applications of Gibbs energy are included in the course. An overall goal is for the students tohave a preliminary working knowledge of Gibbs free energy and chemical potential. In fact, accordingto course pre-requisites, they have already been introduced to Gibbs in their introductory chemistrycourses. Gibbs energy combines the two state properties, enthalpy (H) and entropy (S), and thus is theapplication of all that has been learned in the course to this point. One might chose chapter 3 in Atkins 13 to introduce Gibbs energy. The level of coverage hasnot been completely agreed on, but it cannot go as far as Atkins. A key challenge for the syllabusdevelopment is to choose a set of example problems, which illustrate the application of Gibbs
, analysis of data, final results, and your comments or group discussionsand observations. The analysis may include diagrams, assumptions, and the applications offundamental principles. Follow the “Laboratory Report Writing” guidelines. The formal reportmust be typed on a word processor. Microsoft Word is preferred along with Excel. Computersand the software are available in the Engineering Computer Rooms. Informal reports emphasizethe results and require a less stringent format and neatness. They can be hand-written in pencil.Written reports are due one week from the date that the experiment was performed. All reportsmust contain the data sheet(s) with the instructor’s initials to receive credit. Since the experimentrequires a group effort and the
2003, American Society for Engineering Education"is significant and, in this case, increased by the necessity of responding to a wide variety ofresearch initiatives.Bibliographic Information1. Campbell, D. T., "Administrative Experimentation, Institutional Records, and Nonreactive Measures," in Improving Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis, J. C. Stanley and S. M. Elam, Eds., Chicago, Rand McNally, 1967, pp. 257-291.2. Catalano, G. D. , and Karen Catalano, " Transformation: From Teacher-Centered to Student-Centered Engineering Education," Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 88, No. 1, January 1999, pp.59-64.3. Narayanan, R. M., "Use of Objective-Based Undergraduate Research Project Experience as a Graduate Student
difference existed when replying to “often or always try to do their best work,” with the differences ranging from 61-65% (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000, p. 72). • Mathematics performance scores of U.S. students increased in the 90’s for 4th and 8 th grades; 12th grade scores increased from 1990-96, but declined between 1996-2000. The decline was reported to be associated with opportunities to “study challenging material Page 8.534.4 and the degree to which students took advantage of these opportunities” (National Center
take precedence overexpediency. Understand the consequences of your choices and act accordingly.In the late 1800's engineering had grown from its civil base to encompass developments aroundsteam power. This gave rise to mechanical engineering and a well-entrenched bureaucracy of shop-based engineers controlling the profession and its educational component.The issue of shop versus school varied depending on the field of engineering. Civil engineering —perhaps because of Monge — took to academics faster than mechanical engineering. In fact theterm “shop culture” is derived from the practicality of a machine shop, and the attitude that allengineering education began (and frequently ended) with the machine shop.The real break with the hands-on
. Page 25.560.32.1.3 Scratch CardsFollowing an introduction to the TA union and its responsibilities, scratch cards (see Appendix C– Figure C4) were used to administer a brief, closed-book, multiple-choice quiz on the material(see Appendix D1). The benefit of the scratch card is that if the trainee is unsure of the answer,s/he can scratch out all possible answers until the correct one is revealed. The use of scratchcards in this instance allows us to convey important material to the trainees in a quick andeffective way. Because the answers are provided immediately to the trainees via the scratch card,discussion can be kept brief and to the point.3. ObjectivesFacilitators give a brief introduction of their academic background, past TA experience
., “Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s So Darn Hard).” New York Times, 6 November 2011. Available at http://nytimes.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/why-science-majors-change-their- mind-its-just-so-darn-hard.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp. Page 25.595.13 4. Lowman, J. 1995 Mastering the Techniques of Teaching. Jossey-Bass Publishing, pp. 232-236.5. Waters, C., Taher, A., Messiha, S., Oneyear, S. 2006. “Preparation, Attendance and Note-taking, How to Promote Student Buy-In.” Proceedings of The American Society of Engineering Education, Chicago, Illinois, 18-21 June.6. Daniel, J. W., “Survival
