Search

This paper describes enhancement of green energy and manufacturing subjects using a project based learning and leadership workshops as an educational strategy in a new manufacturing engineering program. There are a number of challenges facing green energy manufacturing from industrial perspective. For example, green energy manufacturing is a complex and technology-concentrated set of processes; therefore, it requires a very specialized and experienced workforce. In this paper, a LEGO® based project and various "Green Energy Manufacturing (GEM)" leadership workshops, which are used to enhance student's professional success, are introduced. Basically, a semester long GEM project using LEGO® and a few general and technical leadership workshops were arranged and delivered during the Industrial, Manufacturing and Systems Engineering (IMSE) Day. The paper is aimed at integrating green energy into the manufacturing engineering curriculum and to cultivate leaders in the field among minority and female engineering students. Successful completion of the course will lead to excellence in green energy and advanced engineering education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Undergraduate students in engineering mostly encounter problems that have unique solutions and are well defined. In their professional life they are most likely to encounter problems that are ill-structured. Hence, in AME4163 Principles of Engineering Design, we strive to provide an opportunity for students to learn and internalize the principles of design and to develop competencies to help them succeed in their careers. Salient features of AME4163 include an authentic, immersive experience and scaffolding of learning via structured assignments and lectures. Purpose: In this paper we focus on the development of competencies by students using an authentic, immersive experience. The course is scaffolded and explicitly focuses on student learning and development of competencies throughout the semester. In this paper we track change- over-time of development of student competencies, specifically related to team, communication, and design process, for a better understanding of the effects of assignments on development of competencies. Method: An instrument was developed and administered to the students in the course for self- reported evaluation of competencies. After each assignment a survey was given to the students to express their understanding of the new tools and concepts, and development of related competencies. Some of the items of the instrument were modified to reflect the assignments. In this paper we focus on the results of the competencies. Results: The data gathered through the instrument indicate that self-reported level of developed competencies fluctuated throughout the semester. Senior students in mechanical engineering in AME 4163, in most instances, perceived to have well-developed competencies from the beginning of the semester. A positive influence was found on competencies related to the design process. Competencies related to managing a team and communication stay steady or show a decline. These are areas that indicate the need for improvement in the course. Conclusions: Data driven analysis provides us with the information we need to continuously improve the course. In the areas where students have indicated an improvement of competence the course was effective. For the areas where the students showed no improvement we recognize the need to modify the course and in the last section we have identified possibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers have shown that the incorporation of hands-on design projects in the first two years of college provides mastery that increases the likelihood of success in engineering [1-8] . Integrating real world design problems, based on faculty on-going research, into the curriculum during the freshman years is without a doubt extremely beneficial; however the process requires a heavy commitment in faculty time and sometimes resources. This paper discusses preliminary results of introducing faculty on-going research to undergraduate students, in a form of a lab sequence, focusing on student-centered approaches such as active cooperative learning. The labs aim to address the need for combining multidisciplinary theoretical knowledge with practical hands-on experience and are specifically focused on involving undergraduate students in research and preparing them for the capstone senior design project class. Each of the labs is related to one or two recently published by the faculty papers, which the students are asked to get familiar with before each lab session. Preliminary results on the learning outcomes, based on students' perception were assessed through anonymous survey questions. Next, the desired learning outcomes from faculty viewpoint, regarding critical thinking, responsibility for one's own learning and intellectual growth were assessed through anonymous survey. The latter required the students to outline the questions that they were asking themselves while working on each project. The preliminary results show that presenting a series of different lab projects, which complement each other, brings to successful results. For the limited time of one semester, the results show students' improved critical thinking, intellectual maturity, as well as taking more responsibility for their own learning. In addition, the inductive methods used in the labs prove efficient not only for learning new tasks, but also in transferring earned skills to tasks of greater difficulty. The next step will be to assess how well the students work under the whole series of lab projects and share our experiences. Here, we would like to note that the lab-based alternative to other undergraduate research engagements is a novel idea and provides interesting perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The challenge of providing leadership learning experiences is particularly challenging in an academic environment. The structure of a traditional classroom environment (built in reward system [grades], presence of an authority figure [professor] and very limited time frame) restrict the range of experiences that a developing leader may encounter and process. On the other hand, it is difficult to assess outcomes using external opportunities for developing leadership capacity because the opportunities (e.g. leading student clubs, honor societies, or ROTC) have significant structural differences. However, the challenges presented in such external opportunities, especially for leading volunteers in any organization, can provide significant learning opportunities that cannot be easily matched in a classroom. This paper discusses the first year of developing a "laboratory" using external development opportunities and the structure used for assessing the leadership experiences for students in a focused engineering leadership class. While none of the leadership experiences