robert Lingard

we know that students, for the most part, fear publicspeaking, we spend some time giving suggestions about effective speaking and practicing briefimpromptu talks.Out of Class ActivitiesCompletion of Kolbe A Index Online: Students individually access and complete the Kolbeinstrument through a Web facility.Required Minutes, Reports: Each group is required to document meeting times, memberspresent, and accomplishments. The preparation of an agenda is required for each meeting andstudents write notes of each meeting for a final report to be handed in at the end of the semester.Reflective Process - Group and Individual: During the semester and at the end students areasked to reflect on the group process and the technical difficulties they had in

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Jr., Donald Horner; Dr. Jack Matson

Annual Conference & ExpositionCopyright C 2001, American Society for Engineering Educationintegrate their experiences with this newly acquired knowledge. Donnie read theportfolios and made the following observation:Donnie: Most of the work is of poor quality - - more diary-like than analytical, more check-the-block than reflective.This saddens me. I wrote these comments most often on thejournals: "nice diary, very observational . . . but . . . .very little substantive reflection . . .void of analysis."The journals tell me that we’re doing the right thing withregard to stepping back and letting the students takeresponsibility for the course. Most students offer thatthey know something needs to be done . . . but they opt towait for someone

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Robert Bishop; Richard Dorf

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Jeffrey A. Donnell

below. Nose, with Guidance Warhead Fuel and Motor Sonar United States Patent # 6,032,460Figure 1. Schematic view of a torpedo, showing the placement of subsystems associated withtarget acquisition, guidance, propulsion and detonation. Labels are italicized to highlight the linkbetween illustration and text discussion. The numbered statements here are arranged to reflect a logical sequence of information.Statement 1, the figure citation, merely signals that an ensuing discussion pertains to a particularfigure. Statement 2, the objective statement, motivates that illustration, posing the challenge orneed that the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

P. David Fisher; Diane Rover

f. SystemInstructions:Report implementation factors for the engineering unit as a whole and for each program being evaluated. Data onthis table should reflect the current level of Criteria 2000 implementation. Refer to Figure A-1, Matrix forImplementation Assessment for descriptions of implementation levels. Enter a numerical value that most accuratelydescribes the extent to which: a. Program Educational Objectives have been established and maintained b. Constituents are involved in helping set program objectives and in evaluating the level to which they are being achieved c. The required Processes are operational d. Outcomes Assessment is being practiced e. Results of outcomes and

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Wilfrid Nixon

approach was needed. This wasprecipitated by three factors. First, there was a feeling that the course, and in particularthe projects, were getting stale. This may reflect unease among the faculty regardingtheir ability to develop meaningful projects. In previous years, a number of students hadcommented in class evaluations that they did not feel the projects were realistic. Second,recent experience in the Mechanical Engineering department in the College ofEngineering showed that it was not only possible to incorporate real world projects intothe curriculum, but it could be a highly effective learning experience for students. Third,a number of practicing civil engineers, especially contacts through the Iowa Section ofASCE, had expressed interest

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Janet Schmidt; Ardie Walser; Barbara Bogue

lessresearch oriented institutions. The video upon which the workshop is based reflects information gathered ininterviews with twenty-four engineering students from the Penn State campus during thesummer of 1996. The workshop development has been described in a previouspublication3 and assessment data for the workshops themselves will be presented in aseparate publication. A full description of the project with copies of all tools will beavailable via a website (http://www.engr.psu.edu/itow) under development at Penn State(projected launch date, May 2001). The workshop can be conducted in one hour with pauses after each of the threesections in the video for discussion. Guided facilitation of the discussion creates a highlyinteractive