Competition, http://www.asce.org/concretecanoe/, Jan. 2012.2 Sulzbach, C., “Enhancing Engineering Education through the Concrete Canoe Competition,” in Proc. ASEEAnnual Conf. & Expo., Honolulu, 2007.3 Pinski, S., Berry, J., Barrett, S., and Leupp, D., “Competition in Senior Design Projects,” in Proc. ASEE AnnualConf. & Expo., Washington D.C., 1996.4 Wankat, P., Undergraduate Student Competitions, J. Eng. Educ., 2005, 94: pp. 343-347.5 SAE Collegiate Design Series: Baja SAE: CDS Event History,http://students.sae.org/competitions/bajasae/cdshistory.htm, Dec. 2011.6 SAE Collegiate Design Series: Baja SAE: About Baja SAE,http://students.sae.org/competitions/bajasae/about.htm, Dec. 2011.7 Mikesell, D., and Moyer, A., “From Crippled to
career-related questions from the audience and/or facilitate a Family Engineering activity. Page 25.636.8Table 2 provides a sampling of Family Engineering activities, the ‘engineering hook’ thatmotivates families to participate, engineering fields introduced through each activity, and thetype of activity.Table 2. Sample Family Engineering Activities. Name of Activity Engineering Hook Engineering Field(s) Type of Activity Opener Activities Diving Board Dominoes How far out can Civil Engineering Hands-on design, you build a Mechanical building, and testing
competitive factor. Page 25.666.6In any case, would the addition of courses really be a solution for achieving an education thatallows greater competitiveness on the part of the graduate? To some degree, probably yes. But itis not a fundamental solution.How do we propose to design our curriculum? What should the goal(s) be for revamping acurriculum? The answer(s) must address the industrial competition that companies andindividuals face.What to do?How should (not could) we prepare our graduates for today’s career environment? The year 2020is too little, too late – the action will be substantially over – it is too far into the future. Weshould address
. Page 25.669.12References1. National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), Annual Results, 2011.2. S. Wilson, D. George, J. Bruni, and M. Cambron, “Algorithm for Defining Student Engagement,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2008, Pittsburg, PA.3. K. A. Rocca, “Student Participation in the College Classroom: An Extended Multidisciplinary Literature Review,” Communication Education, 59, 2010.4. K. McDonald, “Increasing the Class Participation Experience for Engineers,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2006, Chicago, IL.5. J. Hartman, “Does Class Size Matter? Reflections on Teaching Engineering Economy to Small and Large Classes,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual
. English, L.D., L. Dawes, P.B. Hudson, and T. Byers. Introducing Engineering Education in the Middle School. Proceedings of the Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2009, 20-23 July 2009, Palm Cove, Cairns.6. McKay, M., D. Brockway, E. McGrath, H. Harms, E. Hole, and D. Janosz. Systems And Global Engineering: Results Of A Pilot Study For High-School Students And Teachers. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Austin, TX, June 2009.7. Seymour, S. J. and R.R. Luman. Academic Perspectives of Systems Engineering. Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest. Vol, 29, No. 4. 2011: 377 – 386.8. Fromm, E.. The Changing Engineering Educational Paradigm. Bernard M. Gordon Lecture. National Academy of
size from 500 to small threshold(s) that actually reflect current demographics of small companies to include 5, 10-25 and 50 Maintain funding level for NSF-ATE programs and target additional funding for innovative Regional and National Centers in advanced manufacturing, to include significant funding for advanced manufacturing equipment and faculty training Sponsor a joint research project on the state of manufacturing education in coordination with the National Governors Association Adopt the metric systemState and Local Levels Encourage a deeper understanding of the role and economic impact of advanced manufacturing programs in K-12 education, especially with guidance counselors and
Garner, Michael Alley, Allen Gaudelli & Sarah Zappe (2009). Common Use of PowerPoint versusAssertion-Evidence Slide Structure: a Cognitive Psychology Perspective. Technical Communication, 56 (4),331−345.2 Joanna Garner, Lauren Sawarynski, Michael Alley, Keri Wolfe & S. Zappe (2011). Assertion-Evidence SlidesAppear to Lead to Better Comprehension and Retention of Complex Concepts. ASEE Annual Conference &Exposition (Vancouver: American Society of Engineering Educators, 2011)3 Michael Alley & Katherine A. Neeley (2005). Rethinking the Design of Presentation Slides: A Case forSentence Headlines and Visual Evidence. Technical Communication, 52 (4), 417-426.4 Alley, M., Zappe, S. & Garner, J. (2010). Projected words per minute: a
most analysts and policy makers in higher education isfitness of purpose [5]. In this view, the level of quality is determined by the extent to which aproduct or service meets its stated purpose(s) or requirement(s). Due to a lack of consensusamong different stakeholders and/or customers, it is challenging to articulate the purpose ofhigher education. The objective of higher education may be instruction in skills, promotion of thegeneral powers of the mind, advancement of learning, and transmission of a common culture andstandard of citizenship [6]. The above list is not exhaustive as the objective of higher educationmay also include developing critical thinking abilities, creativity, gainful employment, thediscovery of knowledge, and social
