IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO.

10, OCTOBER 2010

3245

Current Trends in Industrial Electronics Education

Juan J. Rodriguez-Andina, Senior Member, IEEE, Lus Gomes, Senior Member, IEEE, and Seta Bogosyan, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractTechnology development creates many challenges in the education of industrial-electronics (IE)-related subjects. At the same time, it allows new educational paradigms to be implemented. The main contribution of this paper is to initiate a discussion for the needs and challenges of IE education both at university level and in lifelong learning, in order to meet the requirements of the emerging technologies of the 21st century. Educational challenges and opportunities are rst identied and analyzed. Afterward, an overview of state-of-the-art learning methodologies and tools is presented. New educational paradigms and future directions are also identied. Index TermsCooperative learning, learning systems, lifelong learning, multidisciplinary education.

I. I NTRODUCTION NDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS (IE) systems are the center piece of all industrial systems, with common applications in, but not limited to, robotics, motion control, industrial automation, electrical, hybrid electrical vehicles, or unmanned vehicles. The IE technologies assert themselves not only in the power electronics, motor drive, microcontroller, or signal conditioning aspects of such systems but also in the sensing, monitoring, diagnostic, control, and communication processes involved with such systems and many other industrial practices. The eld has certainly moved far beyond traditional electronics, which used to be the nal product at one time, and has been the driving force toward larger scale industrial systems with more recent extensions in mechatronics and cyberphysical systems. These emerging technologies of the 21st century bring along the need for IE engineers who have knowledge and expertise in a plethora of technical areas mentioned earlier. This issue is currently well recognized at all educational levels, and despite the lack of a coordinated educational plan at the moment, there are considerable efforts to bring IE education even to high schools, i.e., through Project Lead the Way programs and First Robot Challenge competitions in the U.S., for example, where the students are faced with IE-related challenges for the proper control of autonomous robotics systems. As for the more common arena of IE education, the current trend in university education worldwide is the teaching of IE areas in individual courses for each area listed earlier. This
Manuscript received June 18, 2010; accepted June 30, 2010. Date of publication July 8, 2010; date of current version September 10, 2010. J. J. Rodriguez-Andina is with the Department of Electronic Technology, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain (e-mail: jjrdguez@uvigo.es). L. Gomes is with the Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal, and also with the Center of Technology and Systems, UNINOVA, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal (e-mail: lugo@ieee.org). S. Bogosyan is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775-5915 USA (e-mail: sbogosyan@ alaska.edu). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TIE.2010.2057235

approach hardly provides the student with the multidisciplinary perspective required and demanded by IE systems, where the main issue is the integrated operation of the system, hence calling for a revised engineering education system that puts IE experts (and not only experts in individual areas) and stateof-the-art specially equipped laboratory facilities into the service of engineering students to offer a solid understanding of each area individually while also providing a strong handson perspective for the operation, evaluation, diagnosis, and maintenance of the integrated system as a whole. As IE systems gain more and more weight in the emerging technologies of mechatronics and cyberphysical systems, continued education and lifelong learning in IE also gain importance as many of engineering professionals may not be equipped with a working knowledge of state of the art in IE technologies. Due to the predominantly hands-on requirements of IE, combined with temporal and spatial restrictions associated with lifelong learning, virtual and particularly remote laboratories may be regarded as practical solutions to address this issue. The problem with this solution appears to be the lack of remote physical labs that can offer the full range of experiments provided in an actual lab. Most existing labs still provide a limited and more of a passive experimentation capacity via allowing the user to monitor sensor outputs only, or to tweak some system parameters and observe the result. The main contribution of this paper is to initiate a discussion for the need and challenges of IE education both at university level and in lifelong learning in order to meet the needs of the emerging technologies of the 21st century. Educational challenges and opportunities are rst identied and analyzed. Afterward, an overview of state-of-the-art learning methodologies and tools is presented. New educational paradigms and future directions are also identied. II. C HALLENGES AND O PPORTUNITIES IN IE E DUCATION A. Challenges Signicant technological advancements in many areas related to IE are continuously being reported. At the same time, many classical approaches in these areas are still very important in terms of the practical applications where they are advantageous. Digital electronic circuits for industrial control are a clear example of this fact. Given the distributed nature of many current industrial control systems [1], different processing structures may be used for the different nodes of the same system, according to their requirements. Congurable devices, namely, eld-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), have emerged in the last years as a very suitable implementation platform in an

