|
WSC 2001 Final Abstracts |
Simulation Education Track
Tuesday 8:30:00 AM 10:00:00 AM
Plenary Session
Chair: Helena
Szczerbicka (Universität Hannover)
Thoughts and Musings on Simulation
Education
Richard E. Nance and Osman Balci (Virginia Tech)
Abstract:
Proper education of a modeling and simulation
professional meeting the extensive criteria imposed by the community poses
significant challenges. In this paper, we explore the formation of a
university-based education in modeling and simulation to meet the challenges.
We examine the factors affecting the composition of a modeling and simulation
course. Based on the anticipated consequences, we propose potential solutions.
Tuesday 10:30:00 AM 12:00:00 PM
Panel: Education for Practice
Chair: Jerry Banks (Professor Emeritus, Georgia
Tech)
Panel Session: Education for Simulation Practice –
Five Perspectives
Jerry Banks (Professor Emeritus, Georgia
Institute of Technology), Heimo Adelsberger (University of Essen), Charles
McLean (National Institute of Standards and Technology), Ralph Rogers (Old
Dominion University) and Ian McGregor (AutoSimulations Division of Brooks
Automation)
Abstract:
This panel session is based on the responses of
simulationists representing various segments of simulation practice, to an
article on the required skills of a simulation analyst. The perspectives
represented are those of academia, government, industry, military, and
research. First, the essence of the reference article is provided. Then, the
five perspectives are presented. Finally, inferences are drawn from the five
perspectives and the reference article.
Tuesday 1:30:00 PM 3:00:00 PM
Panel: Academic Perspectives
Chair: Tayfur Altiok (Rutgers University)
Various Ways Academics Teach Simulation: Are They All
Appropriate?
Tayfur Altiok (Rutgers University), W. David Kelton
(The Pennsylvania State University), Pierre L'Ecuyer (Universite de Montreal),
Barry L. Nelson (Northwestern University), Bruce W. Schmeiser (Purdue
University), Thomas J. Schriber (University of Michigan), Lee W. Schruben
(University of California) and James R. Wilson (North Carolina State
University)
Abstract:
This panel discusses goals and educational strategies
for teaching simulation in academia. Clearly, there is considerable material
to cover in a single course or a sequence thereof in, say, an undergraduate
program. The issue is how to motivate and empower students to analyze complex
problems correctly and to prevent the pitfall of misusing the concept.
Tuesday 3:30:00 PM 5:00:00 PM
Curriculum for Simulation Education
Chair: Hugh Osborne (University of Huddersfield)
Integration of Computer Simulation and Visualization
Research into Undergraduate Degree Programs
T. Andrew Yang (Indiana
University of Pennsylvania)
Abstract:
Faculty from several departments in the College of
Natural Sciences and Mathematics at IUP have engaged in interdisciplinary
projects involving the simulation and visualization of neural networks and
material science research. The existing Computer Science degree programs at
IUP, however, contain no courses in computer simulation. It has been felt by
all the researchers involved in the projects that a degree program focusing on
computer simulation is needed to, among its other missions, cultivate students
with sufficient knowledge and skills to participate in the projects. This
paper starts with an analysis of the knowledge and skills required of the
students, followed by identification of existing and new courses that may be
taken to acquire the knowledge and skills. The paper concludes with a proposal
to establish a degree program in computer simulation and visualization, and an
approach in integrating the research projects with the proposed degree
program.
More on a Model Curriculum for Modeling and
Simulation
Roy E. Crosbie, John J. Zenor, and Ralph C. Hilzer
(California State University, Chico)
Abstract:
At WSC 00, one of the authors (Crosbie) suggested that
the development and publication of a Model Curriculum for MS programs in
Modeling and Simulation would facilitate the development of such programs.
This paper presents a first draft of a Model Curriculum developed by a small
group at the McLeod Institute of Simulation Sciences at California State
University, Chico. The aim of the draft is to stimulate further discussion in
the M&S community with the goal of arriving at a generally acceptable
outline that can serve as a guideline for new programs.
Why We Need to Offer a Modeling and Simulation
Engineering Curriculum
Leo J. De Vin and Mats Jägstam (University
of Skövde)
Abstract:
This paper describes some identifiable trends in the
manufacturing industry regarding the increased use of simulation tools,
especially by small- to medium-sized companies. These trends have resulted in
the need for a new type of engineer, namely simulation engineer. This need
prompted the University of Skövde to develop a B.Sc. simulation engineering
study program. The contents and layout of the program, which started in Autumn
2000, are described. After receiving a firm foundation in manufacturing,
logistics and mathematics in the first year, the main focus of the second year
is on simulation. In the third year, which includes a substantial examination
project, a specialization in manufacturing or in logistics is possible.