hosted by Ted Koppel. http://www.ideo.com/ 2. Brasier, Terry G. 2008. The effects of parental involvement on students’ eighth and tenth grade college aspirations: A comparative analysis. Dissertation for Doctor of Education, North Carolina State University, 138 pages. http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/bitstream/1840.16/3952/1/etd.pdf (last accessed, April 2011). 3. Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME), 2011. https://engineering.purdue.edu/CATME 4. Compton-Lilly, C. and Greene, S., editors, 2011. Bedtime Stories and Book Reports: Connecting Parent Involvement and Family. New York: Teachers College Press, p.24-25. 5. Crawford, M., Schmidt, K. “Aims for Engineering
Education Research and Development Society of Australasia. Perth, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.ecu.edu.au/conferences/herdsa/main/papers/ref/pdf/Reeves.pdf. 7. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). (2010). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. Baltimore, MD: Author. 8. Wilbarger, J., & Howe. S. (2006). “Current Practices in Engineering Capstone Education: Further Results from a 2005 Nationwide Survey”, 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October 28-31, 2006, San Diego, CA. 9. National Research Council, Committee on Pre-Milestone A Systems Engineering: A Retrospective Review and Benefits for Future Air Force Systems Acquisition. (2008). Pre-Milestone
: edms.asee.org13.Personal communication14.Bringle, R.G., M.A. Phillips, and M. Hudson. (2004). The Measure of Service Learning: Re- search Scales to Assess Student Experiences. American Psychological Association. Washing- ton, DC. 227 pp.15.Glemon, S.B., B.A. Holland, A. Driscoll, A. Spring, and S. Kerrigan (2001). Assessing Page 25.722.13 service-learning and civic engagement. Rhode Island Campus Compact. 154 pp.16.Thode, A.G., K.D. Landick, K.G. Paterson, and D.W. Watkins (2011). Analyzing Methods to Achieve Successful Development. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering. 6(1):93-102.17.Creswell J.W. (2003). Research Design
have the flexibility toeither follow the suggested teaching outline or use their own discretion to determine which of thetopics are suitable, fine-tuning the course materials to make them more accessible andunderstandable to their students. This also increases the effectiveness of the modules andachieving the desired learning outcomes.Seven Course ModulesThe following is a description of seven course modules that are to serve as the instructionalmaterials for teaching software testing in multiple CS and SE undergraduate courses. Alsoexplained is the rationale behind the choice and design of each module, and the course(s) itmight apply to.Module 1 – Software Testing Fundamentals: The must-knows of software testingThis module covers concepts
AC 2012-4719: INTEGRATING AEROSPACE RESEARCH MATERIALSINTO A PROJECT-BASED FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING DESIGN COURSEDr. Jacques C. Richard, Texas A&M University Dr. Richard got his Ph. D. at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1989 & a B. S. at Boston Univer- sity, 1984. He was at NASA Glenn, 1989-1995, taught at Northwestern for Fall 1995, worked at Ar- gonne National Lab, 1996-1997, Chicago State, 1997-2002. Dr. Richard is a Sr. Lecturer & Research Associate in Aerospace Engineering @ Texas A&M since 1/03. His research is focused on compu- tational plasma modeling using spectral and lattice Boltzmann methods such as in plasma turbulence (http://www.worldscinet.com/cgi-bin/details.cgi?id=jsname:ijmpc&
industrysponsored. Student teams face challenges when defining objectives for an ambiguous project,controlling scope creep, achieving buy-in, and selling their results to the sponsor. These areskills that are not taught in most engineering curriculums prior to the capstone course(s). Ourobservations are consistent with the observations by other researchers who have studied thedesign process. Wilson et. al 2 highlighted how students in the capstone course setting strugglewith setting milestones and soliciting feedback at the right times. Developing and effectivelycommunicating the project plan and status are critical to the success of the project. As noted byYildirim3, there is a need for understanding the relationships between design activities
shift in construction education is vital for the future of our profession. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2005. 131(5): p. 533-539.2. Schexnayder, C. and Anderson, S., Construction engineering education: History and challenge. 2011. 137: p. 730-739.3. Tatum, C.B. Construction engineering education: Need, content, learning approaches. 2010. Banff, AB, Canada: American Society of Civil Engineers.4. National Academy of Engineering - NAE, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. 2005: The National Academies Press.5. Wang, Y., Sustainability in construction education. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 2009
is described and the paper includes several class activities to promote andintegrate these skills.Bibliography1. Corder, P., Aung, K., and Zhou, J. Senior Design and US Space Program, Proceedings of 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 2007.2. Maddren, J., Design of a Thermal Systems Course, Proceedings of 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 2007.3. Dukhan, N., and Schumack, M., Thermal Science Capstone Projects in Mechanical Engineering, Proceedings of 2011 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver, Canada, June 2011.4. Bloom, B. S., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, David McKay, New York, 1961.5. Paul, R., Niewoehner, R., and
. Bevington, P., and D.K. Robinson, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, 3rd ed.,McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2002. 3. Campbell, B.A., and S.W. McCandless, Introduction to Space Sciences and Spacecraft Applications, GulfPublishing, Houston, TX, 1996. 4. Coleman, C., Introduction to Radio Frequency Engineering, Cambridge University Press, West Nyack,NY, 2004. 5. Handelsman, J., S. Miller, and C. Pfund, Scientific Teaching, Freeman, New York, NY, 2007. 6. Horowitz, P., and W. Hill, The Art of Electronics, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 1989. 7. Kelley, M.C., The Earth’s Ionosphere: Plasma Physics and Electrodynamics, 2nd ed., Academic Press, SanDiego, CA, 2009. 8. Moore, J.H., C.C. Davis, M.A. Coplan, S.C
engineering as well as the traditional sophomore chemical engineering fundamentalstwo course sequence. Page 25.914.11References:[1] Collura, M.A., et al. “Development of a Multidisciplinary Engineering Foundation Spiral” American Society ofEngineering Education Proceedings of the 2004 Conference and Exposition[2] Collura, M.A., Daniels, S., and Nocito-Gobel, J., “The current generation of integrated engineering curriculum -assessment after two years of implementation,” American Society of Engineering Education Proceedings of the 2007Conference and Exposition[3] Felder,. R.M. and R.W. Rousseau, Elementary Principles of Chemical Processes, 3rd Ed,. New York
).9. McElfresh, Laura Kane. 2009. “College textbooks and libraries: If you reserve it, they will come.” Technicalities 29(6): 4-5.10. McDonald, K., & Burke, J.. (2010, March). “The Case for Textbooks.” American Libraries, 41(3): 25.11. Laskowski, Mary S. 2007. “The textbook problem: Investigating one possible solution.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Service, 31(3-4): 161-170.12. Crouse, Caroline. 2008. “Textbooks 101: Textbook collection at the University of Minnesota.” Journal of Access Services 5(1-2): 285-293.13. Graydon, Benjamin, Blake Urbach-Buholz and Cheryl Kohen. 2011. “A study of four textbook distribution models.” EDUCAUSE Quarterly 34(4) http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE
. and Brown, S. 2003. Use of HDLs in teaching of computer hardware courses. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computer Architecture Education (WCAE’03).12. S. Areibi, A first course in digital design using VHDL and programmable logic, in Proc. 31st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Educ. Conf.,vol. 1, Oct. 2001, pp. 19–23.13. Todorovich, Marone, and Vázquez Introducing Programmable Logic to Undergraduate Engineering Students in a Digital Electronics Course. IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 54, No. 4, may 2011.14. http://www.altera.com/education/univ/materials/digital_logic/labs/unv-labs.html. Page 25.973.10
addition, the authors are very thankful for the help from theinstructor and students participating in the English 202C and EDSGN 100 classes. Finally, theauthors would like to thank the Penn State Office of Engineering Diversity for providing supportfor travel. Page 25.1019.12References[1] B. Amadei, R. Sandekian, and E. Thomas, "A Model for Sustainable Humanitarian Engineering Projects," Sustainability, vol. 1, pp. 1087-1105, 2009.[2] K. Mehta, S. Zappe, T. Colledge, Y. Zhao, "eplum Model of Student Engagement: Expanding Non-travel Based Global Awareness, Multi-disciplinary Teamwork and Entrepreneurial Mindset Development
increasing grit. He then suggeststhat an important element is required, this is, teaching kids that talent takes time to develop andrequires continuous effort.The notion of continuous effort is based on work by the Stanford psychologist, Carol S. Dweck.8In her work, she looks at “growth mindset”, which believes in time and effort, versus a “fixedmindset”, or the belief that achievement results from abilities we are born with. In her studies,children praised for their intelligence quickly became discouraged when given a version of an IQtest, contrasted to children that were praised for their efforts, who improved their final scores.This work, combined with the extensive work at the University of Pennsylvania, helps to set thestage for the search for
Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 22 - 25, 2008, Pittsburgh, PA.17. Gustafson, R. J. and B. C. Trott. 2009. Two Minors in Technological Literacy for Non-Engineers, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 15-17, Austin, TX.18. Krupczak, J. J., S. VanderStoep, L. Wessman, N. Makowski, C. Otto, and K. Van Dyk. 2005. “ Work in progress: Case study of a technological literacy and non-majors engineering course,” Proceeding of the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October 19-22, Indianapolis, IN.19. Pintrich, P. R., D. Smith, T. Garcia, and W. McKeachie. 1991. A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning