% 4% 5% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Disagree (a) (b)Figure 1: Changes in participant beliefs that active learning and conceptual
Program Evaluation Executive Summary,” Menlo Park, CA, 2017.[17] M. J. Mohr-schroeder, D. L. Little, and D. C. Schroeder, “Developing Middle School Students ’ Interests in STEM via Summer Learning Experiences : See Blue STEM Camp,” Sch. Sci. Math., vol. 114, no. 6, pp. 291–301, 2012.[18] K. Roy, “App Inventor for Android : Report from a Summer Camp,” SIGCSE ’12 Proc. 43rd ACM Tech. Symp. Comput. Sci. Educ., pp. 283–288, 2012.[19] B. Ericson and T. McKlin, “Effective and Sustainable Computing Summer Camps,” Proc. 43rd ACM Tech. Symp. Comput. Sci. Educ., pp. 289–294, 2012.[20] M. Guzdial, B. Ericson, T. Mcklin, and S. Engelman, “Georgia Computes! An Intervention in a US State, with Formal and Informal
Development of a New Power Electronics Curriculum Relevant to Tomorrow’s Power Engineering ChallengesI. IntroductionThis paper presents the results of an effort to develop a new power electronics and electric ma-chines curriculum at two collaborating academic institutions, namely, Purdue University, WestLafayette, Indiana 1, and Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 2, hereinafter referred to as Institu-tions A and B, in a bid to enhance the relevance of this subject to the undergraduate population.This is achieved via identifying the role of power electronics and machines in addressing tomor-row’s grand engineering challenge of sustainable energy use. This is a timely and important top-ic because of the increased demand for highly
teacher self-efficacy scale is a set of questionnaires [5]. It seems tobe a variant of TSES introduced above and has better coverage. It is designed to help people gaina better understanding of the kinds of things that create difficulties for teachers in their schoolactivities. It has 30 questions which are classified into 7 categories: a. Efficacy to Influence Decision Making b. Efficacy to Influence School Resources c. Instructional Self-Efficacy d. Disciplinary Self-Efficacy e. Efficacy to Enlist Parental Involvement f. Efficacy to Enlist Community Involvement g. Efficacy to Create a Positive School Climate These 30 questions provide a comprehensive coverage of teachers’ self-efficacy. 2.3 Collective Teacher
enrolled in Engineering Management (EM), Industrial and SystemsEngineering (ISE), and Mechanical Engineering (ME) degree programs at Stevens Institute ofTechnology during a third-year required engineering design course. These students make up thefirst cohort of a two-year study. The EM and ISE students are taught in a combined section of 23students (referred to as Section A), where market-driven design is highlighted throughout thecurriculum and multiple assignments are collected and analyzed. The ME students are taught intwo sections of approximately 54 students each (Sections B and C). In Section A, 43 percent ofthe students identified as female and 35 percent as non-white, which is typical of nationalengineering student ethnicity demographics
Paper ID #19412Selection Process of Students for a Novel STEM Summer Bridge ProgramDr. Margaret E. Beier, Rice University Margaret Beier is an Associate Professor of Psychology at Rice University in Houston, TX. She received her B.A. from Colby College, and her M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology. Margaret’s research examines the predictors of performance in educational and occupational settings. In particular, she is interested in the effects of examining gender, age, ability, personality, motivation, and self-regulation on a range of outcomes. She is a member of the American Educational
bimolecularrecombination are incorporated into a drift-diffusion model and used to estimate the currentdensity and efficiency of organic solar cells.18 These processes are unique features and conceptsinherent in disordered organic materials which are solved numerically under illumination. Figure2 (b) shows examples of free carrier distributions inside organic layers simulated using electricalmodel.(a) (b)Figure 2. (a)Photoconversion process and (b) distribution of charge carriers inside an organicsolar cell.Organic solar cell simulation has many capabilities for optical and electrical models as follows: Capabilities of Optical Models Capabilities of Electrical Models TMM optical
. These questions are intended to provideexamples of the types of questions that could be included in an assessment of engineering andtechnological literacy that is generally applicable for use with undergraduates who are notstudying engineering. As in the case of the Force Concept Inventory, it would not be advisable toinclude the entire assessment in a publication which might be accessible to the students beingevaluated.Sample Draft QuestionsTECHNOLOGY and SOCIETY1.) Government has had a persistent role in technology development because A. Corruption of government officials disrupts or controls technology development. B. Government can be a very effective way to carry out collective will. C. Technology requires government intervention
. The remaining two articles were excluded because they were theoreticaland did not pertain to the scope of the literature review. After the abstract decision process wascompleted, 24 articles were selected for the full read. Out of those 19-peer reviewed articles wereincluded in the final synthesis (see Figure 1).Figure 1: Prisma diagram including the information of the number of excluded and includedarticles in each step of the reviewing process [12] 3. FindingsDifferent strategies for assessing the development of computational thinking in higher educationwere found. These summaries of findings will be discussed in the following themes (a) tests,instruments, and portfolios, (b) makeshift environments and online games, and (c
learned a lot about engineering education research from this program. Many studentsexpressed their desire to purchase further graduate studies, or teaching, in the development oftheir professional careers.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.DUE 1262806. Graduate students Mr. Andreas Febrian, Mr. Moe Tajvidi, Mr. PresentacionRivera-Reyes, and Ms. Ting Song are acknowledged for their efforts in mentoring REU students.The project external evaluator Dr. Margaret Lubke is also acknowledged for her efforts inconducting independent evaluation of this program.Bibliography[1] Hathaway, R. S., Naqda, B. A., and Gregerman, S. R., 2002, “The Relationship of Undergraduate Research
, Upper Saddle River, NJ.[4] Barrett, S. F., LeFevre, E. W., Steadman, J. W., Tietjen, J. S., White,K. R., and Whitman, D. L., 2010, Using the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Examination as an Outcomes Assessment Tool, National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying, Seneca, SC.[5] Streveler, R. A., Geist, M. R., Ammerman, R. F., Sulzbach, C. S., Miller, R. L., Olds, B. M., and Nelson, M. A., 2006, “Identifying and Investigating Difficult Concepts in Engineering Mechanics and Electrical Circuits,” Proceedings of the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, IL.[6] Cornwell, P. J., 2000, “Dynamics Evolution – Change or Design,” Proceedings of the 2000 ASEE Annual Conference
, 2) overcome difficulties they mayexperience while learning physics, and 3) enjoy learning math.Group B (Purple)There were a total of 702 students identified in group B, which consisted of four sub-progressions (i.e., B1-B4). Similar to group A, this group had moderately high responses on allof the constructs included in the analysis. The most defining features of this group were their 1)high controlled regulation (CR1), 2) strong engineering interests and recognition, and 3)moderately high epistemic beliefs similar to those of Group A. External factors motivated thesestudents regarding their instructors' perception of them as a student. In addition to theirmotivation beliefs, these students believed there is variability in what a person
beliefs about their calculus class (either a Project CALCclass or a regular calculus class). In its original form, the Project CALC survey consists of 40closed-ended 4-point Likert scale questions with response categories ranging from StronglyAgree (“A”) to Strongly Disagree (“D”). Somewhat Agree (“B”) and Somewhat Disagree (“C”)are provided as intermediate choices. Response options A through D are provided in alphabeticalorder, left to right. For the purpose of the study, we tailored the original survey in several ways. Weexpanded the scale of each question to a 7-point scale in order to provide for sufficient variabilityin responses as well as a designate a true midpoint and thus allow a neutral selection. Wechanged the A-D response
. 316, pp. 548-549.[2 Zydney, A. L., Bennett, J. S., Shahid, A., and Bauer, K. W. 2002, “Impact of Undergraduate Research Experience in Engineering,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 91, pp.151–157.[3] Hathaway, R. S., Naqda, B. A., and Gregerman, S. R., 2002, “The Relationship of Undergraduate Research Participation to Graduate and Professional Education Pursuit: An Empirical Study,” Journal of College Student Development, Vol. 43(5), pp. 614-631.[4] Conrad, L. F., May, G. S., and Auerbach, J. L., 2013, “REU Site: Summer Undergraduate Research in Engineering/Science Program at the Georgia Institute of Technology,” Proceedings of the 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia.[5
. A. N. Amaral, “Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance,” Science, vol. 308 no. 5722, pp. 697-702, Apr. 2005.[4] D. A. Harrison, K. H. Price, and M. P. Bell, “Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion,” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 96-107, Feb. 1998.[5] B. Mazur, B. Mazur, and P. Biatosticka, “Cultural diversity in organisational theory and practice,” Journal of Intercultural Management., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 5–15, 2010.[6] K. J. Cross and S. L. Cutler, “Engineering faculty perceptions of diversity in the classroom.” In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition
Society for Engineering Education (2013). Transforming Undergraduate Education in Engineering Phase I: Synthesizing and Integrating Industry Perspectives, Arlington, VA.[4] National Academy of Engineering (2004). The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. National Academy Press: Washington, DC.[5] ABET (2021). Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2020 – 2021. https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-progra ms-2020-2021/. Accessed: Oct 21, 2022. [Online].[6] Bransford, J., Stevens, R., Schwartz, D., Meltzoff, A., Pea, R., Roschelle, J., Vye, N., Kuhl, P., Bell, P., Barron, B., Reeves, B., & Sabelli, N. (2006). Learning Theories
sync FPro bus DAC VGA monitor (a). Top-level diagram of an FPro system (b). Software hierarchy of an FPro SoC system Figure 1. Hardware and software of an FPro system Processor module The processor module, shown as the red box in Figure 1(a), consists of a processor, amemory controller core, and RAM. It is the only part that is constructed from the vendor's IPcores. To be used in the FPro SoC platform, the processor core must exhibit the followingcharacteristics: 32-bit-wide data path
). Dr. Furse’s research has led to the development of a system to locate intermittent electrical wiring faults, and she is a founder of LiveWire Innovation. Her research also includes development of antennas to communicate with medical implants, and methods to predict statistical variability in bioelectromagnetic applications. Dr. Furse is a Fellow of the IEEE and the National Academy of Inventors. She has received numerous teaching and research awards including the Harriett B. Rigas Medal for Excellence in Teaching.Dr. Donna Harp Ziegenfuss, University of Utah Donna Harp Ziegenfuss, is an Associate Librarian in Graduate and Undergraduate Services in the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah. She has an
, and how these views uniquely affectunderrepresented or marginalized students. This conversation can lead to a better understandingof how best to create an inclusive educational system.AcknowledgementsThis project was funded by the NSF IUSE/PFE: RED grant #1730354.References[1] K. Deaux, “Reconstructing social identity,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol.19, pp. 4-12, 1993.[2] S. Stryker, and P. J. Burke, “The past, present, and future of an identity theory,” SocialPsychological Quarterly, vol. 63(4), pp. 284-297, 2000.[3] E. H. Erikson, Identity and the life cycle. New York: International Universities Press, 1959.[4] M. B. Brewer, “The social self: On being the same and different at the same time,”Personality and Social
Technology Degrees”. References[ 1] A. W. Dean, R. Landaeta, K. B. Sibson, V. Jovanovic, C. Tomovic. “A pathway to completion for pursuing engineering and engineering technology degrees”, National Science Foundation Award # 1742118, funded by the Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE), Website. https://nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1742118 (accessed January 30, 2020)[ 2] Department of Veterans Affairs “EducNation 2017 - Department of Veterans Affairs education program beneficiaries: FY2000 to FY2016”. 2017. Website. https://www.va.gov/vetdata/docs/Utilization/EducNation_2017.pdf (accessed January 30, 2020)[ 3] L. M. McAndrew, S. Slotkin, J. Kimber, K
Page 23.276.3Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). It isessential that mentors have an understanding of each of these areas including: calculus concepts,student learning, campus resources, and engineering student groups. Saturn V Rocket Acceleration (a) (b) Fig. 1: (a) The Saturn V rocket—the only vehicle ever constructed capable of putting a man on the moon. In over 40 years man has failed to repeat this task. (b) A plot of the altitude of Apollo 11 as it ascends into orbit.The Saturn V rocket, shown in Fig. 1(a), was used to put men on the moon and launch Skylab. Now with the
., Katz, J., Wandersman, A., Skiles, B., Schillaci, M. J., Timmerman, B. E. and Mousseau, T. A. (2013). Exploring the role of sense of community in the undergraduate transfer student experience. Journal of Community Psychology, 41: 277- 290. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21529[3] Walters, N., DeSalvo, A., & Shafer, S. 2017. Intervention for College Attendance Program: 2015-2016 Report. Minnesota Office of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.ohe.state.mn.us/pdf/ICAP_Report_15-16.pdf. on March 10, 2021.[4] Smith, B. 2013. Mentoring At-Risk Students through the Hidden Curriculum of Higher Education; Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.[5] Polmear, M., Bielefeldt, A., Knight, D., Swan, C., Canney, N., 2019
; Exposition, Charlotte, NC.3. Morrell, D. (2007). Design of an Introductory MATLAB Course for Freshman Engineering Students. Paper presented at the 2007 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, HI.4. Naraghi, M.H.N. & Litkouhi, B. (2001). An Effective Approach for Teaching Computer Programming to Freshman Engineering Students, Paper presented at the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, New York.5. Solomon, J. (2004). Programming as a Second Language. Learning & Leading with Technology, 32(4), 34-39.6. Tran, L. (2014) Computer Programming Could Soon Be Considered a Foreign Language in One State. Retrieved March 7
Licensed Professional Engineer (software). Gilman has been active in various local, state, and national organizations including Rotary, Computer Cleanup Day, Leadership Brazos, B/CS Library Board, multiple IT groups, and the Texas Board of Professional Engineers, and has been nominated to serve on a national committee for the development of a standard professional engineering examination in software engineering.Dr. Dennie L. Smith, Texas A&M University Dennie Smith is a professor of education in the Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture at Texas A&M University, College Station. He received his Ed.D. in curriculum and instruction at Auburn Univer- sity in 1969. Prior to his current position, he worked as
workforce. The SEECS implementation of that grant programprovides scholarships to selected undergraduate students of engineering and computing sciences atGannon University. Students are recruited as incoming freshmen, and are eligible for retention in theSEECS program so long as program requirements are met, including maintenance of a minimum 3.0GPA. As the grant activity has proceeded, it has been noted that students who fail to achieve a grade of“B” or better in Calculus I, Calculus II or Physics 1 have typically failed to maintain an overall 3.0 GPAas well. There is thus an interest for SEECS in providing additional academic assistance to our studentsin support of GPA maintenance, leading to better employment and/or graduate school opportunities
Engineering Mathematics Education: A Longitudinal Study of Program Impacts," Proceedings 4th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, August 2012. Page 23.76.1114. Klingbeil, N., High, K, Keller, M., White, I, Brummel, J., Daily, J., Cheville, A., Wolk, J., 2012, “The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3” Proceedings 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, June 2012.15. Klingbeil, N., Molitor, S., Randolph, B., Brown, S., Olsen, R. and Cassady, R., 2011, “The Wright State Model for Engineering
in Fig. 1. The circuit thatthe students are intending to test, called a device-under-test (DUT – A in Fig. 1), is inserted into atest board, called the device-interface-board (DIB – B in Fig. 1). Depending on the lab, the DUTwill be a comparator, a DAC, or an ADC. The DIB contains circuits that will allow the DUT to beplaced into different configurations for different specification tests (e.g. input bias current, offsetvoltage, linearity, propagation delay, etc.). The DIB circuits may be as simple as load structures(output resistors and/or capacitors) or input resistors to gain up input current measurements, or ascomplicated as negative feedback servo-loops to force the device into a known state. Relays areactivated to change the DIB
-3] and engage with teachers to identify methods that can be used toidentify elementary students’ funds of identity and current perceptions of engineering. Thisinformation can then be utilized by PLC members to develop place-based engineering-focusedinterventions for students.Research DesignThe research goals during this portion of the study were to a) develop and refine a photo novellaprompt that can be used to collect data on individual’s funds of knowledge related toengineering, and b) identify differences in the ways engineering and education professionals andstudents view engineering in their communities.Our FoI work relies heavily on the photo novella projects. There is a rich history of usingphotography in qualitative research [4] and
Linear Equations 13 Solving Systems of Equations with MatricesEach week, the worksheets were graded, and all solutions were scanned and stored in a database.Weekly quizzes were used to assess students’ learning. Areas of difficulties were identified aftermanually grading quizzes and worksheets.Results:Two main issues were identified in the graded worksheets: students’ difficulties with performingbasic math operations and students’ misconceptions.Examples of misconceptions and calculation errors found in students’ work: a) Students incorrectly factored 3 out b) Students incorrectly factorized an expression, by selecting an incorrect common factor c) Lack of knowledge on how to simplify a rational expression d) Unable to
expectations.References[1] R. B. Landis, Studying Engineering: A Road Map to a Rewarding Career, 4th ed., Anaheim, CA: Discovery Press, 2013.[2] S. A. Sorby, Developing Spatial Thinking, Boston, MA: Delmar Cengage Learning, 2011.[3] R. B. Guay, Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations, West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Research Foundation, 1977.[4] J. M. Hektner, J. A. Schmidt and M. Csikszentmihalyi, Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life, Sage, 2007.[5] R. W. Larson, G. Moneta, M. H. Richards and S. Wilson, "Continuity, stability, and change in daily emotional experience across adolescence," Child Development, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 1151-1165, 2002.[6] M. Csikszentmihalyi and R. Larson, "Validity and reliability of the