are exactly the same, there are common elements of each experience. Specifically, the students must self- identify a volunteer (non-paying) organization in which they are engaged. They must clearly articulate the value of that organization in their lives. Further, the students must be able to identify at least one significant problem within the organization that they can address, plus articulate a vision for the organization after solving the problem. Finally, the students must develop an action plan for leading the change to solve the problem, including a defined communication strategy and what leadership styles and tools will be used (and how they will be used) to motivate the volunteers. To provide further experience and help provide value to the organizations, the students were organized into groups of four (cadres), such that each student could act as advisors to each other and assessors of progress for each team member, reporting specific metrics and general progress to the class professor on a weekly basis. This paper will present an overview of the program, a description of the roles and results, as well as lessons learned in helping provide tangible leadership experiences to developing engineering leaders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of robots in undergraduate classrooms has seen a boom in recent years due to the universal appeal of robots, and the applicability of robot systems to preparing students for career paths in computer science, robotics and intelligent systems, and as well as for teaching fundamental engineering and programming concepts in a fresh way. At our University, a novel robot platform was developed in 2008 as part of a funded outreach project, applicable to both K- 12 outreach and university level instruction. The robot platform, named the CEENBoT, became a central learning platform for instructing K-12 math and science teachers in a large educational robotics project and was simultaneously adopted into the Freshman and Sophomore curriculum in the department of Computer and Electronics Engineering (CEEN), one of the key partners in the outreach project. In the CEEN department, use of the CEENBoT was proliferated through a progression of undergraduate courses as an active learning component in teaching students fundamental computer and electrical engineering topics with a goal of providing additional hands-on engagement. Most often, this included at least one lab or project using the CEENBoT platform in each course. As part of this adoption, an existing course, Introduction to Robotics, was modified to include topics in mobile robotics and include exercises with the CEENBoT. It was offered one time. To test the effectiveness of this course, at the end of this course offering, a focus group study was conducted to gather student feedback over a wide range of discussion topics about the course. This feedback was analyzed and used to provide guidance for a future and final iteration of the course. The focus group results indicated important directions for the next iteration of the course. The results of this initial study were published and presented in a paper at the ASEE National Conference and Exposition in summer 2010. In 2010, the final iteration of a newly titled Mobile Robotics I course and lab was created to directly address these issues. It was dedicated to mobile robotics concepts with newly designed labs and an extensive suite of custom firmware developed to make the CEENBoT useful for teaching advanced robotics topic. This paper describes the innovations that were created for this course and the subsequent student feedback that has been obtained through several years of teaching the course, including 2010, 2011, and 2013. Student feedback was obtained through an anonymous internet-based survey instrument at the end of each semester, and reviewed by the instructor after course grades were turned in. The feedback over the three years has validated the course design, and shown the effectiveness of using student focus group feedback for providing excellent direction in course refinement and creation. Finally, this paper illustrates hurdles overcome in designing a robotics course that is both effective for student learning and based upon a novel mobile robot platform. This paper is organized into the following sections: Background: The Need for a Mobile Robotics Course, Mobile Robotics Course Goals, Course Innovations, Analysis of Student Feedback, Reflections, and Conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Gallup StrengthsFinder® Inventory identifies individual's top-five Strengths from the 34 themes in the inventory [1]. Strengths such as Activator, Deliberative, and Restorative are grouped into four domains: executing, influencing, relationship building and strategic thinking. All of our first-year students at Elizabethtown College complete the Strengths Inventory. Throughout the two-semester Introduction to Engineering (ItE) course sequence, we contextualize Strengths for engineering students by contrasting strengths and skills. We use the StrengthsFinder to capture personal strengths and define engineering skills through the lens of the ABET a-k outcomes. We frame developing the required engineering skills from the foundation of their individual strengths. Our "One-Minute Engineer" assignment requires students to describe why they are pursuing engineering as a career path. Again, the framework of StrengthsFinder helps students clearly express their motivations. Team projects form the framework for ItE course sequence. We sort students into teams with diverse Strengths [2]. Students utilize team contracts in which they develop team roles based on individual Strengths [3]. A team mapping exercise reveals that our engineering students tend to overpopulate the executing and strategic thinking domains of Strengths. Less stereotypical engineering students with Strengths in relationship building and influencing realize their position to uniquely contribute in areas that are often undervalued in student engineering teams. This paper will examine our use of Gallup StrengthsFinder as a case study. Additionally, we compare the distribution of Strengths among our engineering students to those college-wide and at engineering students at MacEwan University. We found that using this approach helps students capitalize on unique strengths, build more diverse teams, foster student confidence, and fight imposter syndrome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many of the foundational courses in undergraduate engineering programs are essential prerequisites for the core major-specific courses pertaining to the respective engineering degree, and hence typically have high enrollments. As a result, in addition to being offered during the regular semesters (Fall and Spring semesters, which are typically about 15 weeks in duration), many of these are also offered in an accelerated format over summer sessions (typically about 5 weeks in duration). Such a different manner of offering the same course over drastically different durations is expected to have dissimilar levels of effectiveness - this paper is thus a comparative inquiry into the same. To compare the various aspects of effectiveness related to the difference in duration/format of course offerings, two sophomore-level foundational courses offered in the Manufacturing & Mechanical Engineering Technology (MMET) program within the Engineering Technology & Industrial Distribution (ETID) department at Texas A&M University (TAMU) were selected - one titled "Metallic Materials" (MMET 207) and the other "Mechanics for Technologists" (MMET 275).These were offered during the regular semesters as well as over summer sessions (5 weeks in duration), and each instructed by the same respective professors throughout the year. The evaluation mechanisms employed primarily involved comparing student performance in individual assignments as well as the overall grades, comparative tracking of student performance as the course progressed, as well as in immediately succeeding courses, offeringspecific comments in course/instructor evaluations as well as via surveys meant to gauge student impressions. Altogether, the results tend to show that although students generally did not prefer an accelerated-format from a convenience standpoint, they in fact performed better in the accelerated format offerings, as well as in the immediately succeeding courses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the development of a departmental civil engineering writing guide and assessment of student writing prior to implementing the guide. The pre-writing guide assessment will be compared to assessments of similar assignments after using the writing guide in instruction as part of an effort to quantify impact. The writing guide was a collaborative effort between the civil engineering and writing studies faculty. The collaboration reinforced work done in the required writing classes and allowed both parties to leverage their expertise. The writing guide currently contains sections detailing reports, figures, tables, equations, references, memos, homework, professional e-mails, and a general grading rubric. The rubric is general enough so that individual instructors can adapt it for a given assignment, while maintaining a consistent framework as students move from course to course. Civil engineering faculty used the proposed rubric to evaluate Fall 2014 assignments from a freshman-level introduction to civil engineering course, two required junior-level laboratory courses, and the department's capstone design course; all four courses were taught prior to use of the writing guide. Results demonstrate the need for a writing guide and suggest that the writing guide will help improve student work, particularly in the areas of format, summary, and conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the development of a dynamic ball-and-plate system successfully completed for a one-semester Senior Capstone Design project. A group of five undergraduate students developed the project concept and constructed a prototype within a semester, integrating major mechatronics engineering concepts learned in classes. The three-degree-of-freedom system consists of sensors, actuators, and controls to keep a free rolling ball in a desired position on a flat plate, accounting for any possible external disturbances. Due to its complexity, multiple steps were taken to solve the design challenges and develop the system. The major works were mathematical modeling, kinematic constraints and dimensional analysis, simulations, and construction of the system. The control system required an effective control strategy and a thorough analysis of system parameters. The system's feasibility and optimal operation were fully considered in the design phase. The design was then validated by simulations using Simulink/MATLAB™ and experimental testing. The completion of the system development provided the understanding of analyzing different control designs on various system parameters based on multidisciplinary mechatronics design principles. Lastly, the class outcomes confirmed the effectiveness of students' learning on multidisciplinary mechatronics engineering through this hands-on project as an assessment of the design project presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For large enrollment courses, such as Statics, Dynamics, Fluid Mechanics, Solid Mechanics, Thermodynamics, the use of computers (laptops and tablets) in the classroom can save instructor time. However, there are numerous problems with computer-based exams, especially when the students are allowed to access online course materials (eBook, homework, etc). Previously, the author used student-supplied laptops for web-based exams in the classroom, but this has become problematic over the years due to the increased sophistication of communication software (Twitter, Facebook, Skype, SnapChat, etc.). It is no longer reasonable to expect the instructor and TAs to be able to monitor student laptops during exams. To solve this issue, android-based tablets with special apps have been developed and implemented into two fundamental engineering courses, Fluid Mechanics and Solid Mechanics (Mechanics of Materials). The paper first examines both the selection process for the Android-based tablets and the development process for applications (apps) required for testing. Both Android and iOS tablets were considered. Based on cost and ease of system customization, Android-based tablets were selected. Two different apps were developed for use for tests. The first app, "examApp" permits the student to access the online text and it records the student's choices. It has numerous security features that limit access to the exam only on the tablets provided and only during the test time. All graphics are vector-based so they are crisp on high resolution screens. Included in the examApp was an admin (or instructor) page that provides the instructor and TAs real-time information about the exam while in progress. This includes scores, percent correct for a given problem, students activity, graphs, and direct communications to all students. The second app, "eBookApp", allows the student access to the online eBook used for the class. However, it blocks the student from other online web site or material. The Android operating system itself was modified to limit access to standard apps like email, app stores, social networks, and even browsers. The apps were developed using Abobe AIR development framework due to its relatively easy development of web and mobile apps when compared to native programming or HTML5 with JavaScript. AIR also avoids programming the same app three times (web browsers, Android and iOS). The successful results (and lessons learned) using tablets for in-class testing for multiple engineering courses are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]