GENERAL STUDIES COURSE PROPOSAL COVER FORM

Course information: Copy and paste current course information from Class Search/Course Catalog.

Academic Unit Electrical Engineering Department School of ECEE

Subject EEE Number 489 Title Senior Design Laboratory II Units: I3

Is this a cross-listed course? If yes, please identify course(s)

No

Is this a shared course? No If so, list all academic units offering this course Course description:

Requested designation: Literacy and Critical Inquiry–L Note- a separate proposal is required for each designation requested

Eligibility: Permanent numbered courses must have completed the university’s review and approval process. For the rules governing approval of omnibus courses, contact Phyllis.Lucie@asu.edu or Lauren.Leo@asu.edu.

Submission deadlines dates are as follow:

For Fall 2015 Effective Date: October 9, 2014 For Spring 2016 Effective Date: March 19, 2015 Area(s) proposed course will serve:

A single course may be proposed for more than one core or awareness area. A course may satisfy a core area requirement and more than one awareness area requirements concurrently, but may not satisfy requirements in two core areas simultaneously, even if approved for those areas. With departmental consent, an approved General Studies course may be counted toward both the General Studies requirement and the major program of study.

Checklists for general studies designations: Complete and attach the appropriate checklist

• Literacy and Critical Inquiry core courses (L)• Mathematics core courses (MA)• Computer/statistics/quantitative applications core courses (CS)• Humanities, Arts and Design core courses (HU)• Social-Behavioral Sciences core courses (SB)• Natural Sciences core courses (SQ/SG)• Cultural Diversity in the United States courses (C)• Global Awareness courses (G)• Historical Awareness courses (H)

A complete proposal should include: Signed General Studies Program Course Proposal Cover Form Criteria Checklist for the area Course Catalog description Course Syllabus Copy of Table of Contents from the textbook and list of required readings/books

Respectfully request that proposals are submitted electronically with all files compiled into one PDF. If necessary, a hard copy of the proposal will be accepted. Contact information:

Name James T. Aberle Phone 5-8588

Mail code 5706 E-mail: aberle@asu.edu

Department Chair/Director approval: (Required)

Chair/Director name (Typed): Stephen Phillips Date: 4/13/14

Chair/Director (Signature):

Rev. 1/94, 4/95, 7/98, 4/00, 1/02, 10/08, 11/11/ 12/11, 7/12, 5/14

Arizona State University Criteria Checklist for

LITERACY AND CRITICAL INQUIRY - [L]

Rationale and Objectives

Literacy is here defined broadly as communicative competence—that is, competence in written and oral discourse. Critical inquiry involves the gathering, interpretation, and evaluation of evidence. Any field of university study may require unique critical skills that have little to do with language in the usual sense (words), but the analysis of written and spoken evidence pervades university study and everyday life. Thus, the General Studies requirements assume that all undergraduates should develop the ability to reason critically and communicate using the medium of language.

The requirement in Literacy and Critical Inquiry presumes, first, that training in literacy and critical inquiry must be sustained beyond traditional First Year English in order to create a habitual skill in every student; and, second, that the skill levels become more advanced, as well as more secure, as the student learns challenging subject matter. Thus, two courses beyond First Year English are required in order for students to meet the Literacy and Critical Inquiry requirement.

Most lower-level [L] courses are devoted primarily to the further development of critical skills in reading, writing, listening, speaking, or analysis of discourse. Upper-division [L] courses generally are courses in a particular discipline into which writing and critical thinking have been fully integrated as means of learning the content and, in most cases, demonstrating that it has been learned. Notes:

1. ENG 101, 107 or ENG 105 must be prerequisites2. Honors theses, XXX 493 meet [L] requirements3. The list of criteria that must be satisfied for designation as a Literacy and Critical Inquiry [L] course

is presented on the following page. This list will help you determine whether the current version ofyour course meets all of these requirements. If you decide to apply, please attach a current syllabus,or handouts, or other documentation that will provide sufficient information for the General StudiesCouncil to make an informed decision regarding the status of your proposal.

Revised April 2014

Literacy and Critical Inquiry [L] Page 2 Proposer: Please complete the following section and attach appropriate documentation.

ASU - [L] CRITERIA TO QUALIFY FOR [L] DESIGNATION,THE COURSE DESIGN MUST PLACE A MAJOR EMPHASIS ON COMPLETING CRITICAL DISCOURSE--AS EVIDENCED BY THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

YES NO Identify Documentation Submitted

CCRRIITTEERRIIOONN 11:: At least 50 percent of the grade in the course should depend upon writing assignments (see Criterion 3). Group projects are acceptable only if each student gathers, interprets, and evaluates evidence, and prepares a summary report. In-class essay exams may not be used for [L] designation.

syllabus grading rubrics

1. Please describe the assignments that are considered in the computation of course grades--and indicate the proportion of the final grade that is determined by each assignment.

2. Also: C-1

CCRRIITTEERRIIOONN 22:: The writing assignments should involve gathering, interpreting, and evaluating evidence. They should reflect critical inquiry, extending beyond opinion and/or reflection.

syllabus grading rubrics

1. Please describe the way(s) in which this criterion is addressed in the course design.

2. Also:

C-2

CCRRIITTEERRIIOONN 33:: The syllabus should include a minimum of two writing and/or speaking assignments that are substantial in depth, quality, and quantity. Substantial writing assignments entail sustained in-depth engagement with the material. Examples include research papers, reports, articles, essays, or speeches that reflect critical inquiry and evaluation. Assignments such as brief reaction papers, opinion pieces, reflections, discussion posts, and impromptu presentations are not considered substantial writing/speaking assignments.

syllabus grading rubrics

1. Please provide relatively detailed descriptions of two or more substantial writing or speaking tasks that are included in the course requirements

2. Also: C-3

Please circle, underline, or otherwise mark the information presented in the most recent course syllabus (or other material you have submitted) that verifies this description of the grading process--and label this information "C-1".

Please circle, underline, or otherwise mark the information presented in the most recent course syllabus (or other material you have submitted) that verifies this description of the grading process--and label this information "C-2".

Please circle, underline, or otherwise mark the information presented in the most recent course syllabus (or other material you have submitted) that verifies this description of the grading process--and label this information "C-3".

Literacy and Critical Inquiry [L] Page 3

ASU - [L] CRITERIA YES NO Identify Documentation

Submitted

CCRRIITTEERRIIOONN 44:: These substantial writing or speaking assignments should be arranged so that the students will get timely feedback from the instructor on each assignment in time to help them do better on subsequent assignments. Intervention at earlier stages in the writing process is especially welcomed.

screen capture from BB grading rubrics

1. Please describe the sequence of course assignments--and the nature of the feedback the current (or most recent) course instructor provides to help students do better on subsequent assignments

2. Also: C-4

Please circle, underline, or otherwise mark the information presented in the most recent course syllabus (or other material you have submitted) that verifies this description of the grading process--and label this information "C-4".

Literacy and Critical Inquiry [L] Page 4

Course Prefix Number Title General Studies Designation

EEE 489 Senior Design Laboratory II L

Explain in detail which student activities correspond to the specific designation criteria. Please use the following organizer to explain how the criteria are being met.

Criteria (from checksheet)

How course meets spirit (contextualize specific

examples in next column)

Please provide detailed evidence of how course meets criteria (i.e., where in syllabus)

1 50% of grade for course derived from technical communications related to a group senior capstone project. Similar to real-world engineering activities, individual accountability is enforced by the project technical mentor as well as a peer review.

Attached syllabus indicates that 50% of course grade is based on technical communications. Attached grading sheets show the nature of these assignments.

2 Writing assignments involve written and oral reports on student's senior capstone project. To achieve a successful capstone design, students need to gather, interpret and evaluate evidence based on literature surveys as well as simulations and/or measurements of their own engineering concepts.

Attached syllabus indicates that student teams meet with a project mentor (usually an ECEE faculty member) at least once per week for guidance on the project direction. Attached grading sheets show the nature of the assignments describing progress on the team's senior capstone project for electrical engineering.

3 The syllabus indicates that the lion share of Technical Communications points (35 out of 50 available) are based on three substantial assignments – the interim final report, the final team project report, and the final multimedia presentation.

Attached grading sheets show the nature of these substantial assignments documenting and demostrating to the public the student team's senior capstone project.

4 Technical communications assignments are distributed throughout the semester, and later assignments build on earlier ones.

Screen capture from Blackboard shows typical semester schedule. Attached grading sheets show how later assignments build on earlier ones and incorporate feedback received on them.

EEE 489

SENIOR DESIGN LAB II

EEE 488 and EEE 489 comprise a two-semester capstone senior project for Electrical

Engineering students. During the second semester (EEE 489), the project is implemented,

evaluated, and documented. Appropriate soft engineering issues are addressed.

Technical communications and team skills are enriched. The major deliverables at the

end of the second semester are a completed project including documentation in the form

of a detailed technical report, and a final multimedia presentation given to a general

audience in a public setting.

Class Meetings:

Entire class meets once per week for 75 minutes.

Each team is required to meet with their technical advisor at least once per week.

Course Coordinator:

Prof. Jim Aberle

Telephone:

(480) 965-8588

Office:

GWC 326

E-mail:

aberle@asu.edu

Website:

http://faculty.engineering.asu.edu/aberle

Catalog Description:

Capstone senior project. Implement, evaluate, and document EEE 488 design.

Social, economic, and safety considerations. Technical communications and team

skills enrichment. Lecture, lab. General studies: L (if credit also earned in EEE

488) (3 cr-hrs).

Prerequisites:

EEE 488 in the immediately preceding semester.

Course Objectives:

1. Students can carry out team-oriented electrical engineering projects.

2. Students can communicate and critically evaluate technical information.

Course Outcomes:

1. Students can effectively and actively participate in teams to complete the project

2. Students can use a formal design process to create a project design.

3. Students can implement, evaluate, and document a project design.

4. Students can communicate technical information in writing.

5. Students can communicate technical information in oral presentations.

6. Students can provide informed and constructive criticism on engineering projects.

Course Performance Indicators:

1. Students can perform a design process that includes research, concept, feasibility,

simulation, specifications, benchmarking, and proposal generation.

2. Students can procure appropriate materials and specialized services (e.g., machine

shop) necessary to implement a project defined by a statement of work.

3. Students can implement, test, and debug subsystems necessary to complete a

project.

4. Students can integrate subsystems as needed to complete a project and

appropriately test, debug, for, implement, integrate, package, and demonstrate the

integrated system.

5. Students can write a proposal defining a technical project.

6. Students can write progress reports that describe project progress, issues and

modifications clearly and concisely.

7. Students are able to design and deliver oral project proposals and reports

involving team presentation in a small group setting.

8. Students can prepare poster presentations and real-time project demonstrations

suitable for a large public forum.

9. Students can expertly reply to questions concerning their projects.

10. Students are able to write constructive critiques of other student projects after

observing their progress throughout the semester.

Grading:

Your grade for this class is based on:

Contribution of the individual to the team (weighting factor)

Technical communication: written reports and oral presentations (50%)

Technical performance: assessment of the group’s technical work (50%)

Grades will reflect the following percentages:

Technical

Performance 50%

Technical

Communications

Team Progress

Report 1 (Project

Synopsis)

5%

Oral Presentation 5%

Team Progress

Report 2 (Interim

Final Report)

10%

Individual ABET

Assessment Report

5%

Final Public

Demonstration

10%

Final Team Project

Report

15%

Weighting factor

This factor will be derived by the Course Coordinator with input from the

students. Students will be asked at the end of the semester to "grade" each of their

team members (including themselves) as to each member's contribution as well as

the grade that they feel that each member deserves.

Technical communication

This portion of the grade is based on the Course Coordinator's evaluation of the

team's written and oral reports. The written and oral reports are spaced to allow

the project team to receive timely feedback, and to incorporate this feedback into

subsequent reports. The lion share of Technical Communications points (35 out

of 50 available) are based on three substantial assignments – the interim final

report, the final team project report, and the final multimedia presentation.

All written submissions must be typed and all oral presentations must make use of

computer-generated slides. Writing assistance is available on campus (see

http://studentsuccess.asu.edu/home/writingcenters).

Written reports are simultaneously submitted to both the course coordinator and

the technical advisor. Reports must be submitted on time and as instructed. There

may be a penalty for a late submission.

Technical performance

This portion of the grade is based on input from the Faculty Advisor. The Course

Coordinator will attempt to equitably smooth any differences between groups

working under different faculty advisors.

As part of the Electrical Engineering Department's assessment of the

undergraduate program, the student's work is extensively evaluated. Part of this

assessment process involves student completion of anonymous surveys during the

semester. Although the surveys are anonymous, a record is kept as to whether

each individual student has completed the survey. Answers to the survey do not

affect the computation of the course grade; however, non-completion of ANY

survey is grounds for award of an incomplete grade.

Computer Usage:

Specific computer usage is not dictated; however, written reports are typical

generated on a word processor and many oral presentations are prepared using

PowerPoint. Generally, students also prepare Gantt charts with the aid of

computer software. Particular design projects will require the use of computer

simulation software such as SPICE or Logic Works; in addition, other projects

may require the use of specialized software such as FPGA design and simulation.

Laboratory Experiments:

There are no prescribed lab experiments in this course. The entire class of

students meet once weekly with the course coordinator in the classroom; the

individual design teams then meet once weekly with the faculty advisor/mentor

for their particular design project.

Academic Integrity: Although there are no exams in this class, ASU's Academic Integrity Policy is

still applicable. Academic integrity refers to each student's obligation to act with

honesty and integrity and to respect the rights of others in carrying out all

academic assignments. Violations of the University Academic integrity policy

will not be ignored. Penalties include reduced or no credit for submitted work, a

failing grade in the class, a note on your official transcript that shows you were

punished for cheating, suspension, expulsion and revocation of already awarded

degrees. The University requires that should I implement any penalty for

violations of the academic integrity policy, I must report the matter to the Dean's

office. The University has a Student Academic Integrity Policy, which will be

followed in this class.

Reimbursable Expenses: At the end of the second semester (EEE 489), students are nominally reimbursed

for actual cost up to a total of $100 per project (not per student) for material

expenses approved by their Faculty Advisor. Teams requiring more resources can

submit an application to receive additional funding from the School of ECEE

subject to Course Coordinator and School Director approval. Students will need

to present receipts for all reimburable expenses. Expense claims must be limited

to materials purchased specifically for performance of the senior design project.

E-Mail Communication:

Announcements and other information may be disseminated to students via email.

Thus, students are required to maintain and check their ASU email on a regular

basis.

EEE 489 FINAL PUBLIC DEMONSTRATIONS

The final demonstration differs in setting and format from the oral presentations given earlier in the semester. Rather than a short talk in a conference room, the final presentation is an interactive public display in the ECG Student Center. These presentations are generally well attended by faculty, staff, and students from the Department of Electrical Engineering as well as faculty, staff, and students from other departments and visitors from local industry. Design teams may use posters, computer displays, hardware demonstrations, and other means to create presentations that both capture the attention of the audience and show the results of the year’s efforts. This forum also provides the basis for judging which team will win the coveted senior design prize! Demo Periods The poster demonstration is conducted at the end of the second semester of the capstone course sequence. The exact date and time for the demonstration is announced at the beginning of the second semester of the sequence. At least one team member must be present at any given time during the demo period, and all team members should be at their display as much as possible. Senior Design Prize Prior to the final oral presentation, a small number of teams will be selected by the course coordinator as “prize finalists” for the Senior Design Prize competition. During the presentation period, members of a “secret” panel of judges, consisting of ASU faculty and students, as well as representatives from local industry, will visit the displays of the prize finalist teams and assess which of these teams most deserves to win the senior design prize. Grading Session Each team's poster demonstration will be evaluated by the course coordinator and TAs during the presentation period. A single grade for the entire team will be given, absent noticeable differences in the participation by members and/or the ability of individuals to answer questions during the demo. A formal presentation is not necessary; rather it should be an informational session--much like an exhibitor's table at a professional trade show or conference. The poster demo grading will be based on criteria such as:

• Has the project been completed successfully? • Is the demonstration professional in level and appearance? • Is the information understandable and is it standalone? • Is the demonstration interesting? • Does the demo show real and defendable results?

Setup The design team should have their demonstration completely set up prior to the start of the demo period. One banquet table (roughly 72” x 30”) and an artist easel will be provided for each team. Some groups will want to use the table to place their posters on, whereas other groups will want to use the easel. If a design team needs other facilities, then the course coordinator must be notified at least one week in advance. Poster Format The information on the poster should be succinct and to the point. Some information should be geared toward the casual browser, whereas part of the display should be targeted to the more interested

Final Public Demo.docFinal Public Demo

viewer. Design teams should use from 1 to 3 posters: a group with significant hardware to show and demo might have only 1 poster; a group with a more theoretical project will probably need more posters.

Suggestions given here use a reference poster board of size 20"x30". At the demo each poster can be displayed either vertically or horizontally on an artist easel. A possible arrangement of the display pages on the poster boards is shown below. The project title, team members, technical advisor (and corporate sponsor, if any) can be printed sideways (landscape) on a legal size piece of paper and cut to 3"x13" and pasted onto a legal-sized piece of colored construction paper. It is suggested that the four "white" pages (7½"x10" each) be mounted onto colored construction paper (8½"x11" each) with no more than two total colors used. The font used should be of sufficient size as to be easily read from a distance of 3 feet, and the typeface chosen should be simple, i.e., sans serif typefaces such as Helvetica are easier to read in this format than serif typefaces such as Times.

Perhaps agraph/plotshowingsome resultsin moredetail.

Maybe acircuitschematic orphotographof the productin action.

Some textualmaterialdetailing theresults,conclusions,future work.

Some textualmaterialdescribingthe project,its goals,scopemotivation

Project TitleTeam Members

Tech Advisor; Corp Sponsor

20"x30"Poster

Four8½"x11"Sheets

perPoster

Final Public Demo.docFinal Public Demo

EEE 489 FINAL DEMO GRADE: __________ Team: __________ Very

Poor (0)

Poor (1)

Fair (2)

Good

(3)

Very Good

(4)

Excellent

(5) Presentation Completeness (Important points covered?)

Technical Level (Project at BSE level?)

Project Completion (Does the "product" work?)

Setup Quality (Professional appearance?)

Presentation Materials (Text, Figs, Size, Detail))

Response to Questions (Technical understanding present?)

Overall Impression (Interesting demo/presentation?)

Teamwork (Full team participation?)

Comments (e.g., noticeable differences in team members?) _____________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Final Public Demo.docFinal Public Demo

EEE 489 - Senior Design Laboratory II Spring 2015

Course description: Implement, evaluate, and document EEE 488 design. Social, economic, and

safety considerations. Technical communications and team skills enrichment.

Enrollment requirements: Prerequisite(s): Fulton ECEE, SEMTE, or BHSE senior or post-bacc

undergraduate student; EEE 488

Units: 3

Repeatable for credit: No

General Studies: L

Offered by: Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering

EEE 489

SENIOR DESIGN LAB II

EEE 488 and EEE 489 comprise a two-semester capstone senior project for Electrical

Engineering students. During the second semester (EEE 489), the project is implemented,

evaluated, and documented. Appropriate soft engineering issues are addressed.

Technical communications and team skills are enriched. The major deliverables at the

end of the second semester are a completed project including documentation in the form

of a detailed technical report, and a final multimedia presentation given to a general

audience in a public setting.

Class Meetings: Entire class meets once per week for 75 minutes.

Each team is required to meet with their technical advisor at least once per week.

Course Coordinator: Prof. Jim Aberle

Telephone:

(480) 965-8588

Office:

GWC 326

E-mail:

aberle@asu.edu

Website:

http://faculty.engineering.asu.edu/aberle

Catalog Description: Capstone senior project. Implement, evaluate, and document EEE 488 design.

Social, economic, and safety considerations. Technical communications and team

skills enrichment. Lecture, lab. General studies: L (if credit also earned in EEE

488) (3 cr-hrs).

Prerequisites: EEE 488 in the immediately preceding semester.

Course Objectives:

1. Students can carry out team-oriented electrical engineering projects.

2. Students can communicate and critically evaluate technical information.

Course Outcomes:

1. Students can effectively and actively participate in teams to complete the project

2. Students can use a formal design process to create a project design.

3. Students can implement, evaluate, and document a project design.

4. Students can communicate technical information in writing.

5. Students can communicate technical information in oral presentations.

6. Students can provide informed and constructive criticism on engineering projects.

Course Performance Indicators:

1. Students can perform a design process that includes research, concept, feasibility,

simulation, specifications, benchmarking, and proposal generation.

2. Students can procure appropriate materials and specialized services (e.g., machine

shop) necessary to implement a project defined by a statement of work.

3. Students can implement, test, and debug subsystems necessary to complete a

project.

4. Students can integrate subsystems as needed to complete a project and

appropriately test, debug, for, implement, integrate, package, and demonstrate the

integrated system.

5. Students can write a proposal defining a technical project.

6. Students can write progress reports that describe project progress, issues and

modifications clearly and concisely.

7. Students are able to design and deliver oral project proposals and reports

involving team presentation in a small group setting.

8. Students can prepare poster presentations and real-time project demonstrations

suitable for a large public forum.

9. Students can expertly reply to questions concerning their projects.

10. Students are able to write constructive critiques of other student projects after

observing their progress throughout the semester.

Grading:

Your grade for this class is based on:

Contribution of the individual to the team (weighting factor)

Technical communication: written reports and oral presentations (50%)

Technical performance: assessment of the group’s technical work (50%)

Grades will reflect the following percentages:

Technical

Performance 50%

Technical

Communications

Team Progress

Report 1 (Project

Synopsis)

5%

Oral Presentation 5%

Team Progress

Report 2 (Interim

Final Report)

10%

Individual ABET

Assessment Report

5%

Final Public

Demonstration

10%

Final Team Project

Report

15%

Weighting factor

This factor will be derived by the Course Coordinator with input from the

students. Students will be asked at the end of the semester to "grade" each of their

team members (including themselves) as to each member's contribution as well as

the grade that they feel that each member deserves.

Technical communication

This portion of the grade is based on the Course Coordinator's evaluation of the

team's written and oral reports. The written and oral reports are spaced to allow

the project team to receive timely feedback, and to incorporate this feedback into

subsequent reports. The lion share of Technical Communications points (35 out

of 50 available) are based on three substantial assignments – the interim final

report, the final team project report, and the final multimedia presentation.

All written submissions must be typed and all oral presentations must make use of

computer-generated slides. Writing assistance is available on campus (see

http://studentsuccess.asu.edu/home/writingcenters).

Written reports are simultaneously submitted to both the course coordinator and

the technical advisor. Reports must be submitted on time and as instructed. There

may be a penalty for a late submission.

Technical performance

This portion of the grade is based on input from the Faculty Advisor. The Course

Coordinator will attempt to equitably smooth any differences between groups

working under different faculty advisors.

As part of the Electrical Engineering Department's assessment of the

undergraduate program, the student's work is extensively evaluated. Part of this

assessment process involves student completion of anonymous surveys during the

semester. Although the surveys are anonymous, a record is kept as to whether

each individual student has completed the survey. Answers to the survey do not

affect the computation of the course grade; however, non-completion of ANY

survey is grounds for award of an incomplete grade.

Computer Usage:

Specific computer usage is not dictated; however, written reports are typical

generated on a word processor and many oral presentations are prepared using

PowerPoint. Generally, students also prepare Gantt charts with the aid of

computer software. Particular design projects will require the use of computer

simulation software such as SPICE or Logic Works; in addition, other projects

may require the use of specialized software such as FPGA design and simulation.

Laboratory Experiments:

There are no prescribed lab experiments in this course. The entire class of

students meet once weekly with the course coordinator in the classroom; the

individual design teams then meet once weekly with the faculty advisor/mentor

for their particular design project.

Academic Integrity: Although there are no exams in this class, ASU's Academic Integrity Policy is

still applicable. Academic integrity refers to each student's obligation to act with

honesty and integrity and to respect the rights of others in carrying out all

academic assignments. Violations of the University Academic integrity policy

will not be ignored. Penalties include reduced or no credit for submitted work, a

failing grade in the class, a note on your official transcript that shows you were

punished for cheating, suspension, expulsion and revocation of already awarded

degrees. The University requires that should I implement any penalty for

violations of the academic integrity policy, I must report the matter to the Dean's

office. The University has a Student Academic Integrity Policy, which will be

followed in this class.

Reimbursable Expenses: At the end of the second semester (EEE 489), students are nominally reimbursed

for actual cost up to a total of $100 per project (not per student) for material

expenses approved by their Faculty Advisor. Teams requiring more resources can

submit an application to receive additional funding from the School of ECEE

subject to Course Coordinator and School Director approval. Students will need

to present receipts for all reimburable expenses. Expense claims must be limited

to materials purchased specifically for performance of the senior design project.

E-Mail Communication:

Announcements and other information may be disseminated to students via email.

Thus, students are required to maintain and check their ASU email on a regular

basis.