COMPARATIVE STUDY OF HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION DESIGN AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING John D. Fernandez & Larry Young Texas A&M University – Corpus ChristiABSTRACTMany computer science programs require students to complete software engineering and humancomputer interaction (HCI) courses. Upon graduation, these students join other softwareprofessionals in the field to contribute to the development community. However, the differencesin the two approaches to developing interactive software are not addressed so that students leavethe institution without an integrated view of the two methodologies. Professors at Texas A&MUniversity – Corpus Christi teach
, Switzerland.Kline, S. J. and F. A. McClintock, 1953, “Describing Uncertainties in Single-Sample Experiments”, Mechanical Engineering, vol. 75, pp. 3-8.Klein, S. A., 1992-2002, “EES, Engineering Equation Solver”, F-Chart Software, Madison, WI.Taylor, B. N. and C. E. Kuyatt, 1994, “Guideline for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty in NIST Measurement Results”, NIST TN 1297, NIST Physics Laboratory, Gaithersberg, MD, available online at .BIOGRAPHYSHELDON M. JETER is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the George W. WoodruffSchool of Mechanical Engineering at Georgia Tech. He has degrees from Clemson University, theUniversity of Florida, and Georgia Tech. He has been on the academic faculty at Georgia Tech since 1979
acceleration is independent of weight.Again, the Arabic language may have a subtle influence on the concept in question and contributeto the somewhat lower scores among the PI students. The word for gravity in Arabic,“jathibiyah,” has unusual connotations. It implies a force of “attraction” or a “pull.” The sameword is often used interchangeably to refer to magnetism although magnetism is also translated as“goowah magnetisiah” or “magnetic power.” Further research is needed to determine if there is abasic ontological difference between the concepts of gravity and magnetism in the minds of thestudents. This has implications for teaching, as instructors need to explore the connotative anddenotative aspect of English words used to describe scientific
detailed design of thecourse; 5) a learning outcomes assessment, and 6) a discussion of challenges for the future. A useful way of categorizing typical introduction to engineering courses has beenpresented by Sheppard and Jenison.1 One dimension contrasts teaching students as individualsversus grouping them in teams. Another dimension contrasts content (such as the traditionalengineering content of kinetics and dynamics, energy, electrical circuits, information and so forth)versus process (in particular, the process of design). On this map, the Union College Introductionto Engineering and Mechatronics course combines the teaching of content on an individual basiswith the teaching of process on a team basis. Students are grouped in sections
practical context,foster the development of practical skills such as oral and written communication and teamwork,as well as teach the underlying scientific principles. Learning and instructional theories explainthat providing real-life contexts increases students’ interest, provides opportunities for studentsto apply their knowledge, and prepares students for situations they will encounter aftergraduation2, 3. In addition, the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) hascompelled engineering schools to re-examine their curricula and to make appropriate changes toalign learning outcomes with the new criteria 4. Page 8.348.1
several different courses.Engineering Design and Graphics 100 (ED&G 100) is an introduction to engineeringdesign course for all freshman baccalaureate engineering students at the Altoona Collegeof the Pennsylvania State University. In this three credit-hour course, engineering designprocess is taught through team oriented design projects supported by communicationskills: graphical and written. Implementation of project-based learning in ED&G 100course is achieved by assigning a comprehensive project designed to encompass all thefundamental engineering principles covered in the course and to complement the projectsconducted in the associated design laboratory. The capstone project requires students todesign a product to be mass produced
. Diana Flesche, a Teaching Assistant, helped greatlyin the preparation of this manuscript. Elisa Linsky provided copy editing assistance.Bibliography1. “Undergraduate Teaching Assistants in Freshmen Engineering,” J. Ingham and L. M. Folan, presentation at the 2000 ASEE Annual Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, June 20, 2000.2. “Introducing Design Throughout the Curriculum,” G. W. Georgi, L. M. Folan and D. R. Doucette, presentation at the 2002 ASEE Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada, June 19, 20023. “EG 1004 – Introduction to Engineering and Design,” Laboratory Manual, Polytechnic University, August, 2002.4. Freshman Engineering Website: http://eg.poly.eduONOFRIO N. RUSSOOnofrio N. Russo is the Special Assistant to the Head of Civil