Although simulation-related examination projects are already now carried out
in other study programs, the simulation engineer will be able to cover a
larger part of simulation projects and will have a broader overview of
available simulation tools.
Wednesday 8:30:00 AM 10:00:00 AM
Teaching Tools and Methods
Chair: Ralph Hilzer (California State University,
Chico)
GeNisa: A Web-Based Interactive Learning Environment
for Teaching Simulation Modelling
Tajudeen Atolagbe, Vlatka Hlupic,
and Simon J.E. Taylor (Brunel University)
Abstract:
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) provide students
with adaptive instruction and can facilitate the acquisition of problem
solving skills in an interactive environment. This paper discusses the role of
pedagogical strategies that have been implemented to facilitate the
development of simulation modelling knowledge. The learning environment
integrates case-based reasoning with interactive tools to guide tutorial
remediation. The evaluation of the system shows that the model for pedagogical
activities is a useful method for providing efficient simulation modelling
instruction.
Teaching Manufacturing Systems Simulation in a
Computer Aided Teaching Studio
Charles R. Standridge (Grand Valley
State University)
Abstract:
A computer aided teaching studio provides a unique
environment for teaching an introductory simulation course to manufacturing
engineers. Each meeting can consist of an appropriate combination of lecture
and computer-based activities, depending on the topic. Assigned exercises aid
students in learning methods. Emphasis can be placed on the solution of case
problems that serve as metaphors for realistic simulation projects. Since
students have co-op or full time industrial experience, an industry-based
project of the student's own definition serves as a course capstone. The case
problem and project orientation of the course supported by the computer aided
teaching studio makes examinations unnecessary. Case problems are based on a
set of case studies derived from topics of interest to practicing
manufacturing engineers. Cases are organized into four modules: basic systems
organizations, lean manufacturing, material handling, and supply chain
management. Only the simulation methods needed to support the case studies are
presented.
YACHTS – Yet Another Cooperative High Level
Architecture Training Software
Agostino G. Bruzzone (DIP University
of Genoa), Roberto Mosca (MISS University of Genoa) and Roberto Revetria
(Liophant Simulation Club)
Abstract:
The paper proposes a new tool for supporting
educational and professional skill development in HLA environment; the
application proposed by the authors is devoted to provide a realistic case and
an easy to understand/modify example where to extend technical knowledge of
HLA.
Wednesday 10:30:00 AM 12:00:00 PM
Teaching Simulation and Simulation
for Teaching
Chair: Agostino G. Bruzzone (University of Genoa)
Assessment of Student Preparation for Discrete Event
Simulation Courses
Leonardo Chwif (Mauá School of Engineering),
Marcos Ribeiro Pereira Barretto (University of São Paulo) and Ray J. Paul
(Brunel University )
Abstract:
Over the past years, there has been a growth in
simulation courses both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. A discrete
event simulation course, as with any non-basic course, has some prerequisites
that must be satisfied by students before attending classes. Statistics,
computer programming and modeling are the most important, together with
knowledge on the specific field being simulated (manufacturing, logistics,
etcetera). Are students sufficiently prepared to follow a course on
simulation? This work is related to the construction, application and analysis
of an assessment instrument to evaluate student prerequisite knowledge for a
discrete event simulation course. The proposed questionnaire was given to the
5th year engineering students at the beginning of our first year (72 hours)
discrete event simulation introductory course at Mauá School of Engineering.
The results obtained show the importance of making an assessment evaluation in
order to improve the quality of simulation learning.
A Crowd of Little Man Computers: Visual Computer
Simulator Teaching Tools
William Yurcik (Illinois State University)
and Hugh Osborne (University of Huddersfield)
Abstract:
This paper describes the use of a particular type of
computer simulator as a tool for teaching computer architecture. The Little
Man Computer (LMC) paradigm was developed by Stuart Madnick of MIT in the
1960s and has stood the test of time as a conceptual device that helps
students understand the basics of how a computer works. With the success of
the LMC paradigm, LMC simulators have also proliferated. We compare and
contrast the current crowd of LMC simulators highlighting visual features. We
found unexpected insights since despite starting with the same paradigm with
the same goals, each implementation is distinct with different strengths and
weaknesses. It is our intention that interested educators will find this a
useful starting point or useful reference for incorporating simulation into
their courses.