dramatically. In the days of manual testing, data acquisition rates were measured inbytes/s. Subsequent processing was equally manual so the cost was determined bywages and error rates were high. Now, data collection at MByte/s rates is routine andautomated while a system with the functionality shown in figure 2 can be realized for lessthan $10. The whole system can be procured as a turnkey product so it becomes anextended tool for the non-electronics professional running the application. Specialistintervention is needed less often but the counterbalance is that systems are rapidlyincreasing in complexity so there are more varieties of interaction and novel problems.From an educational viewpoint, this means more emphasis on critical thinking
, 3rd Ed, McGraw-Hill, 20003. C. Reidsema, S. Wilson, and C. Netherton. Impromptu Design as a Vehicle for Developing Team Work and Problem Solving Skills in Design Engineering. International Conference on Engineering Education, Gainesville, Florida, 2004.4. R. Bannerot, R. Kastor, and P. Ruchhoeft. Interdisciplinary Capstone Design at the University of Houston. Proceedings of the 2003 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference, Arlington Texas, 2003.5. B. Adamczyk and S. Fleischmann. Engineering and Elementary School Partnerships (or Dean Kamen’s Challenge Revisited.) ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boulder, Colorado, 2003
will occur when ourundergraduates lead that change.References1. “Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future”, The National Academies Press, 2007.2. “A Model for Freshman Engineering Retention” , Veenstra, Cindy P., Eric L. Dey and Gary D. Herrin, Advances in Engineering Education, Winter 2009, ASEE.3. “Persistence, Engagement, and Migration in Engineering Programs”, Ohland, M., S. Sheppard, G. Lichetenstein, O. Eris, D. Chachra and R. Layton, Journal of Engineering Education, July 2008.4. Building Community and Retention Among First-Year Students: Engineering First-Year Interest Groups (eFIGSs)”, Courter, S and G. Johnson, ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education
AC 2010-1162: PRE-COLLEGE MATHEMATICS PREPARATION: DOES ITWORK?Ruba Alkhasawneh, Virginia Commonwealth University Ruba A. Alkhasawneh is a Ph.D. student in engineering at Virginia Commonwealth University. She received her B.S. and M.S. degrees in Computer Engineering from Jordan University of Science and Technology and Yarmouk University, respectively in Jordan. Her research focuses on diversity issues and engineering education. Address: 601 West Main Street, PO Box 843068,Richmond, VA 23284-3068; e-mail: alkhasawnera@vcu.edu.Rosalyn Hobson, Virginia Commonwealth University Dr. Rosalyn S. Hobson is the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and Associate Professor of Electrical
Universities, Spring 20015. Houston, S. L., “Evaluation of Senior Design Projects”, ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings 19936. Randolph, W. A. and B. Z., Posner Effective Project Planning and Management, Prentice-Hall, 19887. Tombers, P. A ., “Value Analysis Projects for Engineering Technology”, ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings. 19928. Ullman, D. G., The Mechanical Design Process, 4th edition, McGraw-Hill Companies, 20109. Ulrich, C. T. and S. D. Eppinger, Product Design and Development, 4th edition, McGraw-Hill Companies, 200810. University of Arkansas, “Board Policy 210.1 Patent and Copyright Policy", University of Arkansas Board ofTrustees. http://www.uasys.edu
-bisphospphoglycerate as the major effecter for oxygen binding.If it is a biology class, the discussion could shift to the movement of the metabolic product,carbon dioxide, back to the lungs via the assistance of carbonic anhydrase. If it is a mathclass, the presence and absence of an inflection point and their corresponding functionderivatives might be the point. Ultimately the depth of instruction and for that matter thegrade triggered by the vignette really depends on the blending of your and the teacher’scollective talent, training, and time.References:1) Porter A., Roessner J., Oliver S., Johnson D.; “A Systems Model of Innovation Processes in UniversitySTEM Education”; J. of Engineering Education, 1, 2006 pp14-242) Das T.; The Stars GK-12 Program at the
). Page 15.232.6 Table 1: Most Important Activities 1 Customer Needs Analysis and Feedback 2 Brainstorming 3 Analysis, Evaluation and Reporting of Test Data 4 Alpha/In-house Testing 5 Prototype Testing 6 Design Review(s) 7 Design/Prototype Review(s) 8 Product Design Selection from Multiple Alternatives 9 Reliability Testing, Test to Failure, Limit Testing 10 Test Method Definition 11 Customer Feedback Evaluation 12 Refine Tests and Models 13