controlled laboratory experiments with children supported these principles (Mayer,1997; Moreno & Mayer, 1999; Mayer, Heiser & Lonn, 2001). In recent years, however,research with so called “pedagogical agents”, which are computerized characters that appear on astudent’s screen to help guide the learning process, has posed some challenges for the modalityprinciple. Though these agents appear to create redundancy for the visual channel when theyappear on a screen with visual information, they still have been found to facilitate learning(Atkinson, 2002).The shear flow study reported here is an attempt to add a data point to the above investigationson the efficacy of hypermedia in learning. This study consists of a controlled examination
AC 2011-1846: A PROJECT-BASED INTRODUCTION TO ELECTRON-ICSJames W Bales, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Dr. James W. Bales is the Assistant Director of the MIT Edgerton Center, a center dedicated to hands- on, project-based learning. Before joining the Edgerton Center in 1998, he spent seven years designing, building, and testing small robot submarines to explore the deep ocean as part of the MIT Sea Grant AUV Lab. Page 22.90.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 A Project-Based Introduction to ElectronicsAbstractWe have created a laboratory
AC 2010-1970: REFINEMENT AND INITIAL TESTING OF AN ENGINEERINGSTUDENT PRESENTATION SCORING SYSTEMTristan Utschig, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Tristan T. Utschig is a Senior Academic Professional in the Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning and is Assistant Director for the Scholarship and Assessment of Teaching and Learning at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Formerly, he was Associate Professor of Engineering Physics at Lewis-Clark State College. Dr. Utschig has regularly published and presented work on a variety of topics including assessment instruments and methodologies, using technology in the classroom, faculty development in instructional design, teaching
ranking, the top eight quality characteristics or the design elementswere identified as teaching methods, students, instructor qualifications, facilities, technologyand equipment, physical learning environment, curriculum design, material and institutionpolicies, respectively. Page 10.1434.4 “Proceedings of the 2005 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2005, American Society for Engineering Education
Paper ID #9892Promoting Research-Based Instruction in Statics and Dynamics: A VirtualCommunity of PracticeDr. Brian P. Self, California Polytechnic State University Brian P. Self obtained his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Engineering Mechanics from Virginia Tech, and his Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Utah. He worked in the Air Force Research Laboratories before teaching at the U.S. Air Force Academy for seven years. Brian has taught in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo since 2006. During the 2011-2012 academic year he participated in a professor exchange, teaching at the
[8] discusses the incorporation of IoT content into Computer Science (CS) education.They focus on enhancing educator’s ability to integrate IoT into their curriculum by exploringnew contents and teaching methods. It emphasizes the necessity of updating CS curriculum anddiscovering effective IoT teaching methods, while acknowledging the potential limitations infully covering the rapidly evolving IoT technologies. IoT Education: Case GreenhouseMaintenance [9] examines an experimental course that combines problem-based andproject-based learning which focuses on students developing IoT device prototypes for an urbanrooftop greenhouse. They aimed to enhance learning effects through personal interest,competence, teamwork, and collaborative
following academic years, whilesatisfaction with the teacher and teaching materials rose each year [12]. Again, more detailedanalysis of student perceptions was not included [12]. Other studies focused on measures of academic performance across formats. Thepreviously mentioned study involving freshman mathematics students found that grades weresignificantly higher for female students from underrepresented minority groups taking the coursein virtual format and were not significantly different for all other groups [9]. The civilengineering program study found that performance varied by level, with scores of level 1students decreasing over the three years of the study and scores for level 3 students increasingover that same time interval [12
addition to hands-on skills, students gained confidence to participate in research and anappreciation for interacting with and learning from peers. Finally, responses with respect toGSTT performance indicated a perceived emphasis on a learner-centered andknowledge/community-centered approaches over assessment-centeredness [13].Overall, student feedback indicated that SCL teaching strategies can enhance student learningoutcomes and experience, even over the short timeframe of this module. Studentrecommendations for module improvement focused primarily on modifying the lecture contentand laboratory component of the module, and not on changing the teaching strategies employed.The success of this module exemplifies how instructors can implement
. He received his Ph.D. in industrial engineering in 1996 from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where, as a graduate student, he taught quality and applied statistics and researched machining models for monitoring and control. At Cal Poly, Dr. Waldorf has taught and developed courses in manufacturing process design, computer-aided manufacturing, tool en- gineering, quality engineering, and reliability. He has participated in numerous activities related to the improvement of teaching methods, teaching assessment, and curriculum design. He is currently the fac- ulty advisor for Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME). His research interests are in metal cutting process modeling, tool wear, cutting tool
Energy concentration was developed at LakeSuperior State University (LSSU). This concentration is composed of courses such as powerelectronics, power transmission and distribution, and vehicle energy systems. In addition, a newcourse entitled Energy Systems & Sustainability was also developed for this concentration.This new Energy Systems & Sustainability course is designed to provide a broad overview andallows both engineering and non-engineering students to gain exposure to these areas. There isalso a separate laboratory course that is designed for the engineering students, and as suchcontains more technical detail. Only the lecture course is discussed in this work. The primaryobjectives for the course are for students to be able to
Bachelor of Science and Master of Science from the University of Arkansas, and a doctoral degree from the University of Kentucky, Dr. Corrie Walton-Macaulay is now a Geotechnical Engineering Assistant Professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Saint Mar- tin’s University. He teaches the traditional geotechnical course of soil mechanics, but also teaches civil engineering materials, mechanics of materials and pavement design. His research area is in unsaturated soil mechanics, energy geotechnics, and transportation infrastructure resiliency. Address: 5000 Abbey Way SE, Saint Martin’s University, Lacey, WA 98503Dr. Suresh Immanuel P.E., University of Evansville Dr. Immanuel Selvaraj is an associate
. Page 8.499.7 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering EducationTerm Project. Working in teams of three or four, students evaluate the market potential ofinnovative high-tech products or services. Topics are provided each semester by Penn’s Centerfor Technology Transfer, the University’s patent and licensing operation, from a list of recenthigh-tech disclosures from University laboratories. Each team selects a discovery topic, reviewsthe disclosure file, meets with the inventor, shapes the discovery into a product, then performs anopportunity analysis to assess the market potential of their product. Primary
networked; digital networks facilitate back-and-forth communications among users.Their definitions are: “the use of networked computing and communications technologies to supportlearning” (p.5) and “the use of network computing and technologies in support of learning,” respectively.Lastly, two other definitions contributed to the working definition used for this study. Chen (2002)highlights both teaching and learning in the following statement: “[cyberlearning is] conceptualized asteaching and learning interactions mediated entirely through the application of state-of-the-art informationand communications technologies, such as the internet and world wide web” (as cited in 10, p. 6).Additionally, Montfort (2010) took a slightly different approach
AC 2012-4295: HOW AWARD WINNING COURSEWARE IS IMPACTINGENGINEERING EDUCATIONDr. Flora P. McMartin, Broad-based Knowledge, LLC Flora P. McMartin is the Founder of Broad-based Knowledge, LLC (BbK) , a consulting firm focused on assisting educators in their evaluation of the use and deployment of technology assisted teaching and learning. Throughout her career, she as served as an External Evaluator for a number of CCLI/TUES and NSDL-funded projects associated with community building, peer review of learning materials, faculty development, and dissemination of educational innovation. She is PI for the project ”Where have We Come From and Where are We Going? Learning Lessons and Practices from the Projects of the NDSL
emphasis on differences in student performance between the two schools. Bycomparing teaching methods (individual styles), students’ work, and attitudinal surveyscompleted by students after the implementation of the project, insights can be made intothe factors that influenced the motivation level and quality of the work of the studentsinvolved. Particular note is made of how best to implement this project, or a similar one,in other classrooms.1. IntroductionAccording to the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of undergraduateengineering degrees has been decreasing over the last decade [1]. It is vital to stem thattrend and encourage junior high and high school students to actively pursue futures intechnological fields. With this
software. Spreadsheet programs, for example Microsoft Excel, are alreadyentrenched in college computer laboratories with students and faculty having familiaritywith their use. We present our experiences in implementing this approach in one section(32 students) of a freshman introduction to engineering design course. A preliminaryassessment is also presented.1. IntroductionThe use of team projects as a way to teach engineering design is pervasive across allengineering disciplines and throughout the curriculum. The success of any design team --both in learning design concepts and performing well -- requires that students have agood grasp of technical and management aspects of the design process. Accordingly,poor management or lack of communication
Paper ID #10411Evaluation of Impact of Web-based Activities on Mechanics Achievement andSelf-EfficacyProf. Sarah L. Billington, Stanford University Sarah Billington is Professor and Associate Chair of the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineer- ing at Stanford University. Her research group focuses on sustainable, durable construction materials and their application to structures and construction. She teaches an undergraduate class on introductory solid mechanics as well as graduate courses in structural concrete behavior and design. Most recently she has initiated a engineering education research project on
, “The CDIO Initiative offers an education stressing engineeringfundamentals, set in the context of the Conceiving - Designing - Implementing - Operatingprocess, which engineers use to create systems and products.”With respect to teaching and learning reform CDIO states, “We know some interesting factsabout how experiences affect learning. Engineering students tend to learn by experiencing theconcrete and then applying the experience it to the abstract. Unlike their counterparts of yearspast, many engineering students today don’t arrive at college armed with hands-on experienceslike tinkering with cars or building radios. Yet, hands-on experience is a vital foundation onwhich to base theory and science.”In the paper, Lessons Learned from Design
and thetime element assigned to the particular project. In addition, the user must have a thoroughunderstanding of the software functionality and the ability to gather information related toimplementing a particular modeling strategy. This process of strategy development andimplementation coincides with components of learning theory. As engineering graphicseducators, it is helpful to reflect on how students learn in our classrooms and laboratories as wellas reflect on how we develop instruction. This paper outlines three theories of learning that areapplicable to graphics education, discusses the assumptions about the learner and the learningenvironment, presents the components of learning for each theory, discusses major issues relatedto
AC 2012-4617: USING INSTRUCTION TO IMPROVE MATHEMATICALMODELING IN CAPSTONE DESIGNDr. Jennifer Cole, Northwestern University Jennifer Cole is the Assistant Chair in chemical and biological engineering in the Robert R. McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science at Northwestern University. Cole’s primary teaching is in capstone and freshman design, and her research interest are in engineering design education.Dr. Robert A. Linsenmeier, Northwestern University Robert A. Linsenmeier is a professor of biomedical engineering, neurobiology, and ophthalmology, North- western University, and Director, Northwestern Center for Engineering Education Research.Timothy Miller, Binghamton UniversityDr. Matthew R. Glucksberg
than the other two courses due to a clear “right answer” toboth homework and exam problems and general lack of open-ended assignments. On the otherhand, Chemistry and Physics can have problems that are more difficult to grade consistentlyacross sections, and laboratory courses leave a significant portion of the grade to the discretion oflaboratory instructors who may neither teach the corresponding lecture nor grade consistentlyacross sections. Beyond simply expressing institutional level effects on student performance, Padilla et al.note in their 2005 paper the importance of eliminating aggregation bias and misestimatedstandard errors that occur when researchers ignore the nested structures inherent in HLM.36 Thetreatment of HLM in
unintended consequence of built-in obsolescence. Theineffectiveness of many designs has been resident in a static view of learning and teaching styles,personnel-dependence, an inability to manage changes in program size, and/or a lack ofportability and adoption by the larger educational community. To avoid these specific pitfalls inour design for educational enhancement, we are: (1) employing a dynamic view of learning andteaching styles where the characteristics of student and faculty are periodically measured toestablish an assessment process calibration, (2) using knowledge management systems to processvoluminous data collection and analysis in an efficient and flexible manner, (3) using a modulardesign of an established assessment paradigm that
. and Brent, R. (2016). Teaching and Learning STEM: A Practical Guide, Jossey Bass. Jossey Bass. https://educationdesignsinc.com/bookKoretsky, M. D., Brooks, B. J., & Higgins, A. Z. (2016). Written justifications to multiple-choice concept questions during active learning in class. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11), 1747–1765. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1214303Leydens, J. A., & Lucena, J. C. (2017). Engineering Justice: Transforming Engineering Education and Practice. Wiley. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118757369Mahmoud, A., & Nagy, Z. K. (2009). Applying Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle for Laboratory Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 283–294. https