Conference Session

Mentoring and Development of New Faculty

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Taber, National Academy of Engineering; Elizabeth Cady, National Academy of Engineering; Norman Fortenberry, National Academy of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

AC 2009-257: DEVELOPING METRICS TO EVALUATE INSTRUCTIONALSCHOLARSHIP IN ENGINEERINGRichard Taber, National Academy of EngineeringElizabeth Cady, National Academy of EngineeringNorman Fortenberry, National Academy of Engineering Page 14.456.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Developing Metrics to Evaluate Instructional Scholarship in EngineeringAbstractIf valid and reliable means to assess instructional scholarship are identified, and they areaccepted by the engineering community, then greater attention would be devoted to scholarlyteaching by engineering faculty and departments. With this goal in mind, an ad hoc

Conference Session

Mentoring and Development of New Faculty

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Gumaer, Central Washington University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

AC 2009-978: DO'S AND DON'TS FOR RECRUITING ENGINEERING ORTECHNOLOGY FACULTYJohn Gumaer, Central Washington University John A. Gumaer is an associate professor of Electronics Engineering Technology at Central Washington University. He earned a MSEE from the University of Texas at Austin and a BSEE from the University of Texas at San Antonio. He is a registered professional engineer and has worked in commercial hardware and software development. He has participated in numerous faculty searches as either a committee member or a candidate. Page 14.497.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009

Conference Session

Getting Started: Objectives, Rubrics, Evaluations, and Assessment

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Zbigniew Prusak, Central Connecticut State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

Intelligences and Their ImplicationsMultiple IntelligencesThe theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI) was originally developed in 1983 by Howard Gardner.It suggests that the traditional IQ-based description of intelligence is not adequate to describehuman potential. Gardner proposes nowadays 8 different intelligences to account for a broaderrange of human potential in children and adults.Table 1. List of Multiple Intelligences versus areas of excellence of typical engineering and technical minds. Intelligence type Description Where technical minds excel primarily (1) and secondarily (2

Conference Session

Been There, Done That: Advice for NEEs

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew Gerhart, Lawrence Technological University; Philip Gerhart, University of Evansville

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

formal training and experience is not in education at all, but instead has spent yearslearning the technical side of engineering. With a mentor, the new engineering educator will notonly develop more quickly, but perhaps even more successfully than without a mentor. With thisin mind, some institutions have established a formal mentoring program and/or process, whereinmentors are trained and a mentor assignment process is established. (Jackson et al. performed astudy of 24 institutions with such programs,4 but discussion of their results is beyond the scopeof this paper.) Unfortunately, as is often the case, the new engineering educator is left on hisown to seek a mentor and establish a mentoring relationship. This paper will present advice for

Conference Session

Tricks of the Trade I

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Seamus Freyne, Manhattan College; Micah Hale, University of Arkansas; Stephan Durham, University of Colorado, Denver

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

the expense of other topics. Try to address the topics found on theFundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam. Add value to each class period.1 Be decisive,confident, and knowledgeable on the subject being taught.2Design assignments, projects, and exams to be both rigorous and fair.3 Gear the lectures to theassignments, and gear the assignments to the exams. Keep the audience in mind, and be mindfulof the scholastic background and maturity of the students in your course.2 Do not make thecourse easy in an attempt to please students, as a course without some difficulty is ultimately adisservice to the students and yourself.Problems can arise when there are multiple sections of the same course taught by differentfaculty members. In these situations

Conference Session

Getting Started: Objectives, Rubrics, Evaluations, and Assessment

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathy Schmidt, University of Texas, Austin; Mia Markey, University of Texas, Austin; Wonsoon Park, University of Texas, Austin

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

AC 2009-191: BEYOND ANECDOTES: HOW TO ASSESS WHAT GOES ON INYOUR CLASSESKathy Schmidt, University of Texas, Austin KATHY J. SCHMIDT is the Director of the Faculty Innovation Center for the Cockrell School of Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin. The FIC’s mission is to provide faculty with effective instructional tools and strategies. In this position, she promotes the School's commitment to finding ways to enrich teaching and learning. She works in all aspects of education including design and development, faculty training, learner support, and evaluation.Mia Markey, University of Texas, Austin MIA K. MARKEY is an Associate Professor in The University of Texas Department of

Conference Session

Mentoring and Development of New Faculty

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Donna Llewellyn, Georgia Institute of Technology; Marion Usselman, Georgia Institute of Technology; Richard Millman, Georgia Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

AC 2009-545: DESIGNING EFFECTIVE EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES FORGRANT PROPOSALSDonna Llewellyn, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Donna C. Llewellyn is the Director of the Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning (CETL)at Georgia Tech. Donna received her B.A. in Mathematics from Swarthmore College, her M.S. in Operations Research from Stanford University, and her Ph.D. in Operations Research from Cornell University. After working as a faculty member in the School of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Georgia Tech, she changed career paths to lead CETL where she works with faculty, instructors, and graduate students to help them teach effectively so that our students can

Conference Session

Tricks of the Trade II

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jerry Samples, University of Pittsburgh, Johnstown

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

AC 2009-1599: LEADERSHIP 106: THE VALUE OF TIMEJerry Samples, University of Pittsburgh, Johnstown DR. JERRY SAMPLES holds a BS Ch.E. from Clarkson College, MS and Ph.D. in ME from Oklahoma State University. Dr. Samples served at the United States Military Academy twelve years before assuming the position of Director of the Engineering Technology Division at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown in 1996. After a five year period as the Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs he returned to the Engineering Technology Division. He is a Fellow of the International Society for Teaching and Learning receiving that honor in 2007. In 2008, he received the American Society for

Conference Session

Been There, Done That: Advice for NEEs

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert Engelken, Arkansas State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

expediency in mind. They tend to be viewed less favorably by SEE with a vested interest in the status quo and their territories than by NEE in the building stage.7. Changing Student Mindsets, Habits, and Preparation: As is bemoaned among engineering faculty, particularly SEE, student mindsets, habits, and preparation for college (seem to) have evolved in recent years. One hears conflicting opinions of whether this is overall good or bad, but most opinions reflect a serious concern about how these changes really affect the bottom-line quality of engineering education and graduates. This topic could be the subject of a dedicated paper by itself, and typically evokes spirited discussions. A generation gap factor is