. Technologyeducation cannot afford to become complacent; it needs to remain focused onmaintaining a modern syllabus that reflects the technological world, with the need fora sustainable model of CPD that promotes the progression of technological literacyand competency.Bibliography1. OFSTED-UK, Education for a technolgically advanced nation. 2008: London. p. 51.2. Irish-Academy-of-Engineering, E.-I., Engineering a Knowledge Island 2020. 2005, Irish Academy of Engineering: Dublin. p. 66.3. Condon, N., McNaboe, J., Trends in Education / Training outputs, in Monitoring Irelands Skill Supply. 2008, Expert group on future skills needs Dublin. p. 85.4. McGuinness, S., An Evaluation of the Implementation of Technology in the Junior Cycle
assessment:A national study. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 1545-1562.2. Howe, S., Lasser, R., Su, K., and Pedicini, S. “AC 2009-1228: Content in Capstone Design Courses: Pilot SurveyResults from Faculty, Students, and Industry”, American Society for Engineering Education, 20093. Arnold, A. “Senior Design Capstone -- Lessons Learned From Our First Year”, Associated Schools ofConstruction Region5 Proceedings. Dallas, Texas October 2009. Worldwide web address:http://regionv.tamu.edu/conference/proceedings.asp4. Accreditation Board for Engineering & Technology (ABET). (2008). Criteria for Accrediting EngineeringTechnology Programs. Technology Accreditation Commission. Baltimore, MD. Worldwide web address:http://www.abet.org
years.The University of Rochester has transitioned its focus from big businesses to smaller start-upventures. The University of Rochester is committed to helping local economic development. TheRochester community was stable for most of the 20th century because of entrepreneurs likeGeorge Eastman (Eastman Kodak), Joseph Wilson (Xerox) and Jon Jacob Bausch and HenryLomb (Bausch and Lomb). By the end of the 20th century, the employment for all threecompanies was significantly lower than it was in the 1980’s. In 2008, the UR became the largestemployer in the greater Rochester area.In 2004,The Council of Competitiveness studied Rochester, New York and produced a reportentitled “Fanning the Flame”. The Council reported that Rochester has a well
Education, Vol. 96.,No. 2, pp. 117-124, 2007.10. T. Grose, “You Know it. Can you Write it?”, PRISM, American Society for Engineering Education, pp. 42-45,December 2007.11. L. Shuman et al., “The ABET “Professional Skills”-Can They Be Taught? Can they Be Assessed?”, Journal ofEngineering Education, Vol. 94, No. 1, pp. 41-55, 2005.12. S. Yule, et al., “Development of a rating system for surgeon’s non-technical skills”, Medical Education;Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2006, 40: pp.1098-1104.13. S. Barkley, “A Synthesis of Recent Literature on Articulation and Transfer”, Community College Review 1993,Vol.20, Issue 4.14. P. Bahr, “Cooling Out in the Community College: What is the Effect of Academic Advising on Students’Chances of Success?”, Res. High Educ
style of interactive group workhas been found to be effective in teaching students difficult physics topics1 , and the goal is todetermine whether such activities can produce similar benefits for introductory materials scienceclasses.AcknowledgementsThis work has been supported in part by the Center for Emergent Materials at the Ohio State Uni-versity, an NSF MRSEC (Award Number DMR-0820414). Page 15.1126.12References 1. Heller, P., Keith, R., and Anderson, S. (1992). “Teaching Problem solving through cooperative group- ing. Part 1: Group vs individual problem solving.” Am. J. Phys., 60: 627-36. 2. McDermott, L.C., Rosenquist, M.L
March 17, 2010)8. Kelly, W.E. “Standards in Civil Engineering Design Education.” J. Profl. Issues in Engrg. Educ. and Pract. 134(1), January 2008, pp. 59-66.9. Brenner, B. “Editor's Note.” J. Profl. Issues in Engrg. Educ. and Pract. 128(3), July 2002, pp. 99.10. Bundy, D. “Preparation of Papers in Two Column Format for the FIE 2010 Conference.” Frontiers in Education Clearing House website, accessed January 7, 2010 (URL: http://fie- conference.org/format/FIEformat.pdf).11 Murad, M. “Course and syllabus change to incorporate aspects of diversity in engineering and engineering technology courses.” Proceedings, 2004 ASEE Annual Conference, June 2004, Salt Lake City, UT. (CD-ROM).12 Rose, A.T. and Kinsinger, K. S
greatest good for the greatest number? - Did character Y’s response appropriately balance short term and long termconsequences? - Mill discusses various notions/definitions of “justice” in the last chapter ofUtilitarianism. When you consider character Z’s choices, which of these notions seem(s) toapply? Who do they line up with your understanding of justice?Relativism, Pluralism, and Absolutism: - Character X offered character Y a bribe, but this situation happened in a foreign countrywhere this sort of thing is more common. Is offering (and accepting) bribes in this case wrong? - We have seen that character X’s dilemma puts following principle A in direct conflictwith consequence B. How do you resolve dilemmas of this
