Download
1 / 19
190 likes | 307 Views
Innovations & Experiences in the Multidisciplinary Course EGR 4353, Image Formation & Processing. Jason Gomes Bo Xu Zhuocheng Yang Mentor: Dr. Jim Farison. Abstract.
E N D
Innovations & Experiences in the Multidisciplinary Course EGR 4353, Image Formation & Processing Jason Gomes Bo Xu Zhuocheng Yang Mentor: Dr. Jim Farison
Abstract The goal of this presentation is to give an introduction to the Image Formation and Processing course offered in Fall 2007. Description of the course content and conducting methods will be given, along with some analysis of the responses of the students in the class.
Presentation Outline • Introduction • Course Description • Learning Methods • Important Dates • Presentation List • Grading • Innovations • Student Response • Conclusion and Recommendations • Questions
Course Description • EGR 4353, Image Formation and Processing, is an elective course for electrical and computer engineering, mechanical engineer, general engineering, and computer science majors. • The course offers an introduction to image formation systems and methods of image processing through lecturing and individualized student projects.
Course Description : Learning Methods • 2 student research projects and classroom presentations. • MATLAB student project and presentation. • Midterm test and final exam. • Classroom lectures and discussion. • Homework problem assignments. • MATLAB image processing exercises. • Textbook: Digital Image Processing (3rd edition), Rafael C. Gonzalez and Richard E. Woods, Prentice Hall, 2008 .
Course Description: Important Dates • Aug. 30 – Project 1 Assigned. • Sept. 17-21 – Imaging Systems Presentations. • Sept. 28 – Mid-term Test. • Oct. 3 – Project 2 Assigned. • Oct. 31-Nov. 5 – Reviewed Literature Presentations. • Nov. 5 – Project 3 Assigned. • Nov. 28-30 – Student Project Presentations. • Dec. 7 – Final Exam.
Bo Xu Presentation Summary Grading Innovations
Course Description: Innovations from other courses • One mid-term exam and one final exam. • Very few homework assignments. • Company Allusion. • Class as team investigating a possible business venture in image processing/hardware. • 50% of grade from presentations. • Most of the work done outside class. • Lecture Style.
Jason Gomes Student Response Conclusion/Recommendations Questions
Student Response • A more thorough assessment sheet was given to the students on the last day of lecture. • It asked for detailed responses in the following areas: • PP Visuals – Lecture style evaluation. • Emphasis - Imaging systems vs. Image processing. • Pace/Level – more/less material, faster/slower, simpler/more advanced. • Homework – opinions on amount assigned. • Testing – 1 or 2 mid-term preference. • Student Presentations – effectiveness. • Company Allusion – opinions on this aspect of the course. • Extremes – best/worst parts of the course. • Other comments.
Student Response: • PP Visuals • Class lectures were power point presentations, with lots of visual elements. • 5/8 were satisfied. • Main complaint was need for variation. • Emphasis • Chapter 1 (hardware systems, basics, 6 class periods) vs. other chapters (ideas and methods of image processing). • Balanced response. Seemed to match study concentrations of students. • Pace/level • 4/8 students wanted a faster pace, with more advanced material. • None suggested a slower pace.
Student Response: • Homework • Very few homework assignments were collected due to most of the time being spent on the projects. • Class was divided in response. The students who wanted more homework wanted basic assignments to help introduce advanced topics in the presentations. • Testing • One mid-term and a final. • Students were satisfied with this due to presentation workload and grade percentage.
Student Response: • Presentations • Imaging Systems • 7/8 students said they learned a significant amount from the first presentation. • Imaging Processing Research Literature • 5/8 students responded positively. • Drawback to this presentation seemed to be most of the learning was individual. Topics were too complex to fit into a short presentation to the class. • Student Investigation • All of the students enjoyed this project. • Only complaint was lack of satisfaction in depth of project due to limited knowledge of MATLAB/ topics beforehand.
Student Response: • Company Allusion • All of the student liked the idea, but agreed it was not implemented effectively. • Suggestions included forum style lectures and group work. • Extremes • Presentations were the most liked aspect of the course by 6/8 students. • Least liked aspects varied, only drawback mentioned twice was setup for the last presentation. • 7/8 students said they learned the most from their research and listening to others’ presentations. • Responses to least effective learning method varied.
Conclusion • Recommendations • More time for MATLAB project. • Company allusion is a good idea, but needs to be implemented more effectively. • Homework assignments used more effectively – Specifically MATLAB introduction. • Presentation heavy format was received very well.
