Conference Session

Track 3 - Session 2 - Faculty Development

Collection

2012 ASEE International Forum

Authors

Kang SoYeon, Yonsei University

Tagged Topics

Track 3 - Faculty Development

tried to make faculty members believe that process andprocedures of the evaluation are reliable, valid and fair.5. Conclusion In Korea, universities and colleges have concentrated on ranking and classifying thefaculty by the number of publication in SCI-rated research journal, which lead to indifference toteaching of most engineering faculty. Now we try to find the way how to get balance betweenresearch and teaching. It is time for the faculty in Korean engineering colleges to develop facultyownership for their own career growth and to harmonize teaching and research. Course portfolios can be a very effective method for identifying and validating quality ofteaching. Most engineering faculty members in Korea agreed that the

Conference Session

Track 3 - Faculty Development

Collection

2012 ASEE International Forum

Authors

R. Murugesan, Anna University of Technology Madurai

Tagged Topics

Track 3 - Faculty Development

University, Philadelphia, USA, and Villonova University, Philadelphia, USA. The experience and expo- sure earned during the visit gives an helping hand in building the Anna University of Technology Madurai matching with international standards. Dr. R.Murugesan has an illustrious career of over 33 years in academic arena and has about 31 interna- tional journal/conference publications and 30 national journal/conference publications to his credit. He has authored 18 books in various disciplines. He was a National Executive Council Member of ISTE (In- dian Society for Technical Education) for seven terms and also served as National Students Advisor for Institution of Engineers. He was a Member of the Syndicate of Anna

Conference Session

Track 3 - Session 2 - Faculty Development

Collection

2012 ASEE International Forum

Authors

Prasad Edamana, Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IIT M), India; Ajit Kumar Kolar, Indian Institute of Technology Madras; Pramod S. Mehta, Indian Institute of Technology Madras; Sujatha Srinivasan, Indian Institute of Technology Madras; Jefferey E. Froyd, Texas A&M University

Tagged Topics

Track 3 - Faculty Development

relevant to engineering educators, and (ii) “hard disciplines [e.g.,engineering] place greater importance [than soft disciplines] on student career preparation andemphasize cognitive goals such as learning facts, principles and concepts [i.e., content]”12. Alarge percentage of engineering faculty members still believes that “subject knowledge” is theonly criteria for becoming an effective teacher in engineering institutions.Emergence of for-profit employers in faculty developmentDuring the last decade in India, major employers of engineering graduates have observed in theirrecruitment drives that while thousands of students graduated with an engineering degree, onlyabout 20% or less, were really “employable” directly. An analysis revealed that the