computer technology,SIGITE 2004 Conference, October 2004.3. Krug, S., Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, New Rider Press,Indianapolis, IN, 2000.4. Marcur, A., The emotion connection, Interactions, November-December, 2003, 28-34.5. McCracken, D. and Wolfe, R., User-Centered Website Development: A Human-Computer InteractionApproach, Pearson Education Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2004.6. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., and Sharp, H., Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, John Page 10.613.7Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 2002. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
. Hu, J. “Tele-lab IT security: A means to build security laboratories on the web.” Proceedings - 18th International conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, AINA 2004 v 2, 2004, p 285-288.8. Lin, P.I., Broberg, H., Mon, A. “A web-based lab for distance learning.” ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 2002, p 10161-10172.9. Scott, T.C. “Versatile, low cost electronics lab protoboard” ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 2004, p 15243-15250.10. Naghedolfeizi, M.; Arora, S.; Garcia, S. “Survey of Lab VIEW technologies for building Web/Internet-enabled experimental setups.” ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, p 7897-7906.11. Grinberg, I, Matusiak, R.C. “Experiments with electrical motors in distance
examples of seminal case study research withinthe management literature dating back to the 1950’s. For example, Gibb and Wilkins6 cite Page 10.1013.1Blau’s7, Gouldner’s8 and Dalton’s9 work on management related cases. There are numerouscurrent works on the use and impact of case studies in education and these are excellent Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Session
Document: 2005-940Division: Computers in Education Integration of Educational Methodologies in the C o m p u t e r S c i e n c e C u r r i c u l u m b a s e d o n t h e B e o wu l f Curriculum Enrichment Integrated Lab (B-CEIL) Dr. Juan R. Iglesias, Dr. Mahmoud K. Quweider, and Dr. Fitra Khan jriglesias@utb.edu; mkquweider@utb.edu; khan@utb.edu CS/CIS Department, University of Texas, Brownsville Eighty Fort Brown Brownsville, TX 78521 U.S.A. 1-956-574-6616Abstract Over the past two years, the Computer Science faculty have been hard at workimplementing BCEIL (the Beowulf based Curriculum
. Page 10.600.7[3] Todd RH, Red WE, Magleby SP, Coe S. Manufacturing: A strategic opportunity for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education 2001;90(3):397-405. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2005, American Society for Engineering Education[4] Parsons JR, Seat JE, Bennett RM, Forrester JH, Gilliam FT, Klukken PG, et al. The engage program: Implementing and assessing a new first year experience at the university of Tennessee. Journal of Engineering Education 2002;91(4):441-6.[5] Davis DC, Gentili KL, Trevisan MS, Calkins DE. Engineering design assessment processes and scoring scales for program improvement
supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.0220500. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Page 10.678.7Foundation. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering EducationReferences[1] Henes, R., Bland, M.M., Darby, J., McDonald, K., January, 1995 "Improving the Academic Environment forWomen Engineering Students through Faculty Workshops", The Journal of Engineering
was achieved in 1970’s has been reversed because of the decades of wars and instabilities. Limited progress has been achieved since the establishment of new government over seven years ago. For instance the number of students has increased, some new institutions have been Page 15.1251.2established and effort has been made to upgrade the experience and qualifications of existingacademics in such institutions. However, the overall quality of higher education has not been improved significantly, the exception being that the computer science and information technology (IT) sector has
or solutions were generally directed to the instructor who gave the quiz orhomework. Since that instructor was not in the classroom when these were returned tothe student, the student normally had to call or email the instructor. None of the JZinstructors had an office at TU, nor did they have any set office hours which made itmore difficult for students to discuss issues face-to-face after an instructor finishedteaching their topic(s).Another important challenge in the course was the broad scope of topics covered. Forexample, process burners are taught at the JZI over four full days but covered in only twoand half hours total in the TU Combustion Engineering course. Due to time constraints,instructors had to greatly scale back the content
whole could beestablished. This is due in no small part to the fact many technology programs where created atdifferent times with varying goals.1 Resulting in many institutions commingling the termsengineering, engineering technology, technologist, technician, and the like, which furtherexacerbate the process of developing an accurate history. This becomes exceedingly clear duringthe research of this topic, for example, Purdue’s College of Technology.Purdue University’s College of Technology has a deeply rooted and well established history thatdates back to the 1870’s. Beginning with the Morrill Act of 1862, Purdue began focusing onteaching the principals of applied engineering. However, it was not until WWII when acoordinated effort with the
two-minute presentation on a student-selected, engineering-related topic in areas such as devices, biographies, vocabulary, or current events. Eachpresentation is assessed through use of a set of rubrics developed in support of an oralpresentation framework presented in a paper by Renaud, Squier, and Larsen3. This frameworkemphasizes oral presentation skills by focusing students’ attention on four key presentationareas: • R – Responsiveness (e.g., audience analysis), • S – Speech Patterns (e.g., speed, volume, enunciation), • V – Verbal and Visual Rhetoric (e.g., presentation structure, use of visual aids), and • P – Physical (e.g., use of stage, congruence of body language with message).The RSVP Framework and its accompanying
will be encountered in the real world. Observations show that studentsare able to significantly enhance their skills in creating realistic and complex CAD models.Challenges remain in creating an environment that supports collaborative modeling, efficientCAD data management and in creating teaching materials that focus more on the methodologiesand strategies of modeling versus the mechanics of using the CAD system.Bibliography1. Smith, S. Pro/Engineer® Wildfire 3.0 Advanced Design. CADQuest Inc., 2006.2. Smith, S. Pro/Engineer® Wildfire 3.0 Introduction to Mechanism Design. CADQuest Inc., 2006.3. Budynas, R., Nisbett, J. Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design. 8th ed., McGraw Hill, 2008
ofvideo and storage technologies, ways to better respond to student and institution needs andcreating even greater efficiencies while at the same enhancing the areas of focus, courseware andeducational experience. Finding new ways and means of expanding these notions can besupported by using some of the recommended “out of the box” thinking.Bibliography 1. Buede, D., “The Engineering Design of Systems”, John Wiley, 2000 2. Standard for Systems Engineering, IEEE P1220 (1994), Piscataway, New Jersey, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standards Department 3. C4ISR Architecture Framework, version 2.0 (1997), Washington, DC: Architectures Working Group, U. S. Department of Defense, December 18 4
Education. Physics Today,58(11), 2005.3 Hrepic, Z., Rebello, N. S., Zollman, D. A., Remedying Shortcomings of Lecture-Based Physics InstructionThrough Pen-Based, Wireless Computing And DyKnow Software,http://www.fhsu.edu/~zhrepic/Research/BookCh/2008%20Remedying%20shortcomings%20of%20lecture-based%20physics.pdf. Page 15.196.84 Cromack, J., Technology and Learning-Centered Education: Research-Based Support for how the Tablet PCEmbodies the Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, 38th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers inEducation Conference, October 22–25, 2008, Saratoga Springs, NY.5 Chidanandan, A., Ferro, P., Frolik, J
. Page 15.1329.10References 1. R. Murray and J. R. Brightman, Interactive teaching, European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 295-301, 1996. 2. C. C. Bonwell and J. A. Eison, Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, 1991. 3. L. A. Van Dijk, G. C. Van Den Berg, and H. Van Keulen, Interactive lectures in engineering education., European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 15-28, 2001. 4. B. Mehlenbacher, C. R. Miller, D. Covington, and J. S. Larsen, Active and interactive learning online: A comparison of web-based and conventional writing
, HI.: ASEE.2 L. S. Vygotsky. 1978. Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.3 C. Quintana, B. Reiser, E. Davis, J. Krajcik, E. Fretz, R.G. Duncan, E. Kyza, D. Edelson, and E. Soloway. 2004. Journal of the Learning Sciences 13, no. 3: 337-386.4 R.M. Felder and L.K. Silverman. 1988. Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education. Engineering Education, 78 no. 7: 674-681.5 D. Norman and S. Draper, User-centered system design, Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Mahwah, NJ, Page 15.564.8 (1986).
inception.David Woehr, University of Tennessee, Knoxville David J. Woehr is a Professor in the Department of Management at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He received his Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Georgia Institute of Technology in 1989. Dr. Woehr ‘s research focuses on the measurement and evaluation of individual job performance, managerial assessment centers, and applied measurement. Dr. Woehr currently serves as an associate editor for Human Performance and is an elected fellow of the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology (SIOP), the American Psychological Association (APA), and the Association for Psychological Science (APS).Eduardo Salas, University of