Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Molly Johnson; Cathie Scott; Cynthia Atman

Session 2655 Preparing Engineering Graduate Students to Teach: An Innovative Course Design and Evaluation Cathie Scott,* Molly Johnson,** Cynthia J. Atman* *University of Washington/**Agilent TechnologiesIntroductionIn spring 2000 we designed and delivered a three-credit course to prepare students for careers inteaching. The course was offered through the industrial engineering department and was open toall engineering graduate students. Fourteen students enrolled—seven men and seven women—representing the industrial, civil and environmental, electrical, bioengineering, and

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Mark Crozier

Session 3255 Industry Needs: Engineering Graduate Program Opportunities Mark L. Crozier University of St. ThomasAmerica has been the benchmark for technological innovation for over a century1. America’sexpertise with advancing a concept from initial thought to reality has been evident since thedawning of the Industrial Revolution, through designs and advancements in automatedmanufacturing technology, and the dawning of a computerized world culture. The mostsignificant recognizable catalyst facilitating the transition of a concept to physical reality is

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

John Bourne

Session 2793 An Architecture for Learning: Designing an Initial Curriculum for Olin College John R. Bourne, Ph.D Franklin W. Olin College of EngineeringIntroductionThis paper describes the initial process of curriculum design and the study ofimplementation methods at the new Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering inNeedham, MA. Commencing with a broad-gauged discovery process, curriculum designat Olin College sought, from the outset, to incorporate the best ideas in engineeringeducation pedagogy. We hope that our systematic investigation of innovative

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Eric Warmbier; James S. Fairweather; P. David Fisher

similar engineeringservice courses.” This question led us to benchmark other institutions. This benchmarkingprocess and its results are the focus of the remainder of this paper.II. BenchmarkingStrategic PlanningGeorge Keller 6 was the first to call for the use of strategic planning as a common practice incollege and university administration. Since that time, many authors and practitioners haveechoed his call for tying resource allocation more directly both to institutional and programmaticneeds, and to performance 7-11. Many state policy-makers now argue for the use of performancemeasures, in particular student learning outcomes and faculty teaching and research productivity,to judge the quality of academic programs 12.Initially academic

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Narayanan Komerath

/ competitions5. Research team membersII-1. Summer InternshipsEach summer, one or two of our own students ask to work a full 30 to 40 hours per week, takingat most one class. These positions require substantial funds, so we can accommodate only one ortwo. In addition, we get an average of 1 student every 2 years paid by some other source, whoworks with us through the summer. Very positive examples: Physics student from SpartanburgCollege, Summers ’92 and 93. Student from French university system, on practical trainingassignment. Typically, these arrangements work best when the student has family or othersupport for staying in the area during the summer. Difficulties arose in another case where astudent with relatives 90 miles away got discouraged by the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Vinay Dayal; Jerald Vogel; Rebecca Sidler Kellogg

areimportant to the careers of the practicing engineers. (add industry-centered approach) Results ofthe evaluation will be available during the spring of 2001 and presented subsequently.Course Module ScopeCourse modules developed within the pedagogical arena described above are generally subsets ofcomplete college courses in engineering design and various disciplinary areas normallyencountered in engineering design. As an example, one might consider breaking a 3 credit-hourfinite element analysis course into 4 course modules that combine to form the total course. Themotivation for a modular structure resides in the fact that students who enroll in off-campuscourses cannot always schedule sufficient contiguous uninterrupted time to allow completion of

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Francis W. Derby

students, responsibilities as graduate research faculty, and as an adviser to studentProceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Page 6.80.3Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education.organizations. Whereas the related activities may not bear direct relationship to classroominstruction, they contribute to the nurturing of students. It is advisable to briefly describe theseresponsibilities so as to provide some idea of the time spent in these activities. For example, ifthe faculty person is in charge of a research laboratory with several research assistants, adescription of

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Stephanie Eisenbarth; Siddhartha P. Duttagupta; Robert Walters; Paul Dawson; Joseph Guarino; George Murgel; Christopher Pentico

are continuously updated.The goal was to develop professionally-oriented, practical-experience based programs, whichcan readily incorporate cutting edge research and development into the curricula, and areconveniently accessible to the community. The key elements of the on-going program buildingeffort which are described below include development of infrastructure, laboratories, distancelearning courses, and a graduate research program, and innovative ways to recruit and retainfaculty.i) Partnerships for infrastructure development:In preparing for graduate programs while the undergraduate programs were only three years oldand growing rapidly, the College of Engineering anticipated a severe shortage of space foroffices, labs, and classrooms

Conference Session

Are We Losing Our Minds (2470)

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Stephanie Sanford; Kenneth Williamson

Are We Losing Our Minds (2470) Paper 1211 A Course in Difference, Power, and Discrimination For Engineering Students Kenneth J. Williamson, Stephanie Sanford Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering/ Center for Water and Environmental Sustainability, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331AbstractOregon State University has adopted as a general education requirement that all studentsmust take a designated difference, power and discrimination (DPD) course. The DPDrequirement was created by the faculty to assist

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Benjamin Flores; Walter Fisher; Pablo Arenaz; Connie Della-Piana

inception in the spring of 1998, the CircLES Program has become recognizedmodel on campus and elsewhere for creating a strong foundation for entering students tospringboard them toward a successful college and (eventual) professional career. Twoareas in the literature influenced the design of the program: (1) research on institutionaldeparture and persistence1 2 and (2) programmatic efforts focused on undergraduatecurriculum innovation/reform, specifically, learning communities 3 4 and the first–yearseminar.5Research on students’ departure and persistence in higher education reveals, that thedecision to depart or persist, is a function of the interaction between the academic andsocial context of the campus and students’ experiences and background

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Robert Knox; Randall Kolar; Leslie Fink; Kanthasamy Muraleetharan; Gerald Miller; David Sabatini; Baxter Vieux; Michael Mooney; Kurt Gramoll

each individual student’s design skills when the students are working and learning in a team setting? 5. How can we measure the impact of a curriculum innovation on a student’s ability to design when they leave college and begin work as a practicing engineer?Key points from the discussion are given below. Although they are grouped according to the ques-tion numbers, not all of the points necessarily answer a particular question. Rather, the breakoutgroups often posed additional questions and pointed out related issues.Question 1 - What is Design? • Design is both a process and a product. • The students should know what are the criteria for evaluating their designs. Alterna- tively the

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Marilyn Smith

John J. Harper wind tunnel, leads the Georgia TechExperimental Aerodynamics Group (EAG). He has taught over 1600 AEs in 19 courses in the past 15 years. He is aprincipal researcher in the Rotorcraft Center of Excellence at Georgia Tech since its inception in 1982. He is anAssociate Fellow of AIAA. He has won GT awards for Outstanding Graduate Student Development, OutstandingPhD thesis advisor, and Most Valuable Professor (GTAE Class of '91). EAG research projects have enjoyed theparticipation of nearly 100 undergraduates over the past 14 years. EAG is a leader in multidisciplinary team-oriented projects, including the Aerospace Digital Library Project at Georgia Tech: http://www.adl.gatech.eduMARILYN J. SMITHMarilyn J. Smith earned her Ph.D

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Marilyn Smith

taught over 1600 AEs in 19 courses in the past 15 years. He is aprincipal researcher in the Rotorcraft Center of Excellence at Georgia Tech since its inception in 1982. He is anAssociate Fellow of AIAA. He has won GT awards for Outstanding Graduate Student Development, OutstandingPhD thesis advisor, and Most Valuable Professor (GTAE Class of '91). EAG research projects have enjoyed theparticipation of nearly 100 undergraduates over the past 14 years. EAG is a leader in multidisciplinary team- Page 6.1050.12oriented projects, including the Aerospace Digital Library Project at Georgia Tech: http://www.adl.gatech.edu Proceedings

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Robert Brown; Francine Battaglia; Donald R. Flugrad

a process for continuous quality improvement was implemented. Thispaper focuses on our development of assessment tools, which includes fives components: designpanels to judge reports from design-oriented courses; targeted assessments in all core andtechnical elective courses; student assessments to receive feedback from students in our courses;graduating senior surveys to allow students completing our curriculum to provide an overallprogram assessment; and alumni surveys of former students who are three years into theirprofessional careers.I. IntroductionThe faculty and staff of the Mechanical Engineering (ME) Department at Iowa State Universityhave recently devised a new curriculum that includes assessment of program outcomes. Thesteps

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Berrisford Boothe; Todd Watkins; John Ochs

approach to curricular integration includes pre-college outreach, freshmanprojects, curricula support, capstone projects and graduate projects. The educationalenvironment includes a Campus Center for Entrepreneurial projects; an entire building designedto support students project teams. This paper will discuss the design and implementation ofthese programs, our assessment and evaluation methods, lessons learned and future plans forimproving this environment.1. IntroductionThe engineer as inventor is certainly not new. Many innovative products that we enjoy todaywere invented and created by engineers, but what about the engineer as entrepreneur? Textbookauthors write and students study engineering design, concurrent engineering and design in abroad

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Edward Lumsdaine

approaches. Because of many institutional and administrative barriers, introducingnew courses and recruiting students to enroll in these courses however has not been easy.The objectives of three new courses developed and taught by the author in the past year are: Students learn teaming, communication, and lateral thinking skills as well as the creative problem solving process applied to invention and creating a new business. Students learn the practical aspects of the patenting and licensing process, how to protect and market their ideas, and how to develop a business plan. They learn how to access and use web-based and other resources for starting their enterprise and evaluate entrepreneurial ideas. The student-centered teaching occurs

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Anna Phillips; Paul Palazolo; Scott Yost

second phase involved reviewing some of the more recent curricular modifications inengineering education, and in general, research data supported that idea that successfulmodifications include a variety of approaches designed to work together and reflect theindividual learning styles of the students. Randolph’s4 recent review of Kolb’s5 and Bloom’s6work regarding individual learning styles suggests that engineering educators should designcurricular methodologies that are more student-centered and less teacher-centered. At the sametime, Randolph4 proposes that writing can be used as a powerful tool for learning byincorporating more psychologically active writing activities to promote transfer from contentknowledge to application of content

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Steven de Haas; S.K. Ramesh; Preetham Kumar; Michael Fujita; Elizabeth Raley; Andrew Lindsay

. Experiments should show some current engineeringequipment and some should be of a nature to not need any technical equipment.One of the better experiments in the course is that of dropping rocks off a suspension foot bridgeand comparing the distance found by timing the drop compared to a measured distance. They areonly given the definitions of velocity and acceleration for analytical tools to work from. Thisencourages thinking and hopefully moves them away from formula dependency. The best part ofthis experiment is to ask them to design an experiment to prove their reasons for the error thatthey are often quick to give in the original experiment. This starts them on the path of some reallearning.Another good experiment is that of having students

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Sarah Lewis; Renate Fruchter

Engineering Education”RENATE FRUCHTER 5Renate Fruchter is the director of the Project Based Learning Laboratory (P BL Lab) in the Department ofCivil and Environmental Engineering, and a senior research associate at CIFE, at Stanford. She leads a researcheffort to develop collaboration technologies for multidisciplinary, geographically distributed teamwork, and e-Learning. She is the leader and developer of the innovative “Computer Integrated A/E/C” course launched in1993 and currently offered in a global setting including universities in US, Japan and Europe.SARAH LEWISSarah Lewis is a Graduate Student in the Learning, Design, and Technology M.Sc. Program in the School

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Thomas Stanford; Michael Aherne; Duane D. Dunlap; Mel Mendelson; Donald Keating

engineering innovation. Graduate education must be responsive to this change and mustbuild a new type model of in-service graduate professional education which reflects thesubstantial changes and characteristics of the engineering innovation process itself, and thestages of lifelong growth, professional dimensions, and leadership responsibilities associatedwith the modern practice of creative engineering in a knowledge-based, innovation-driveneconomy. Whereas traditional research-based graduate engineering education and teaching haveresulted during the last three decades as a byproduct of the linear research-driven model ofinnovation, a new model of graduate professional education has been developed which focuseson lifelong professional education for

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Leah Jamieson; Edward J. Coyle; William Oakes

) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility(g) an ability to communicate effectively(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Joseph Betit; William Swart; Sushil Chaturvedi; Gary Crossman

conference entitled “Research and Engineering Education in a Global Society.”Participants identified best practices, discussed strategies, and formulated a declaration forachieving goals in engineering education and global research cooperation, with a view tobuilding a global society in the next century.5 Joining in this call for change was the NationalScience Foundation, which encouraged mutual and beneficial cooperation with other countries inits publication NSF Engineering: The Long View.6Universities in general have long supported the view that an international experience is avaluable part of education. However, such an experience is more difficult in a program of studyfor engineers than some other disciplines. Consider, for example, that 43% of

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

John Martin; Mohammed Haque

virtual models, andautonomous 3-D navigation within the interactive virtual engineering domain.The virtual engineering and construction science curriculum should become more experiential.Virtual lessons should incorporate the real world whenever possible. Hands-on activities arepremium opportunities for learning and teaching. Inclusions of self-directed virtual activitiesallow for the personal development of the learner. Therefore, students should be encouraged tocreate their own learning experiences using these virtual tools. Research in the fields ofcognition, artificial intelligence, and learning science solidifies what common sense indicateslearners learn best when they can practice and experience failures in their lessons with theguidance of

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Mark Plichta; Mary Raber

the Enter-prise Program are to • provide opportunities for students and faculty to develop entrepreneurial and innovative engineering skills, • provide students with a multi-disciplinary design experience that involves other baccalau- reate programs, such as Business and the Basic Sciences, • provide a framework for faculty to mentor students in a learning setting that closely resembles an industrial or professional environment, • include learning activities that arise from the approaches used to solve real-world prob- lems provided by industrial and/or professional sponsors, • utilize the students' fundamental background in science and engineering in the context of a problem when

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Constantin Chassapis; Kishore Pochiraju; Sven Esche

-wide assessment committee. This workis gratefully acknowledged.Bibliography1. "Preparing for ABET 2000: From Curriculum Mission to Assessment Planning", Engineering Assessment Committee,School of Engineering, Report, December1998.2. Website of the Stevens Engineering Assessment Center: http://attila.stevens-tech.edu/assess/3. "Integrating Grading and Attitudinal Analysis in Engineering Assessment", A. B. Urken, Best Practices in EngineeringAssessment, Presentation, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, 2000.4. "Integrating Self-Assessment and Grading via the World Wide Web", C. Christodoulatos and A. B. Urken, AmericanAssociation for Higher Education, Presentation, Denver, 1999.5. "Assessment Update", G. B. DeLancey, Engineering Assessment

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Vijay Arora; Lorenzo Faraone

that theeducation of the future must be relevant, attractive, and connected to the needs of society atlarge. Considering this paradigm, the U. S. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology(ABET) in its well-researched ABET Engineering Criteria 20005 (EC2000) proposed that thespirit of technopreneurship be integrated within the curriculum of all programs. It forcesuniversities to develop a process of assessing learning outcomes of programs that are consistentwith the original mission of the institution. The Criteria can be easily adapted to embrace alldisciplines. The desired attributes or outcomes for graduates of a baccalaureate program includean ability to:✔ apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.✔ design and

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Wayne Walter; Paul Stiebitz

Consortium for Product Development Leadership in the 21stCentury (PD21), customizes course materials and elective courses to meet the needs of theirrespective constituency. The program balances technical and business perspectives in an effortto provide technical leaders with the skills and knowledge to create best-in-class productportfolios.The program at RIT, known as the Masters in Product Development (MPD), is a joint effortbetween the College of Business and the Kate Gleason College of Engineering. In addition to acourse in Leadership in Product Development, the core of the curriculum consists of threesystems design and management courses: Systems Engineering (SE), Systems Architecture (SA),and Systems and Project Management. Students are also

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Larry Shuman; Justin Chimka; Mary E. Besterfield-Sacre; Jack McGourty; Harvey Wolfe

specific cognitive and behavioral skills. Thebasic application requires each team member to rate both themselves and their teammateson a series items designed to identify skills and behaviors found to be important forengineering graduates and practicing engineers. (See Figure 1 for an example.) Anadministrative authoring system enables the instructor to quickly create an electronicversion of the survey (in disc format). Each student is given a disc and instructed tocomplete the survey at a convenient time. The computer-collected data is then compiledby the administrative application. Reports are automatically generated, giving eachstudent a confidential, developmental feedback report that presents self and team ratingson each survey item and

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Sarah Irvine; Mary Anne Lesiak; Andrea Prejean; Teresa Larkin-Hein

content areas. The mainfoundation the constructivist scenario is built upon states that authentic learning must be student-centered and meaningful and must encourage students to engage in real-world experiences, thusallowing them to go further in their learning and education.III. DesignThe basic structure of the workshop involved sharing information and materials with the teachersduring the morning sessions. This structure builds on known ideas about infusing technologyinto the instructional techniques of teachers, as many educators are experiencing atransformation in the ideology of “best-practices” as they once knew it9. Appendix I highlightsthe schedule developed for the workshop activities.Each morning, the workshop began with a group

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

D. Yogi Goswami

andfinancial professionals who are extremely important to increase the use of solar energy, yetwho are least familiar with it. There is a great deal of K-12 solar energy educationalmaterials that has been developed in different parts of the world. Advanced informationtechnologies can be used to compile and make this material available throughout the world.1. IntroductionThe oil crisis of the mid 1970s was mainly responsible for creating the awareness todevelop solar energy applications. Large-scale solar energy research programs were startedat universities in the U.S.A. and other parts of the world. Research programs at theseuniversities created a need and an opportunity for solar energy education for science andengineering students at the graduate