The Experts below are selected from a list of 237519 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Y E Peihua - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Instrument landing simulative system of aircrafts
    2011
    Co-Authors: Y E Peihua
    Abstract:

    Based on the application of air traffic control system,the virtual reality technology was used to design an aircrafts' Instrument landing system and introduce the Process of forming and establishing the model of this system.This system simulated aircrafts' flight analyses,the Process of Instrument landing,and simulated the Process of aircrafts' flight and fall.The result of simulating indicates that this system really simulates the Process Instrument landing,efficiently control landing of aircrafts in poor weather standard conditions and especially in reducing the control personnel of workload.

Emily Butt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Real time risk monitoring in a Processing system using Bayesian networks
    2019
    Co-Authors: Emily Butt
    Abstract:

    Safety and risk are essential components of Process industries. The research objective of this thesis is to develop a method to measure and monitor safety in terms of real-time risk of a Process system failure. The risk monitoring concept was developed using event trees and Bayesian networks. Process Instrument data such as flowrate was used as a basis for the risk probability calculations. The risk monitoring methodology was developed and applied to the Williams Geismar reboiler rupture and fire in 2013. The risk level of the reboiler was examined based on the original design prior to failure and an updated design based on recommendations made by the CSB. The accident probability was decreased by 96% and risk level was reduced by 76.9%. By plotting the risk of a Process overtime, future projections of risk can be predicted and action can be taken to prevent accidents before they could occur.

Laura Ring Kapitula - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • built environments impact behaviors results of an active learning post occupancy evaluation the study shows that rigorous research methods embedded in the design of product s and contextual solutions result in measurable improvements
    2013
    Co-Authors: Lennie Scottwebber, Aileen Strickland, Laura Ring Kapitula
    Abstract:

    INTRODUCTION THE SUCCESS OF A STUDENT IS INFLUENCED by a myriad of variables ranging from socioeconomic background to internal motivation; a variable often underemphasized is the role of the built environment. Studies show that factors in the built environment affect retention, attention, motivation, learning, and academic achievement (Blincoe 2008; Duran-Narucki 2008; Earthman 2004; Kumar, O'Malley, and Johnston 2008; Schneider 2002). What is missing in these studies is a post-occupancy evaluation that assesses whether or not an intentionally designed intervention had an effect on student outcomes in the classroom. This knowledge is important in designing evidence-based educational spaces that connect intentional learning behaviors and pedagogical practices. In this study, Steelcase Education Solutions (SES) researchers focused on student engagement using a content analysis Process to synthesize information from multiple sources including brain and learning sciences (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), and one author's longtime research in this area (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000). The research team had three goals: (1) generate and test a post-occupancy evaluation Instrument focused on student engagement, (2) ensure that the Instrument was valid and reliable for future use, and (3) determine, through use of the Instrument, if the evidence-based design solutions used as an intervention impacted student engagement. This article will discuss the background, methods, results, and implications for future initiatives of this study. BACKGROUND Research on student engagement and its effect on learning outcomes is not novel; multiple areas of research from numerous disciplines work to understand this particular phenomenon (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; Jones 2008; Kahu 2011). What is new is an Instrument connecting evidence-based product and spatial designs to student engagement factors. SES developed this Instrument to understand how evidence-based, intentionally designed formal education spaces (i.e., the classroom) could perhaps impact and/or influence student engagement. The Instrument was created by * incorporating research on the impact of space in learning settings (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000) to guide the identification of student engagement factors; * using a validated two-step decision model survey structure as a template (Baudouin et al. 2007; Hiebert 2012); and * incorporating secondary research materials from the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), brain science (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), and brain-compatible classrooms (Erlauer 2003). The result was an active learning post-occupancy evaluation (AL-POE, trademark in Process) Instrument that sought to measure the effect of evidence-based, intentionally designed solution intervention(s) on student engagement in the formal learning place. The AL-POE asked participants to compare their old/pre (row-by-column seating) environment with their new/post (SES's intentionally designed) environment on the basis of identified student engagement factors. Engagement is a variable that inevitably dominates the conversation when exploring ways to cultivate passionate learners and successful students. It is a multidimensional metaconstruct identified as a predictor of academic performance (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; National Survey of Student Engagement 2012). While comprehensive reviews elucidate slightly different definitions of what engagement is and how it should be measured, the literature generally identifies four components of engagement: cognitive, affective, behavioral, and academic (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008). In addition to these components, there are also varied perspectives through which student engagement is studied-behavioral, psychological, socio-cultural, and holistic-each of which places emphasis on a different facet of the metaconstruct (Kahu 2011). …

Lennie Scottwebber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • built environments impact behaviors results of an active learning post occupancy evaluation the study shows that rigorous research methods embedded in the design of product s and contextual solutions result in measurable improvements
    2013
    Co-Authors: Lennie Scottwebber, Aileen Strickland, Laura Ring Kapitula
    Abstract:

    INTRODUCTION THE SUCCESS OF A STUDENT IS INFLUENCED by a myriad of variables ranging from socioeconomic background to internal motivation; a variable often underemphasized is the role of the built environment. Studies show that factors in the built environment affect retention, attention, motivation, learning, and academic achievement (Blincoe 2008; Duran-Narucki 2008; Earthman 2004; Kumar, O'Malley, and Johnston 2008; Schneider 2002). What is missing in these studies is a post-occupancy evaluation that assesses whether or not an intentionally designed intervention had an effect on student outcomes in the classroom. This knowledge is important in designing evidence-based educational spaces that connect intentional learning behaviors and pedagogical practices. In this study, Steelcase Education Solutions (SES) researchers focused on student engagement using a content analysis Process to synthesize information from multiple sources including brain and learning sciences (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), and one author's longtime research in this area (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000). The research team had three goals: (1) generate and test a post-occupancy evaluation Instrument focused on student engagement, (2) ensure that the Instrument was valid and reliable for future use, and (3) determine, through use of the Instrument, if the evidence-based design solutions used as an intervention impacted student engagement. This article will discuss the background, methods, results, and implications for future initiatives of this study. BACKGROUND Research on student engagement and its effect on learning outcomes is not novel; multiple areas of research from numerous disciplines work to understand this particular phenomenon (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; Jones 2008; Kahu 2011). What is new is an Instrument connecting evidence-based product and spatial designs to student engagement factors. SES developed this Instrument to understand how evidence-based, intentionally designed formal education spaces (i.e., the classroom) could perhaps impact and/or influence student engagement. The Instrument was created by * incorporating research on the impact of space in learning settings (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000) to guide the identification of student engagement factors; * using a validated two-step decision model survey structure as a template (Baudouin et al. 2007; Hiebert 2012); and * incorporating secondary research materials from the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), brain science (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), and brain-compatible classrooms (Erlauer 2003). The result was an active learning post-occupancy evaluation (AL-POE, trademark in Process) Instrument that sought to measure the effect of evidence-based, intentionally designed solution intervention(s) on student engagement in the formal learning place. The AL-POE asked participants to compare their old/pre (row-by-column seating) environment with their new/post (SES's intentionally designed) environment on the basis of identified student engagement factors. Engagement is a variable that inevitably dominates the conversation when exploring ways to cultivate passionate learners and successful students. It is a multidimensional metaconstruct identified as a predictor of academic performance (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; National Survey of Student Engagement 2012). While comprehensive reviews elucidate slightly different definitions of what engagement is and how it should be measured, the literature generally identifies four components of engagement: cognitive, affective, behavioral, and academic (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008). In addition to these components, there are also varied perspectives through which student engagement is studied-behavioral, psychological, socio-cultural, and holistic-each of which places emphasis on a different facet of the metaconstruct (Kahu 2011). …

Aileen Strickland - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • built environments impact behaviors results of an active learning post occupancy evaluation the study shows that rigorous research methods embedded in the design of product s and contextual solutions result in measurable improvements
    2013
    Co-Authors: Lennie Scottwebber, Aileen Strickland, Laura Ring Kapitula
    Abstract:

    INTRODUCTION THE SUCCESS OF A STUDENT IS INFLUENCED by a myriad of variables ranging from socioeconomic background to internal motivation; a variable often underemphasized is the role of the built environment. Studies show that factors in the built environment affect retention, attention, motivation, learning, and academic achievement (Blincoe 2008; Duran-Narucki 2008; Earthman 2004; Kumar, O'Malley, and Johnston 2008; Schneider 2002). What is missing in these studies is a post-occupancy evaluation that assesses whether or not an intentionally designed intervention had an effect on student outcomes in the classroom. This knowledge is important in designing evidence-based educational spaces that connect intentional learning behaviors and pedagogical practices. In this study, Steelcase Education Solutions (SES) researchers focused on student engagement using a content analysis Process to synthesize information from multiple sources including brain and learning sciences (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), and one author's longtime research in this area (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000). The research team had three goals: (1) generate and test a post-occupancy evaluation Instrument focused on student engagement, (2) ensure that the Instrument was valid and reliable for future use, and (3) determine, through use of the Instrument, if the evidence-based design solutions used as an intervention impacted student engagement. This article will discuss the background, methods, results, and implications for future initiatives of this study. BACKGROUND Research on student engagement and its effect on learning outcomes is not novel; multiple areas of research from numerous disciplines work to understand this particular phenomenon (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; Jones 2008; Kahu 2011). What is new is an Instrument connecting evidence-based product and spatial designs to student engagement factors. SES developed this Instrument to understand how evidence-based, intentionally designed formal education spaces (i.e., the classroom) could perhaps impact and/or influence student engagement. The Instrument was created by * incorporating research on the impact of space in learning settings (Scott-Webber, Marini, and Abraham 2000) to guide the identification of student engagement factors; * using a validated two-step decision model survey structure as a template (Baudouin et al. 2007; Hiebert 2012); and * incorporating secondary research materials from the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), brain science (Jensen 2005; Wolfe 2010), and brain-compatible classrooms (Erlauer 2003). The result was an active learning post-occupancy evaluation (AL-POE, trademark in Process) Instrument that sought to measure the effect of evidence-based, intentionally designed solution intervention(s) on student engagement in the formal learning place. The AL-POE asked participants to compare their old/pre (row-by-column seating) environment with their new/post (SES's intentionally designed) environment on the basis of identified student engagement factors. Engagement is a variable that inevitably dominates the conversation when exploring ways to cultivate passionate learners and successful students. It is a multidimensional metaconstruct identified as a predictor of academic performance (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008; National Survey of Student Engagement 2012). While comprehensive reviews elucidate slightly different definitions of what engagement is and how it should be measured, the literature generally identifies four components of engagement: cognitive, affective, behavioral, and academic (Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong 2008). In addition to these components, there are also varied perspectives through which student engagement is studied-behavioral, psychological, socio-cultural, and holistic-each of which places emphasis on a different facet of the metaconstruct (Kahu 2011). …