<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>ETE Faculty Publications</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2013 Utah State University All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub</link>
<description>Recent documents in ETE Faculty Publications</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2013 03:33:27 PST</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>








<item>
<title>Education and Qualification for Control and Automation</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/17</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/17</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:56:59 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Engineering education has seen an explosion of interest in recent years,                                                                  fueled simultaneously by reports from both industry and  academia. Automatic control education has recently become a core issue             for the international control community. This has occurred  in tandem with the explosion of interest in engineering education             as a whole. The applications of control are growing rapidly.  There is an increasing interest in control from researchers from             outside of traditionally control-based fields such as  aeronautics, chemical, mechanical, and electrical engineering. Recently             control and systems theory have had much to offer to  nontraditional control fields such as biology, biomedicine, finance,             actuarial science, and the social sciences as well as  transportation and telecommunications networks. Complementary,  innovative             developments of control and systems theory have been  motivated and inspired by complex real-world problems. These new  developments             present huge challenges in control education. Meeting these  challenges will require a multifaceted approach by the control             community that includes new approaches to teaching, new  preparations for facing new theoretical control and systems theory             problems, and a critical review of the status quo. This  chapter discusses these new challenges as well as new approaches to             education and outreach. This chapter starts by presenting an  argument towards the future of controls as the application of             control theory expands into new and unique disciplines. It  provides two case studies of nontraditional areas where control             theory has been applied: finance and biomedicine. These two  case studies show a high potential for using powerful fundamental             principles and tools of automatic control in research with  an interdisciplinary nature. The chapter then outlines current             and future                           pedagogical approaches being employed in control education,  particularly introductory courses, around the world. It concludes             with a discussion about the role of scholarship, teaching,  and learning in control education both now and in the coming years.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Bozenna Pasik-Duncan et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Challenges to Informed Peer Review Matching Algorithms</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/16</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/16</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:56:58 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p><strong>BACKGROUND</strong><br />Peer review is a beneficial pedagogical tool. Despite the abundance of data<br />instructors often have about their students, most peer review matching is by<br />simple random assignment. In fall 2008, a study was conducted to investigate<br />the impact of an informed algorithmic assignment method, called Un-weighted<br />Overall Need (UON), in a course involving Model-Eliciting Activities<br />(MEAs). The algorithm showed no statistically significant impact on the<br />MEA Final Response scores. A study was then conducted to examine the<br />assumptions underlying the algorithm.<br /><br /><strong>PURPOSE (HYPOTHESIS)</strong><br />This research addressed the question: To what extent do the assumptions used<br />in making informed peer review matches (using the Un-weighted Overall Need<br />algorithim) for the peer review of solutions to Model-Eliciting Activities decay?<br /><br /><strong>DESIGN/METHOD</strong><br />An expert rater evaluated the solutions of 147 teams’ responses to a particular<br />implementation of MEAs in a first-year engineering course at a large mid-west<br />research university. The evaluation was then used to analyze the UON<br />algorithm’s assumptions when compared to a randomly assigned control group.<br /><br /><strong>RESULTS</strong><br />Weak correlation was found in the five UON algorithm’s assumptions: students<br />complete assigned work, teaching assistants can grade MEAs accurately,<br />accurate feedback in peer review is perceived by the reviewed team as being<br />more helpful than inaccurate feedback, teaching assistant scores on the first<br />draft of an MEA can be used to accurately predict where teams will need<br />assistance on their second draft, and the error a peer review has in evaluating a<br />sample MEA solution is an accurate indicator of the error they will have while<br />subsequently evaluating a real team’s MEA solution.<br /><br /><strong>CONCLUSIONS</strong><br />Conducting informed peer review matching requires significant alignment<br />between evaluators and experts to minimize deviations from the algorithm’s<br />designed purpose.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Matthew Verleger et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Council on Technology Teacher Education
Yearbook</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/15</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/15</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:47 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>American &quot;KAIZEN&quot; - A Perspective on American Management Theories</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/12</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/12</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:46 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Extending Instructional Reach Using Technology</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/10</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/10</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:45 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Content and Strategies for Teaching Computer-Aided Drafting</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/11</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/11</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:45 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Thai Students&apos; Attitudes and Concepts of Technology</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/8</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/8</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:44 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Of the eight major programs mentioned in Thailand's Eighth National Education Development Plan (1997-2001), one is aimed at developing human capability in the areas of science and technology. This is to address the fact that the teaching of technology in Thailand is lagging behind the technological changes of the last decade. Part of this reform effort is the development of conceptual based learning activities in science and technology for 12 to 15-year old students. These concepts are being introduced through the offering of a subject at the high school level. de Klerk Wolters (1989) indicated learning the concepts of technology is necessary and should be required for all students of this age range. Cross and McCormick (1986) added that students in both primary and secondary schools need to learn to solve technological problems in creative ways. Students also should understand the nature of technology. Understanding technology is just as important for Thai students as it is for students in other countries.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Constructivism and the Use of Technology</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/9</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/9</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:44 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Becker</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>A Comparison of Students&apos; Achievement and Attitudes Between Constructivist and Traditional Classroom Environments in Thailand Vocational Electronics Programs</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/6</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/6</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:43 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Improving International Project Success</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/7</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/7</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:43 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Discusses key issues concerning improving the success of international vocational and technical education projects worldwide. Important economic and social development roles played by vocational and technical education in the international development process; Comprehensive model on the development of economic and technical training programs; Rapid response worker adjustment component.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>National Center for Engineering and Technology Education</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/5</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/5</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:42 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>The article reports that the overall impact of the National Center for Engineering and Technology Education (NCETE) is to strengthen the nation's capacity to deliver effective engineering and technology education in the K-12 schools. Further, it informs that the National Science Foundation established the Centers for Learning and Teaching (CLT) program to address needs in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. The CLT program has three goals, based upon stated national needs. First, CLT are expected to renew and diversify the cadre of national leaders in STEM education. The CLT includes partners with strengths in engineering and in technology education, including four land-grant university research partners and five technology education partners geographically distributed across the United States. On September 15, 2004, NCETE received funding from the National Science Foundation as one of the 17 CLTs in the country. The ultimate goal of NCETE is to infuse engineering design, problem solving, and analytical skills into K-12 schools through technology education and to increase the quality, quantity, and diversity of engineering and technology educators.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>C. Hailey et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Engineering
Education: Departments, Degrees and Directions</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/4</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:41 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>L. Benson et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Motivation while Designing in Engineering and Technology Education Impacted by Academic Preparation</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/3</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/3</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:40 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>The purpose of this study was to determine if high school students’ academic preparation was correlated with change in motivation during an engineering design challenge. The research was conducted in a high school classroom in which elements of engineering design were taught in a technology education context to eleventh-grade student from diverse academic backgrounds (measured by grade point average [GPA]). Participant motivation was assessed by the California Measure of Mental Motivation (CM3). The CM3 measures student motivation to apply critical thinking skills and reasoning to solve problems in five subscales: mental focus, learning orientation, creative problem solving, cognitive integrity, and scholarly rigor.</p>
<p>Findings of this study suggested that knowledge of students’ GPA served as a predictor of student motivation. With the exception of the mental focus subscale, growth over time was not related to GPA. Change across multiple time points in the other four subscales of learning orientation, creative problems solving, cognitive integrity, and scholarly rigor did not show significant correlation with mathematics, science or communication GPA.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>N. Mentzer et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Integrative Approaches among Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Subjects on Students&apos; Learning: A
Meta-Analysis</title>
<link>http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/1</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ete_facpub/1</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 09:18:39 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Kurt Henry Becker et al.</author>


</item>





</channel>
</rss>