0278-0046/$26.00 2010 IEEE

3246

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2010

increasing number of industrial applications [2], [3]. At the same time, microcontrollers [4], DSPs [5], and PCs [6] provide very efcient solutions in many cases. Moreover, the resources included in currently available devices (e.g., peripherals in microcontrollers) are very diverse [7]. Another eld in which similar overhead of the required educational content can be identied is power electronics, given the increasing importance of the new concepts associated to renewable energy sources and their integration in transmission grids [8], distributed generation [9], microgrids [10], energy storage [11], [12], new converter topologies and control techniques for high-power/power-quality applications [13], [14], or, last but not least, hybrid and electric vehicle technology [15], [16]. From an educational point of view, this means that new contents need continuously to be added to courses, whereas much of the existent content still needs to be kept. This has to be achieved without increasing the (usually very limited) time available. In some cases, this time is being even reduced, like in some European countries, because of the implementation of the so-called Bologna process. In addition, the fast pace at which technological innovations are being produced implies that engineering education cannot be restricted to a given period of time, but it extends through the whole professional life of engineers, so concepts related to lifelong learning are open for discussion and analysis [17], [18]. Many universities need to adapt to this new (at least for them) scenario, in which students come on an irregular temporal basis and, in some cases, demand the possibility to access to education without the need for being actually present. Specic educational methodologies and tools are required to efciently address these issues, taking into account the strong requirements of engineering education regarding practical experimentation. Effective safety and security mechanisms related to remote access to shared resources [19], user authentication (for granting access to sensitive contents such as tests or personal/private records or copyrighted material) [20], protection against manipulation or denial of service attacks [21], etc., need to be implemented. Another signicant challenge of IE education is that many of the target topics are interdisciplinary. Microsystems [22] and robotics [23] are clear examples of this, but others can be easily identied, even when dealing with a single technology, as engineering products must not only solve real-life problems but also do it according to realistic constraints such as economic or environmental [24]. Let us consider the case of electronic circuits for industrial control [25]. Information from a physical process is rst obtained by means of sensors, whose characteristics determine the kind of conditioning circuit required. Analog-to-digital and digital-to-analog interfaces are necessary whenever dealing with analog measurements or actuations, which is the case in many real systems. Processors are required, having enough computation capabilities, as well as humanmachine interface, storage, and communication resources, to deal with data processing and visualization tasks and also with storage/transfer of information (e.g., charts, reports, or alarms). For designers to be able to successfully develop complete electronic control systems, they need to be aware

of many different subjects dealing with physical processes, control theory, and electronics engineering, just to mention the technological side of the problem, only. In order for these challenges to be efciently addressed within the educational process, several requirements have to be taken into account. 1) Cooperative efforts are needed at two levels. On the one hand, instructors from different elds must cooperate in the development of (at least some) course materials and educational tools [26]. On the other hand, cooperation among students to solve practical problems must be promoted, including comparative peer analysis [27], highlighting the importance of (and the current need for) teamwork. It has also been proposed that students actively collaborate among them in various phases of the examination process, by designing exam questions, answering questions designed by their peers, and grading answers to the questions they authored [28]. 2) A change of educational paradigm is necessary, from the situation where the focus is on how well teachers teach (mainly through lectures), to a student-centric approach, where instructors act mainly as facilitators: Once provided with suitable tools, students are responsible to make the necessary efforts to acquire the target abilities and competencies (a somewhat diffuse term demanding clear conceptualization [29]). As a consequence, motivating the students becomes one of the fundamental tasks of educators [30]. In particular, the materials for courses to be taught during the initial years of the IE-related degrees have to be developed as to make basic science and engineering concepts interesting for students [31], [32], trying to link them to practical problems more directly related with the eld of study actually chosen by students [33], [34]. It is also necessary to strengthen the interest of high school students in engineering subjects [35]. Learning objects (modular didactic units, designed following specic learning objectives [36]) are basic elements of this new paradigm. Particularly in the case of lifelong learning, they allow students to adapt the learning pace to the time they can devote to study. The availability of learning object repositories [37] allows students to search for educational contents tting their specic interests. In this context, project- and problem-based learning methods have also been proven to be effective in increasing the interest of students in subjects, like power electronics [38], which they usually considered particularly difcult. In these approaches, projects or problems are proposed in such a way that students need to get acquainted with some important concepts before solving them. Problem formulation should be motivating enough as for students to be really interested in learning the required concepts on their own. 3) The way in which students, and the education process itself [39], are evaluated needs to be adapted, not only to reect this change of paradigm but also to take into account that, in an increasing number of situations, students

RODRIGUEZ-ANDINA et al.: CURRENT TRENDS IN INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS EDUCATION

3247

will not attend lectures, labs, or even tests (rising issues about authentication and plagiarism [40]) in person. 4) It is very important that educational tools can be adapted to the level of knowledge of students so that the same type of tools can be used through the whole educational process. In this way, students do not need to spend a signicant part of their time focusing on how to use new educational tools, but on effectively learning the important concepts instead. For instance, the combination of recongurable hardware and virtual instruments can provide signicant advantages in this regard [41]. This has to be balanced with the need for engineering students to become acquainted with the equipment and techniques used in professional environments.

B. Opportunities At the same time that technological advancements pose signicant educational challenges, they also enable new more efcient methodologies and tools to be developed. In addition to this direct positive impact of technology on education, there are also indirect opportunities for advancement coming from social changes caused by globalization. Many advantageous features provided by current educational platforms are enabled by recent technological developments. 1) The ubiquitous availability of technology allows a more exible access to educational content [42], contributing to improve the efciency of the learning process. Adaptive learning environments can be developed, where both students and teachers can perform individual or collaborative activities in different contexts, which can be dynamically managed [43]. The concept of m-learning (mobile learning) arises as a new stage in the development of distance learning and e-learning [44], with the added exibility provided by the possibility to access educational resources from mobile devices. The trend toward social learning environments (in analogy with social networks), which should help learners to nd the right content and connect with the right people (where what right means depends on the context, the learner, and his/her purpose), is discussed in [45]. 2) Widespread access to high-speed Internet connections boosted the development of remote laboratories. In IErelated areas (such as control engineering, mechatronics, power electronics, electrical machines and drives, or robotics), the cost associated to educational laboratories is usually high, both in terms of setup and of maintenance. In this context, one of the major advantages of remote laboratories is that they allow resources (and costs) to be shared among different institutions through off-site experimentation. Another evident advantage of remote labs (in any area) is that they can provide 24/7 access to experimentation to regular students or lifelong learners. Sharing of resources implies the need for resource management, in order for exclusive access to only one active user at a time to be granted. In many cases, this is solved by using booking systems, in conjunction with

user authentication and control access techniques [25]. Recently, a simpler approach has been proposed, which can be used for carrying-out experiments that, once launched, do not require user interaction until the results are obtained. The idea is to set up in real time a queue of requested experiments, whose results are asynchronously sent to the students once available [46]. This approach is particularly suitable for short-time experiments, for instance, electrical measurements in dc-to-dc converters, because students, in fact, hardly realize any delay in getting the results, even when several users are simultaneously active. 3) Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation techniques can be advantageously applied in project-based learning. In this way, students can design and test controllers for complex systems, without the need for accessing the actual plant, which simplies the educational process and eliminates safety concerns. For instance, platforms exist that allow a controller, physically implemented in an FPGA, to be tested in conjunction with a Matlab/Simulink model of the plant, running on a PC. There are also actuatorload emulator-based HIL simulators, as in [47] and [48], capable of providing real-time simulations for any given mechatronics conguration without the need for the physical system in the lab. 4) Using physics-based simulation and data-driven methods for generating realistic animations in computer graphics can be a very suitable approach to generate learning content [49]. Such systems not only provide an entertaining educational environment for the programming, modeling, and sensing aspects of IE but also introduce the students to the main concept of emerging cyberphysical systems technologies. Globalization has changed advanced societies in many senses. From an educational point of view, the two main implications of these changes are the following. 1) Cooperation among nations (not only in educational subjects) is increasingly perceived as a fundamental need in many areas. Programs like Erasmus, Erasmus Mundus, or ISEP provide an excellent framework for IE students to work on M.Sc. projects or Ph.D. thesis in foreign universities. Joint degrees are being developed among universities from different countries and continents. To highlight only a few initiatives, within the European project PEMCWebLab, a network of remote laboratories distributed across Europe has been developed [50], a multinational project aimed at better understanding the sociotechnical infrastructure required to support cross-national teaching and learning models is presented in [51], the issues related to the expansion of Georgia Tech campus worldwide are reported in [52], and a multilingual remote laboratory platform allowing students from different countries to gain access to measurement on real instrumentation is described in [53]. 2) Education is increasingly perceived as the key aspect for the integration of groups of people at risk of social exclusion: disabled people [54][56], unemployed [57], people in underdeveloped regions or countries [58], etc.

3248

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2010

III. L EARNING M ETHODOLOGIES AND T OOLS A. Advent of New Learning Methodologies Concepts of learning and teaching appear sometimes mixed, the common use being mostly based on who is at the center of the process: the teacher or the student. In the same direction, it is possible to distinguish between e-learning and e-teaching whenever information and computer technologies are used [59]. Considering the excellent work of edutainment (EDUcation plus enterTAINMENT), available through the short lm Teaching teaching and understanding understanding [60], according to [61], during the last quarter of the 20th century, several paradigm shifts occurred within the learning processes. Roughly, before the 80s, the emphasis was on What students are? (leading to answers classifying the students into good students or bad students). Due to the increasing number of bad students in comparison with the number of good students, the paradigm was changed, and the emphasis became on What teachers do? (to handle so many bad students in the university). Considering this attitude, the teacher becomes partly an entertainer, in order to grab students attention. Unfortunately, being a good entertainer does not assure at all that the students will acquire the expected learning outcomes. In this sense, a new paradigm appears, emphasizing What students do? and the student-centric teaching approach. This paradigm shift is in line with lifelong learning as well. On the other hand, continuing to have as reference the works from John Biggs [61], the three levels of thinking about teaching were identied. Level-one teachers are associated with good studentbad student dichotomy, present when using the what students are? attitude; this is also known as the blame the students approach to teaching. Similarly, considering the what teachers do? question, one will nd the good teacherbad teacher dichotomy, also known as the blame the teachers approach. A level-two teacher can emphasize the entertainer aspect of teaching at different levels, but in the end, this usually results in passive students. To get students actively involved in the learning process, it is necessary to emphasize the what students do? question. This is related with the levelthree teacher, who is more concerned with the learning outcome of the teaching process, through systematic observation of what the student does before, during, and after teaching. Complementing the referred shifts in terms of the learning methodology paradigms, a similar shift arises in terms of the kinds of tools and techniques that are available to support those new learning methodologies. As a matter of fact, as pointed out earlier in [62], it seems that the development of models of learning has historically coincided with new technological developments. In this sense, availability of computer-based learning environments has been supporting methodology paradigm shift and changing the traditional roles for teachers and for students. Instead of being sole orators, teachers need to focus on students guidance of their learning and become organizers of the learning activities. Instead of focusing their activity on grading students, teachers need to prepare and to be prepared for student-based learning, allowing interaction and exible learning [63].

B. Role of Project- and Problem-Based Learning Being good representatives of new emergent pedagogic attitudes that have been increasingly used in engineering education, it is important to mention project-based learning [64] and problem-based learning [65]. These methodologies also support collaborative work, as in [66], contributing to put the student in the center of its own learning process. Within IE education, as well as in engineering education in general, the role of project- and problem-based learning could be particularly important, as these methods contribute to emphasize the usage of a set of theories to a specic application to be solved, which is the main motivation for engineering work.

C. Role of LMS and CMS Computer-based learning environments group several types of solutions. Among them, learning management systems (LMS) and content management systems (CMS) have been widely used to support new learning methodologies and pedagogic experiments. LMS and CMS integrate a set of tools allowing several types of interaction: one-to-one communication, one-to-many communication, many-to-one communication, and many-tomany communication. Any of these communication patterns would impose a decrease in face-to-face activities, which longterm consequences are still not completely clear. Computer-mediated learning tools, through LMS and CMS platforms, become a support for interaction, where information and computer technologies mediate communication between individuals or groups of individuals, allowing computer-supported cooperative/collaborative work [67]. According to [68], Cooperative work is accomplished by the division of labor among participants, as an activity where each person is responsible for a portion of the problem solving . . ., and collaboration focus on mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated effort to solve the problem together. Differentiation between cooperation and collaboration is on the role and type of participation of individuals in the activity. New ways of interacting are available within LMS and CMS. One example is the possibility to create forums for discussion around a specic subject. Other examples are e-mails, chats, blogs, and wikis. On the other hand, several types of devices for user interfaces are available, including xed, mobile, and ubiquitous. These lead to a decentralized and asynchronous interaction among all participants in the learning process (teachers and learners). Even with current unknown impact within regular engineering courses delivered by academia, the impact within lifelong learning activities looks very promising. Expandability is also a key feature of current LMS and CMS, normally supported by metadata characterization and standards for interoperability, as SCORMShareable Content Object Reference Model, and IEEE-1484 Learning Objects Metadata (IEEE LOM). Use of such kind of standards allows different types of resources and materials to be integrated and different types of media to be supported, including CD-ROMs, DVDs, and online delivery using Web servers and browsers.

RODRIGUEZ-ANDINA et al.: CURRENT TRENDS IN INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS EDUCATION

3249

One key aspect that is expected to be emphasized in LMS and CMS platforms is the adaptability to the learner prole and needs. This is particularly sensitive when considering lifelong education, where background of learners could be diverse and the LMS should provide some built-in (and invisible) guidance to assure a fast and secure path to achieve the new learning goals, considering initial skills of the learner. This goal is assured through the integration of a tutorial system that will guide the learner along the process as a consequence of previous achievements [69]. D. Role of Experimentation Unsurprisingly, no controversy arises if considering that engineering education strongly relies on experimentation. Hands-on laboratories are the traditional form to support experimentation, requiring, most of the time, step-by-step guidance by the teacher, in order to avoid damage to the learner as well as malfunctions or damage to the equipment involved. However, hands-on labs are also associated to high costs. This is one reason to consider some alternatives to hands-on labs, as simulation and remote labs. Each type of lab has rm advocates and detractors, as referred to in a recent literature survey [70], which also provides comprehensive discussions on the pros and cons of the different types of labs. A balanced education curriculum in engineering needs to offer a reasonable blend of physical experiments and simulations to provide students with a good understanding of the physical laws and hands-on familiarity with analysis/design procedures. The combined use of e-learning environments integrating remote, virtual (simulation-based), and hybrid laboratories is encountered nowadays in a notable variety of multidisciplinary applications, namely, within IE-related areas. An example from the basic electronics and digital systems, illustrating the formal dichotomy between physical experimentation and simulation, can be found in [71]. Other relevant examples illustrating benets of hybrid laboratories can be found in [72] for a virtual networking laboratory and in [73] for a control laboratory. Considering different constraints and goals, physical experimentation and simulation can both contribute for a balanced IE engineering education curriculum and can both be integrated within the same computer-based environment, the e-learning management system. In the following sections, special attention is devoted to the potential contributions of remote labs and simulation-based environments. E. Role of Remote Labs Remote laboratories can provide remote access to experiments (either physical or simulation) and can allow learners to have access to experiments without time and location restrictions, providing the necessary guidance and assuring a safe and secure operation for both the equipment and staff in charge. Recent state-of-the-art papers [19], [74] provide an updated discussion associated with remote labs. Several recent books also provide a systematic view to the area emphasizing the remote access to experimentation [75][77].

Complementary to the usage of the remote labs, it is also important to address their development and technologies used for their implementation, as the lack of proper software design degrades their quality, usefulness, and impact within the learning processes. An updated overview of available technologies supporting client/server architectures is available in [78]. This is an area where evolution on Web technologies will directly benet effectiveness and robustness of remote laboratories. Among them, it is worth to mention the potential impact from developments associated with video conferencing for small groups allowing replication of physical laboratory constraints even if the learners are at different locations having access to the same remote laboratory. F. Role of Simulation Virtual laboratories, based on simulators, can be accessed locally or remotely, isolated or integrated in e-learning management systems. Simulators are often seen as practical and affordable alternatives to physical experimentation, addressing the same kind of problems and concerns related to physical experimentation. Being dependent on models, the accuracy of the result from the simulator is associated with the accuracy of the model. This is a major concern when dealing with virtual laboratories. However, models with adequate level of accuracy are normally available to almost all systems and devices of interest within IE engineering education. One example of a very successful case is described in [79], in the area of digital systems, where simulators are used to support virtual experimentation at introductory digital systems, as well as introductory microprocessor systems courses. Another successful example is presented in [80], where the integration of virtual labs (as well as remote labs) with e-learning management systems is achieved. Even for theories with some complexity, simulators can ll the gap between practice and theory. Using simple applications with animations of the system or integration of these ingredients to develop educational games is a common practice with successful results [81]. In some areas, integration of 2-D and 3-D modeler applications provides additional insights and a very effective support for the learner to successfully ll the gap between the models and reality. This is the case for robotics and manufacturing systems, where full integration of CAD systems can visualize robot arm animation as in [82], as well as advance problems, allowing detection of collisions and other mechanical problems. G. Success Cases This section is intended to refer to some reference sites delivering e-courses for engineering. As the number of good references is tremendously large, only a very few examples will be provided, having the focus on sites that emphasize the role of experimentation, either physical hands-on or simulated lab environments using remote or local access, in IE-related areas. The Virtual Instrument Systems in Reality (VISIR) initiative is an open-source software initiative for distributed online laboratories [83], [84] at Blekinge Institute of Technology,

3250

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2010

Sweden, providing remote access to online lab workbenches containing an experiment connected to specic lab instruments like oscilloscopes, multimeters, power supplies, and waveform generators. A relay switching matrix is remotely controlled to properly set up the experiments. The components are displayed on the client Web browser close to a virtual breadboard where the student draws the desired circuit. VISIR recommends usage of Interchangeable Virtual Instrument, a de facto standard supported by the IVI Foundation [85], and hardware platforms such as PXI (PCI eXtensions for Instrumentation) [86] and LXI (LAN eXtensions for Instrumentation) [87]. The IVI standards dene open driver architectures, a set of instrument classes, and shared software components. Presentation of a second example of a remote laboratory fully integrated with an e-learning management system (Moodle), using booking system to avoid collisions when accessing the remote lab and with several simulators, can be found in [88]. The learner may remotely exercise the experiment while getting visual feedback through a Web cam, as well as numerical and graphical output information on the results of the experiment (which can also be received by e-mail). IV. C ONCLUSION This paper has aimed to initiate a discussion for novel approaches and methodologies in IE education due to the ubiquitous use of the related technologies in almost all industrial practices, as well as its signicance for emerging technologies such as mechatronics or cyberphysical systems. The discussion draws attention to the interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary nature of the eld which is the main reason underlying the need for a modied engineering education approach that addresses the requirement in a concurrent manner, as required by the systems in consideration, whether robotics, automotive, or factory automation ones. The common approach taken to address this need currently is via individual courselab combinations that educate the students on individual IE components, which rarely exposes them to the involved theory and practice in a concurrent manner. This paper has discussed possible methodologies to be adapted by teachers in the preparation of the IE courses as well as those to be implemented in class (on-site or remotely) for effective learning in IE. The multidisciplinary nature of the eld calls for ample teamwork both from teachers and students perspective more than any other engineering eld has ever needed. The constant changes and emerging technologies, which build on IE, also call for lifelong learning, bringing along the need for remotely accessible virtual and physical experimentation platforms as well as Web-based courses and forums among professionals for their development in the face of temporal and spatial limitations of professional life. This paper has provided a concise discussion of recent literature on IE applications, as well as interesting and effective educational efforts in support of IE. With the discussion of this individual and yet effective activities, authors aim to initiate ideas for a modied, well-structured, and coordinated engineering education methodology that can address the needs of IE education adequately and contribute to the development of a

strong IE engineering workforce equipped with all the tools required to take IE-related technologies far and beyond where they already are. R EFERENCES
[1] T. Li and Y. Fujimoto, Control system with high speed and realtime communication links, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 15481557, Apr. 2008. [2] E. Monmasson and M. N. Cirstea, FPGA design methodology for industrial control systemsA review, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 18241842, Aug. 2007. [3] J. J. Rodriguez-Andina, M. J. Moure, and M. D. Valdes, Features, design tools, and application domains of FPGAs, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 18101823, Aug. 2007. [4] J. H. Lee, H. S. Bae, and B. H. Cho, Resistive control for a photovoltaic battery charging system using a microcontroller, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 27672775, Jul. 2008. [5] I. Baturone, F. J. Moreno-Velo, V. Blanco, and J. Ferruz, Design of embedded DSP-based fuzzy controllers for autonomous mobile robots, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 928936, Feb. 2008. [6] M. Jager, S. Humbert, and F. A. Hamprecht, Sputter tracking for the automatic monitoring of industrial laser-welding processes, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 21772184, May 2008. [7] L. Costas, J. Farina, and J. J. Rodriguez-Andina, A congurable framework for the education of digital electronic control systems, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 712. [8] M. Liserre, T. Sauter, and J. Y. Hung, Future energy systems: Integrating renewable energy sources into the smart power grid through industrial electronics, IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1837, Mar. 2010. [9] J. M. Guerrero, F. Blaabjerg, T. Zhelev, K. Hemmes, E. Monmasson, S. Jemei, M. P. Comech, R. Granadino, and J. I. Frau, Distributed generation: Toward a new energy paradigm, IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 5264, Mar. 2010. [10] J. M. Guerrero, J. C. Vasquez, J. Matas, M. Castilla, and L. G. de Vicuna, Control strategy for exible microgrid based on parallel line-interactive UPS systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 726736, Mar. 2009. [11] F. Baalbergen, P. Bauer, and J. A. Ferreira, Energy storage and power management for typical 4Q-load, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 14851498, May 2009. [12] S. M. Lukic, J. Cao, R. C. Bansal, F. Rodriguez, and A. Emadi, Energy storage systems for automotive applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 22582267, Jun. 2008. [13] L. G. Franquelo, J. Rodriguez, J. I. Leon, S. Kouro, R. Portillo, and M. A. M. Prats, The age of multilevel converters arrives, IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 2839, Jun. 2008. [14] J. D. Barros and J. F. Silva, Optimal predictive control of three-phase NPC multilevel converter for power quality applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 36703681, Oct. 2008. [15] A. Emadi, Y. J. Lee, and K. Rajashekara, Power electronics and motor drives in electric, hybrid electric, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 22372245, Jun. 2008. [16] Z. Amjadi and S. S. Williamson, Power-electronics-based solutions for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle energy storage and management systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 608616, Feb. 2010. [17] J. Kay, Lifelong learner modeling for lifelong personalized pervasive learning, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 215228, Oct.Dec. 2008. [18] J. L. De Coi, P. Karger, A. W. Koesling, and D. Olmedilla, Control your elearning environment: Exploiting policies in an open infrastructure for lifelong learning, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 88102, Jan.Mar. 2008. [19] L. Gomes and S. Bogosyan, Current trends in remote laboratories, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 47444756, Dec. 2009. [20] A. Moini and A. M. Madni, Leveraging biometrics for user authentication in online learning: A systems perspective, IEEE Syst. J., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 469476, Dec. 2009. [21] N. H. M. Alwi and I.-S. Fan, Information security management in e-learning, in Proc. ICITST , 2009, pp. 16. [22] S. L. Firebaugh and J. A. Piepmeier, The RoboCup nanogram league: An opportunity for problem-based undergraduate education in microsystems, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 394399, Aug. 2008.

RODRIGUEZ-ANDINA et al.: CURRENT TRENDS IN INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS EDUCATION

3251

[23] M. Jou, C.-P. Chuang, D.-W. Wu, and S.-C. Yang, Learning robotics in interactive web-based environments by PBL, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Adv. Robot. Social Impacts, 2008, pp. 16. [24] D. Braun, Teaching sustainability analysis in electrical engineering lab courses, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 243247, May 2010. [25] L. Costas-Perez, D. Lago, J. Farina, and J. J. Rodriguez-Andina, Optimization of an industrial sensor and data acquisition laboratory through time sharing and remote access, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 23972404, Jun. 2008. [26] R. Rabb, J. Rogers, and D. Chang, Course development in interdisciplinary controls and mechatronics, in Proc. 38th Annu. Frontiers Educ. Conf., FIE, 2008, pp. T3F-11T3F-15. [27] C. Tan and Y.-Y. Chan, Knowledge community: A knowledge-building system for global collaborative project learning, Proc. IEEE, vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 10491061, Jun. 2008. [28] J. Shen, S. R. Hiltz, and M. Bieber, Learning strategies in online collaborative examinations, IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 6378, Mar. 2008. [29] M. Edwards, L. M. Sanchez-Ruiz, and C. Sanchez-Diaz, Achieving competence-based curriculum in engineering education in Spain, Proc. IEEE, vol. 97, no. 10, pp. 17271736, Oct. 2009. [30] F. P. Lopes, P. S. Oliveira, L. P. Reis, and R. E. Araujo, An electric wheelchair as a tool for motivating students in power electronics, in Proc. Int. SPEEDAM , 2008, pp. 481485. [31] E. Montero and M. J. Gonzalez, Student engagement in a structured problem-based approach to learning: A rst-year electronic engineering study module on heat transfer, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 214 221, May 2009. [32] K. Muoz, J. Noguez, P. McKevitt, L. Neri, V. Robledo-Rella, and T. Lunney, Adding features of educational games for teaching physics, in Proc. 39th Annu. Frontiers Educ. Conf., FIE, 2009, pp. 16. [33] B. Parhami, Puzzling problems in computer engineering, Computer, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 2629, Mar. 2009. [34] A. Behrens, L. Atorf, R. Schwann, B. Neumann, R. Schnitzler, J. Balle, T. Herold, A. Telle, T. G. Noll, K. Hameyer, and T. Aach, MATLAB meets LEGO mindstormsA freshman introduction course into practical engineering, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 306317, May 2010. [35] R. W. Y. Habash and C. Suurtamm, Engaging high school and engineering students: A multifaceted outreach program based on a mechatronics platform, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 136143, Feb. 2010. [36] A. Balestrino, A. Caiti, and E. Crisostomi, From remote experiments to web-based learning objects: An advanced telelaboratory for robotics and control systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 4817 4825, Dec. 2009. [37] S. Ternier, K. Verbert, G. Parra, B. Vandeputte, J. Klerkx, E. Duval, V. Ordoez, and X. Ochoa, The Ariadne infrastructure for managing and storing metadata, IEEE Internet Comput., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1825, Jul./Aug. 2009. [38] L. S. Patil, K. D. Patil, and A. G. Thosar, The role of computer modeling and simulation in power electronics education, in Proc. 2nd ICETET , 2009, pp. 416419. [39] J. Park, D. Parsons, and H. Ryu, To ow and not to freeze: Applying ow experience to mobile learning, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 5667, Jan.Mar. 2010. [40] B. Hayes and J. V. Ringwood, Student authentication for oral assessment in distance learning programs, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 165175, Jul.Sep. 2008. [41] J. Faria, L. Costas, C. Quintns, and J. J. Rodrguez-Andina, Application of a recongurable platform for the education of electronic control loops, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 2007, pp. 29722977. [42] S.-H. Ye and Y.-C. Hung, The study of self-seamless teaching strategy for ubiquitous learning environments, in Proc. 6th IEEE Int. Conf. WMUTE, 2010, pp. 182186. [43] E. Martin and R. M. Carro, Supporting the development of mobile adaptive learning environments: A case study, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 2336, Jan.Mar. 2009. [44] T. Georgiev, E. Georgieva, and A. Smrikarov, m-learningA new stage of e-learning, in Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Comput. Syst. Technol., 2004, pp. IV.28-1IV.28-5. [45] J. Vassileva, Toward social learning environments, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 199214, Oct.Dec. 2008. [46] A. Nogueiras-Melendez, A. Lago-Ferreiro, A. Montero, A. Otero, L. Eguizabal, and C. Martinez, A course on dc-to-dc converters towards the ECTS using the B-learning methodology, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 1318.

[47] H. Temeltas, S. Bogosyan, and M. Gokasan, Hardware-in-the-loop robot simulators for on-site and remote education in robotics, Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 815828, Oct. 2006. [48] T. Singaraju, A. Turan, M. Gokasan, and S. Bogosyan, Hardware-in-theloop simulation of PUMA 560 via Internet, in Proc. 32nd IEEE IECON , Nov. 2006, pp. 54265432. [49] N. Kwatra, C. Wojtan, M. Carlson, I. Essa, P. J. Mucha, and G. Turk, Fluid simulation with articulated bodies, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graphics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 7080, Jan./Feb. 2010. [50] T. M. Wolbank, P. Bauer, P. Macheiner, and M. Vogelsberger, Distance laboratory for teaching industrial electronicsII, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 4550. [51] D. L. Cogburn, N. Levinson, A. U. Ramnarine-Rieks, and F. K. E. Vasquez, A decade of globally distributed collaborative learning: Lessons learned from cross-national virtual teams, in Proc. 43rd Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., 2010, pp. 111. [52] G. AlRegib, M. H. Hayes, E. Moore, and D. B. Williams, Technology and tools to enhance distributed engineering education, Proc. IEEE, vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 951969, Jun. 2008. [53] D. Cmuk, M. Borsic, T. Mutapcic, and S. Rapuano, A novel approach to remote teaching: Multilanguage magnetic measurement experiment, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 724730, Apr. 2008. [54] N. Adamo-Villani and R. Wilbur, Two novel technologies for accessible math and science education, IEEE Multimedia, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 3846, Oct.Dec. 2008. [55] W. Lan, X. Jiacheng, and Q. Xueli, Exploration of Moodle-based collaborative learning for the deaf, in Proc. IFCSTA, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 145147. [56] T. Pietrzak, A. Crossan, S. A. Brewster, B. Martin, and I. Pecci, Creating usable pin array tactons for nonvisual information, IEEE Trans. Haptics, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 6172, Apr.Jun. 2009. [57] A. Rojko, D. Hercog, and K. Jezernik, Realization and experience of professional mechatronics e-training, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 151156. [58] U. P. T. Maldonado, G. F. Khan, J. Moon, and J. J. Rho, E-learning motivation, students acceptance/use of educational portal in developing countries: A case study of Peru, in Proc. 4th ICCIT , 2009, pp. 14311441. [59] M. Y. Ibrahim and C. Brack, E-teaching and e-learning in engineering course design, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 145150. [60] C. Brabrand, Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding. [Online]. Available: http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-lm/ [61] J. Biggs and C. Tang, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 3rd ed. Maidenhead, U.K.: Open Univ. Press, 2007. [62] W. Winn, A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality, Univ. Washington, Seattle, WA, Rep. TR-93-9. [Online]. Available: http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publications/r-93-9/ [63] C. Arden-Close, Conict of learning styles: University science lectures in the sultanate of Oman, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 323 332, Dec. 1999. [64] H. Hassan, C. Domnguez, J.-M. Martnez, A. Perles, J. Albaladejo, and J.-V. Capella, Integrated multicourse projectbased learning in electronic engineering, Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 581591, Mar. 2008. [65] A. Kolmos, X.-Y. Du, M. Dahms, and P. Qvist, Staff development for change to problem based learning, Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 772782, Jul. 2008. [66] M. Helander and M. Emami, Engineering eLaboratories: Integration of remote access and eCollaboration, Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 466479, 2008. [67] D. Mller and H. Erbe, Collaborative remote laboratories in engineering education: Challenges and visions, in Advances on Remote Laboratories and e-Learning Experiences, L. Gomes and J. Garca-Zuba, Eds. Bilbao, Spain: Univ. Deusto, 2007. [68] J. Roschelle and S. D. Teasley, The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving, in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, C. E. OMalley, Ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1995, pp. 6997. [69] F. M. Schaf and C. E. Pereira, Integrating mixed-reality remote experiments into virtual learning environments using interchangeable components, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 47764783, Dec. 2009. [70] J. Ma and J. V. Nickerson, Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review, ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 124, Sep. 7, 2006. [71] G. Donzellini and D. Ponta, The electronics laboratory: Traditional, simulated or remote? in Advances on Remote Laboratories and e-Learning

3252

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2010

[72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79] [80]

[81] [82]

[83] [84]

[85] [86] [87] [88]

