NonQCD contributions to heavy quark masses and sensitivity to Higgs mass

We find that if the Higgs mass is close to its present experimental lower limit (100 GeV),Yukawa interactions in the quark-Higgs sector can make substantial contributions to the heavy quark MS masses.Comment: 16 pages, 1 figure. Fixed a few typos (eqs (7),(34)

Memristive Responses of Jammed Granular Copper Array Sensors to Mechanical Stress

A granular memristive device with the end goal of creating a novel system protection device is introduced in a 1-Dimension array. The electromechanical network will lay the groundwork for future 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional devices for simultaneous protection from intrusion. Off the shelf copper spheres with diameter of 710 ± 11microns were found through nano-indentation measurements to have elastic modulus of 106GPa, and compressive yield strength of 729MPa, these spheres were prepared for test in a 1-Dimensional array device. The arrays response to mechanical perturbations modeled by Hertz contact mechanics can be monitored by simultaneous electrical measurements across the multiple metal-insulator-metal junctions. A shift in the nonlinear IV trace behavior to lower resistance states is the result of increasing compressive forces. Additionally a relation of breakdown to ohmic conduction of the junctions is found to be -7.6 in units of Volts per Newton per Interface for a 15 minute thermally oxidized sample array of 4 spheres. This granular array can be preset and monitored retaining the ability to recognize mechanical or electrical interference. The ability to have multiple electromechanically characterized chains within a 3-Dimensional volume allows for a complex redundancy in the future system protection circuit

Rethinking Evangelism as Discipleship: Equipping Followers to Live Incarnational Lives Outside the Walls

This dissertation explores how local churches can help lay people live incarnational lives of reaching out and connecting or building relationships in their communities with the potential to share the gospel. To live an incarnational life means to allow Jesus to live through you in a way that changes your life and allows you to do what you otherwise could not do on your own. To live the life of a disciple or follower fosters a missional mindset and the desire to build relationships. To spring off of Len Sweet’s concept of MRI (Missional, Relational and Incarnational)1 I will explore how the church can better develop a discipleship training that focuses on missional, relational and incarnational thinking. A relationship with Jesus is necessary and relying on Jesus’ power, presence, strength, and courage which in turn will help to foster a missional attitude. This type of discipleship is “others” focused and “outward” focused. The MRI model views missional not as a program, but rather living life as God intended, and relationships not as something followers do, but rather what faith is, and incarnational is not what followers do but how Christians live.2 Today more than perhaps ever before, our communities are in great need. Foundational in outreach to neighborhoods is focusing on others and observing potential needs in communities. Communities have households where people come and go from their homes without having any idea who the individuals are that live beside them or around them. Living in such isolation hinders human interaction and connection. This dynamic manifests itself in the church as guests come and then often leave after a short time because they haven’t “connected” or built relationships with others in the church. While the internet has made global connections possible in a superficial way, it may be influencing how individuals live disconnected in our society leaving people hungry for purposeful and meaningful connections and relationships. The church has failed in connecting and instead has turned inward on itself, forming a discipleship that is shared only with its own people. 1 Leonard Sweet. So Beautiful, Divine Design for Life and the Church (Colorado Springs, CO: 2009), 27. 2 Ibid

Extended flight evaluation of a near-term pitch active control system

Fuel savings can be achieved by moving the center of gravity of an aircraft aft which reduces the static stability margin and consequently the trim drag. However, flying qualities of an aircraft with relaxed static stability can be significantly degraded. The flying qualities can be restored by using a pitch active control system (PACS). This report documents the work accomplished during a follow-on program (see NASA CR-165951 for initial program report) to perform extended flight tests of a near-term PACS. The program included flying qualities analyses, piloted flight simulation tests, aircraft preparation and flight tests to demonstrate that the near-term PACS provided good flying qualities within the linear static stability envelope to a negative 3% static stability margin

Building a community of practice to improve inter marker standardisation and consistency

Copyright © 2015 SEFI. Over several years the authors have coordinated engineering subjects, with large cohorts of up to 300+ students. In each case, lectures were supported by tutorials. In the larger subjects it was not uncommon to have in excess of 10 tutors, where each tutor is responsible for grading the assessment tasks for students in their tutorial. A common issue faced by lecturers of large multiple tutor subjects is how to achieve a consistent standard of marking between different tutors. To address this issue the authors initially used a number of methods including double-blind marking and remarking. This process was improved by using the benchmarking tool in SPARKPLUS [1] to compare both the grading and feedback provided by different tutors for a number of randomly selected project tasks. In these studies we found that while students' perception of difference in grading was not unfounded, the problem was exacerbated by inconsistencies in the language tutors use when providing feedback. In this paper, we report using new SPARKPLUS features developed as a result of this previous research to quickly establish and build a community of practice amongst subject tutors. We found that in just one session these processes assisted tutors to reach a higher level of shared understanding of the concepts and practices pertinent to the subject assessment activities. In addition, it enabled tutors to gain an appreciation of the grading issues frequently reported by students. This resulted in not only improving both the understanding and skills of tutors but changing the way they both marked and provided feedback

Improving self- and peer assessment processes with technology

Purpose - As a way of focusing curriculum development and learning outcomes universities have introduced graduate attributes, which their students should develop during their degree course. Some of these attributes are discipline-specific, others are generic to all professions. The development of these attributes can be promoted by the careful use of self- and peer assessment. The authors have previously reported using the self- and peer assessment software tool SPARK in various contexts to facilitate opportunities to practise, develop, assess and provide feedback on these attributes. This research and that of the other developers identified the need to extend the features of SPARK, to increase its flexibility and capacity to provide feedback. This paper seeks to report the results of the initial trials to investigate the potential of these new features to improve learning outcomes. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reviews some of the key literature with regard to self- and peer assessment, discusses the main aspects of the original online self- and peer assessment tool SPARK and the new version SPARKPLUS, reports and analyses the results of a series of student surveys to investigate whether the new features and applications of the tool have improved the learning outcomes in a large multi-disciplinary Engineering Design subject. Findings - It was found that using self- and peer assessment in conjunction with collaborative peer learning activities increased the benefits to students and improved engagement. Furthermore it was found that the new features available in SPARKPLUS facilitated efficient implementation of additional self- and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes. The trials demonstrated that the tool assisted in improving students' engagement with and learning from peer learning exercises, the collection and distribution of feedback and helping them to identify their individual strengths and weaknesses. Practical implications: SPARKPLUS facilitates the efficient management of self- and peer assessment processes even in large classes, allowing assessments to be run multiple times a semester without an excessive burden for the coordinating academic. While SPARKPLUS has enormous potential to provide significant benefits to both students and academics, it is necessary to caution that, although a powerful tool, its successful use requires thoughtful and reflective application combined with good assessment design. Originality/value - It was found that the new features available in SPARKPLUS efficiently facilitated the development of new self- and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Authors' perceptions of peer review of conference papers and how they characterise a 'good' one

This paper examines the individual's experience of the peer review process to explore implications for the wider engineering education research community. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts showed that providing feedback to authors in reviews was mentioned equally as frequently as the role of quality assurance of the conference papers. We used responses from participants from various levels of expertise and types of universities to identify what were for them the elements of a quality conference paper and a quality review. For a conference paper these included that it should be relevant, situate itself relative to existing literature, state the purpose of the research, describe sound methodology used with a logically developed argument, have conclusions supported by evidence and use language of a professional standard. A quality review should start on a positive note, suggest additional literature, critique the methodology and written expression and unambiguously explain what the reviewer means. The lists of characteristics of a good paper and a good review share elements such as attention to relevant literature and methodology. There is also substantial overlap between how our participants characterise quality papers and reviews and the review criteria used for the AAEE conference, and for such publication outlets as the European Journal for Engineering Education (EJEE) and the Journal of Engineering Education (JEE). This suggests some level of agreement in the community about the elements that indicate quality. However, we need to continue discussions about what we mean by 'sound' methodology and 'good' evidence as well as establishing some shared language and understanding of the standards required in regard to the review criteria. The results of this study represent the first steps in improving our shared understandings of what constitutes quality research in engineering education for our community, and how we might better convey that in offering constructive advice to authors when writing a review of a conference paper. Since the peer review process has implications for the development of individual researchers in the field and hence for the field overall, it seems reasonable to ask reviewers to pay attention to how they write reviews so that they create the potential for engineering academics to successfully transition into this different research paradigm

Changing student's perceptions of self and peer assessment

The authors have previously reported the effectiveness of using self and peer assessment to improve learning outcomes by providing opportunities to practise, assess and provide feedback on students' learning and development. Despite this work and the research of others, we found a significant number of students perceive self and peer assessment to be an instrument to facilitate fairness, focusing on its free-rider deterrent capacity, rather than providing opportunities for reflection and feedback to complete the learning cycle. We assumed that these perceptions were enforced by the fact that the main use of self and peer assessment was to moderate marks and provide feedback to individuals on their contribution to team tasks. We hypothesised that these perceptions would change if students were provided with opportunities to use self and peer assessment for different purposes. In this paper we report testing this hypothesis by using self and peer assessment multiple times a semester to not only assess team contributions but to assess individual student assignments and in benchmarking exercises. Our aim was to test whether this approach would assist students to gain more benefit from self and peer assessment processes while simultaneously breaking down their narrow focus on fairness. © 2009 Keith Willey & Anne Gardner