Experiences, L. Gomes and J. Garc-Zub, Eds. Bilbao, Spain: Univ. Deusto, 2007. J. Prieto-Blazquez, J. Arnedo-Moreno, and J. Herrera-Joancomarti, An integrated structure for a virtual networking laboratory, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 23342342, Jun. 2008. F. Coito, P. Almeida, and L. B. Palma, SMCRVIA Labview/Matlab based tool for remote monitoring and control, in Proc. 10th IEEE Int. Conf. Emerg. Techno. Factory Automat., 2005, pp. 10391044. C. Gravier, J. Fayolle, B. Bayard, M. Ates, and J. Lardon, State of the art about remote laboratories paradigmsFoundations of ongoing mutations, Int. J. Online Eng., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1925, Feb. 2008. L. Gomes and J. Garca-Zuba, Eds., Advances on Remote Laboratories and e-Learning Experiences. Bilbao, Spain: Univ. Deusto, 2007. S. G. Tzafestas, Ed., Web-Based Control and Robotics Education, vol. 38. New York: Springer Verlag, 2009, ser. International Series on Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering. T. A. Fjeldly and M. S. Shur, Lab on the WebRunning Real Electronics Experiments via the Internet. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003. J. Garcia-Zubia, P. Orduna, D. Lopez-de-Ipina, and G. R. Alves, Addressing software impact in the design of remote laboratories, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 47574767, Dec. 2009. G. Donzellini and D. Ponta, A simulation environment for e-learning in digital design, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 30783085, Dec. 2007. G. Scutaru, E. Cocorada, L. Gomes, A.-M. Scapolla, M. Mustica, M. Pavalache, D. Kristaly, and S. Cocorada, Enhanced individualized learning environments impact on the learning process, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. E-Learn. Ind. Electron., 2009, pp. 5156. U. Munz, P. Schumm, A. Wiesebrock, and F. Allgower, Motivation and learning progress through educational games, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 31413144, Dec. 2007. R. Marin, G. Leon, R. Wirz, J. Sales, J. M. Claver, P. J. Sanz, and J. Fernndez, Remote programming of network robots within the UJI industrial robotics telelaboratory: FPGA vision and SNRP network protocol, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 48064816, Dec. 2009. I. Gustavsson, J. Zackrisson, H. kesson, L. Hkansson, I. Claesson, and T. Lag, Remote operation and control of traditional laboratory equipment, Int. J. Online Eng., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 18, Feb. 2006. I. Gustavsson, J. Zackrisson, and L. Hkansson, A new concept for distributed laboratories based on open source technologies, in Advances on Remote Laboratories and e-Learning Experiences, L. Gomes and J. Garca-Zuba, Eds. Bilbao, Spain: Univ. Deusto, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.ivifoundation.org/ [Online]. Available: http://www.pxisa.org/ [Online]. Available: http://www.lxistandard.org/home M. T. Restivo, J. Mendes, A. M. Lopes, C. M. Silva, and F. Chouzal, A remote laboratory in engineering measurement, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 48364843, Dec. 2009.

Lus Gomes (M96SM06) received the Electrotech. Eng. degree from the Universidade Tcnica de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal, in 1981 and the Ph.D. degree in digital systems from the Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal, in 1997. From 1984 to 1987, he was with EID, a Portuguese medium enterprise, in the area of electronic system design, in the R&D engineering department. He is currently a Professor with the Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, and a Researcher with UNINOVA, Caparica. He is the author of more than 100 papers published in journals, books, and conference proceedings. He was a Coeditor of the books Hardware Design and Petri Nets (Kluwer, Boston, MA, 2000), Advances on remote laboratories and e-learning experiences (University of Deusto, 2007), and Behavioral Modeling for Embedded Systems and Technologies: Applications for Design and Implementation (IGI Global, 2009). His main research interests include the usage of formal methods, like Petri nets and other concurrence models, applied to recongurable and embedded systems codesign. Dr. Gomes has been serving in different roles for the organization of conferences, namely, as General Cochair for the 2nd and 3rd IEEE International Conference on E-Learning in Industrial Electronics (ICELIE2008 and ICELIE2009) and the 2nd and 3rd International Symposium on Industrial Embedded Systems (SIES2007 and SIES2008), among other events.

Juan J. Rodriguez-Andina (M00SM04) received the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from the Polytechnic University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain, in 1990 and the Ph.D. degree (with honors) in electrical engineering from the University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain, in 1996. He is currently an Associate Professor with the Department of Electronic Technology, University of Vigo. He has authored over 100 journal and conference papers and is the holder of several Spanish, European, and U.S. patents. His research interests include implementation of complex processing algorithms in eld-programmable gate arrays and concurrent testing of complex systems, from digital to industrial electronics. Dr. Rodriguez-Andina is currently a member of the Administrative Committee (AdCom) of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (IES) and the Chair of the IES Technical Committee on Education in Engineering and Industrial Technologies. He currently serves as an Associate Editor for the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUSTRIAL E LECTRONICS and the IEEE I NDUSTRIAL E LECTRONICS M AGAZINE and has been serving IEEE conferences in different positions, including General Chair for the 2007 IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE2007) and for the 3rd and 4th IEEE International Conference on E-Learning in Industrial Electronics (ICELIE2009 and ICELIE2010).

Seta Bogosyan (M95SM06) received the B.Sc., M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and control engineering from Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey, in 1981, 1983, and 1991, respectively. She conducted the Ph.D. degree studies at the Center for Robotics, University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 1987 and 1991, she was a Researcher and Lecturer with the Center for Robotics, University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 1992 and 2003, she was an Associate Professor with Istanbul Technical University. She is currently a Professor with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alaska, Fairbanks. She has served as the Principal Investigator in several National Science Foundation, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and California Energy Commission grants. She has authored over 90 journal and conference publications and a book on modeling and control of induction motors. Her research interests are nonlinear control and estimation techniques for electromechanical systems with applications in direct-drive systems, sensorless control of induction motors, high-efciency control of hybrid electrical vehicles, and cyberphysical systems, such as bilateral robotics and intelligent transportation systems. Dr. Bogosyan is a member of the Industrial Electronics Society (IES) Technical Committee on Education in Engineering and Industrial Technologies and Technical Committee on Motion Control and serving as General Cochair of the International Conference on Mechatronics (ICM 2011). She is currently an Associate Editor of the International Journal of Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing, IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUSTRIAL E LECTRONICS, and IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine.