are only a few of the many groups that havedevoted an enormous amount of time to bringing communication into the minds of individuals Page 23.142.2who many times relegated writing and speaking to other majors. These efforts have opened up awide range of studies that have pinpointed the need to address communication issues outside ofthe English classroom.Instead of simply complaining about the lack of communication skill demonstrated by engineers,it is important that interested parties in engineering departments investigate the actualdeficiencies and concerns of those affected. These parties are comprised of students, faculty, andemployers
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Addressing Professional Practice Issues within the CurriculumAbstractSome programs struggle with how to accomplish all that is required in the currentAmerican Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Body of Knowledge (BOK) while planningfor possible state-mandated decreased credit hours due to current budgetary issues. Manyprograms are beginning to investigate how to possibly add additional outcomes listedunder the new ASCE BOK II document knowing that some of those outcomes willmigrate eventually into the ABET CE program criteria. How to do more with less (people,time, and resources) is a common theme on many campuses across the country especiallywith the current economic crisis. If these
/newsletter/fall06/storypages/othernews_story02.html, accessed January 17, 2008).15. Sputo, T. (2006). Care and Feeding Instructions for Engineering Adjunct Faculty. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. V. 132(1) 14-17.16. Welch, R., Estes, A., and Considine, C. (2007). Training for Adjunct Faculty. Proceedings, 2007 ASEE Annual Conference, Honolulu, HI.17. Webster’s New World Compact School and Office Dictionary, Wiley Publishing Company, 2002.18. Hoeller, K. (2006). The Proper Advocates for Adjuncts. The Chronicle of Higher Education. June 16, 2006.19. Rose, A.T. (2002). Exposing Students to Innovative Construction Technologies in the Undergraduate Civil Engineering Technology
AC 2009-2208: BRINGING PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE INTO THECLASSROOM: FACULTY EXPERIENCESKaren Chou, Minnesota State University, Mankato Karen C. Chou is Professor of Civil Engineering and former Civil Engineering Coordinator at Minnesota State University, Mankato. Dr. Chou has over 25 years of professional experience and is a registered P.E. in New York, Tennessee, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and South Dakota.Deborah Nykanen, Minnesota State University, Mankato Deborah K. Nykanen is an Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at Minnesota State University, Mankato. Her teaching, research and professional experience focus on water resources, hydrology and hydrometeorology. Dr. Nykanen has 8 years of
Finance from Long Island University, and a Ph.D. degree in Civil Engineering from Lehigh University. Dr. Lenox served for over 28 years as a commis- sioned officer in the U.S Army Field Artillery in a variety of leadership positions in the U.S., Europe, and East Asia. He retired at the rank of Colonel. During his military career, Dr. Lenox also spent 15 years on the engineering faculty of USMA – including five years as the Director of the Civil Engineering Division. Upon his retirement from the U.S. Army in 1998, he joined the staff of the American Soci- ety of Civil Engineers (ASCE). In his position as educational staff leader of ASCE, he managed several new educational initiatives – collectively labeled as Project
been argued that to create something new (synthesize or design) requiresone to also be able to evaluate.5,6For engineering education purposes, the paramount concern is that students are able to functionat both levels with less importance being attached to which is a higher level.7 The authors forthis paper have adopted a similar argument here. Further, the authors have taken the perspectivethat when students create an engineering report for a specific class project, they utilize high levelevaluative and synthesis skills, even when they are following a fairly well established templatefor that report. We are not suggesting that students are operating at a level where they arecreating new types of reports not yet known to the engineering
Paper ID #14392Licensure Issues of Strategic Importance to the Civil Engineering Profession- and ASCECraig N Musselman P.E., A & E Consulting Craig N. Musselman, P.E. is a practicing civil and environmental engineer and is the Founder and Pres- ident of CMA Engineers, a consulting engineering firm with offices in New Hampshire and Maine. He holds B.S.C.E. and M.S.C.E. degrees from the University of Massachusetts and has more than 40 years experience in the planning, design and construction administration of public works facilities. Musselman is a former member of the New Hampshire Board of Licensure for Professional
Paper ID #18725Challenges of a Professional Issues Course in Civil Engineering: ComparisonAcross Two YearsDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE). She has served as the ABET assessment coordinator for the department since 2008. Professor Bielefeldt is the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where interdisciplinary students learn about and practice sustainability. Bielefeldt is also a
option such that the users couldselect the questions from each topic individually. Therefore, the faculty revisitedtheir areas of expertise and prepared a new examination for the latter two years.Therefore it is worth noting here that one set of examination was administered thefirst two years and another set of examination was administered for the last twoyears.Data CompilationThe data from the past four years of comprehensive examinations and studentgrades for the mechanics based courses were compiled. Transfer students fromcommunity colleges comprise half the civil engineering student population atSeattle University. These students typically transfer statics, dynamics and basicstrength of materials from community colleges. In the past four
needs of industry, and in some cases realize taxsavings for their monetary and in-kind contributions to the University or engineering program.IABs that operate at the Department level are less common than College-level boards, butprovide many of the same functions. These boards tend to be proactive rather passive, and Page 13.901.2exhibit more specific interactions as enumerated recently1. For example, proactive IABs: (1)recruit members, especially Chairs, that will fit well with the goals and objectives of theprogram; (2) support student organizations for travel or educational activities; (3) screenpotential faculty and support recruiting
strategies. In this position, she promotes the College of Engineering’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.William O'Brien, University of Texas at Austin Bill O'Brien's professional goals are to improve collaboration and coordination among firms in the design and construction industry. Dr. O'Brien specializes in construction supply chain management and electronic collaboration, where he conducts research and consults on both systems design and implementation issues. He is especially interested in the use of the information technologies to
responding, 3. his Valuing (3.0) the phenomenon or 3. his skill in Application (3.0) of the activity so that he voluntarily responds an knowledge he comprehends, seeks out ways to respond, 4. his skill in Analysis (4.0) of situations involving this knowledge, his skill in 4. his Conceptualization (4.1) of each value Synthesis (5.0) of this knowledge into new responded to, organizations, 5. his Organization (4.2) of these values into 5. his skill in Evaluation (6.0) in that area of
to $2500 foronly one research presentation, and up to $2500 for only one faculty developmentopportunity (workshop, conference attendance) per year and only with a detailedprofessional development plan established with the department head prior to the currentyear of funding. Additionally, new assistant professors could apply for one grant in eacharea, associate professors on track to achieving full professor could apply for two out of thethree grants and full professors and long-term associate professors could only apply for oneout of the three faculty development grants.Initially the full and long-term associate professors expressed concern at the loss of anexpected college-wide benefit. However, further research into benefit use noted that
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 aglobal, economic, environmental, 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 forengineering practice.The current Criterion 3 (a)-(k) student outcomes have been revised into a new Criterion 3(1)-(7) set of student outcomes1 shown below. The history of these changes and
Paper ID #25122The ASCE Raise the Bar Initiative: A New Paradigm Based on Credentialingin the Medical ProfessionDr. Stephen J. Ressler P.E., U.S. Military Academy Stephen Ressler, P.E. Ph.D. is Professor Emeritus from the U.S. Military Academy (USMA) at West Point. He earned a B.S. degree from USMA in 1979, a Master of Science in Civil Engineering from Lehigh University in 1989, and a Ph.D. from Lehigh in 1991. As an active duty Army officer, he served for 34 years in a variety of military engineering assignments around the world. He served as a member of the USMA faculty for 21 years, including six years as Professor
and transfers and most courseswithin the first two years of a four year program outside of the department, the teachingrequirements grew slowly. The first faculty member was a tenured professor hired to startin June 2005 as the inaugural chair. Success as chair and only CE faculty member led tohis selection as the Dean in the spring of 2006 while selecting one tenure-track assistantprofessor and one visiting associate professor to start in August 2006. The program whichneeded to have at least three faculty members present to gain the Texas Higher EducationCoordinating Board final approval hired a tenured professor as the new chair and atenure-track associate professor to start in January 2007. Approval followed later thatyear while the
teach this body ofknowledge. It concludes that civil engineering faculty must be scholars, effective teachers,practitioners, and role models. While true, there are a number of complex issues that arise suchas whether it is possible for one person to possess all of these attributes, whether such a modelbest serves the projected trends in civil engineering education, and whether these needs areapplicable to and can be enforced for non-traditional, non-university civil engineering programs.As a new committee (BOK-2) has formed to write the second edition of this document, theASCE Committee on Faculty Development is revising the “who should teach” chapter for thiseffort. This paper discusses some key issues that are relevant to the civil
programs willnormally be done at the same time; thus the program will be able to prepare for bothsimultaneously. Moreover, it is likely that there will be only a single self-study report. Mostimportantly, the draft accreditation criteria and associated guidelines have been designed tominimize the incremental resource requirements for advanced-level accreditation. For example,as the current draft ASCE Commentary states, “Successful project reports, theses, orcomprehensive exams approved by the faculty are some of the possible ways the program mightdemonstrate that its graduates have the ability to apply advanced knowledge.”7 Thus, there is noreason for any new assessment processes above and beyond those already existing in the currentdegree
to satisfy certain requirements that may or may not prove to beimpediments.BackgroundFaculty in civil engineering, civil engineering technology, and construction programs haveexpressed concerns about meeting the vague and increasing expectations for tenure. Previousinvestigations showed that some impediments include lack of funding opportunities, highteaching expectation and teaching load, as well as lack of quality students to employ for researchand as teaching assistants [5, 6]. Comparison of perceptions of these impediments pre and posttenure among faculty has not been performed.Requirements for tenure vary between institutions, and even between academic units within thesame institution. In addition, guidelines for tenure are often
in the U.S., Europe, and East Asia. He retired at the rank of Colonel. During his military career, Dr. Lenox spent 15 years on the engineering faculty of USMA – including five years as the Director of the Civil Engineering Di- vision. Upon his retirement from the U.S. Army in 1998, he joined the staff of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). In his position as educational staff leader of ASCE, he managed several new educational initiatives – collectively labeled as Project ExCEEd (Excellence in Civil Engineering Education). As ASCE’s Executive Vice President, Dr. Lenox led several educational and professional career-development projects for the civil engineering profession – with the overall objective of
mandatory. Informal programsaccount for three quarters of the mentoring programs recorded. The survey did not definewhat was meant by formal or informal, so this is clearly an issue that requires somefurther clarification. However, it is clear that an effective mentoring program can at thevery least supplement any formal training in the areas of both teaching and research, andmay well serve as an alternative to more formal development offerings in these areas.Nearly 60% of the respondents provided some form of assistance for the professionaldevelopment of faculty (indicated in the survey as “e.g. getting their PE or obtainingspecialty certification”). This is perhaps one area of major concern. If civil engineeringdegree programs become too
Page 23.1249.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Three Approaches to Flipping CE Courses: Faculty Perspectives and SuggestionsAbstractClassroom inversion or “flipping” is one of the latest models designed to actively engagestudents during class times. The model involves moving traditional lecture material outside theclassroom and practical application of newly learned ideas into the class meeting times. In theinverted model, the course concepts, theory, or equations are presented in various media –videos, readings, notes – prior to the class contact time. Application of those new ideas iscultivated during the class time through faculty-directed problem solving
, department heads, tenuredfaculty) are unable or unwilling to recognize the intellectual complexities and resources neededto support good design education.Fortunately, more and more educators are becoming aware of the issues of design, and steps arebeing taken world wide, to address the concerns of industry at large. One approach has been toform “symbiotic” partnership between industry and academia through senior capstone projects.The capstone course has evolved over the years from “made up” projects devised by faculty toindustry-sponsored projects where companies provide “real” problems, along with expertise andfinancial support. In fact, design courses, in general, have emerged as a means for students to beexposed to some flavor of what engineers
industry have an equal path to tenure.This paper cites the advantages and disadvantages of this program and addresses the most oftenexpressed concerns for this alternative. Such issues as the professional development andscholarship components of the tenure process, the role of consulting, the integration ofpractitioners into the faculty, the value of their contacts to industry, and the types of classes thepractitioners teach are all addressed. The purpose is to describe a model that other universitiesmay wish to consider as the profession debates the CE faculty of the future.I. IntroductionThe American Society of Civil Engineers has defined the Body of Knowledge (BOK) thatdescribes the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to become a licensed
mechanics courses that may be taught by civil engineering faculty at someinstitutions. A list of chapters is provided in table 1.Table 1: List of ChaptersChapter Title1 Why Case Studies?2 Statics and Dynamics3 Mechanics of Materials4 Structural Analysis5 Reinforced Concrete Structures6 Steel Structures7 Soil Mechanics, Geotechnical Engineering, and Foundations8 Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulics9 Construction Materials10 Management, Ethics, and Professional Issues Three appendices are provided. Appendix A is Notes to the Professor, based on resultsfrom the two NSF-funded projects on teaching failure case studies in the classroom. Appendix Bis
AC 2009-2105: LET'S GET DOWN TO BUSINESS: PREPARATION FOR ABETUNDER THE NEW CE PROGRAM CRITERIAFred Meyer, United States Military Academy Colonel Fred Meyer is the Civil Engineering Division Director in the Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from USMA in 1984, a M.S. degree in Civil Engineering from Georgia Tech in 1993, and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from Georgia Tech in 2002. COL Meyer has been a member of the USMA faculty for over six years and teaches courses in basic mechanics, structural steel design, reinforced concrete design, structural system design, and professional practices. He is an active
? The only national organization that took a serious look atthis issue was the AAUP due to its concern about faculty rights, the strategic planning processthat didn’t engage the faculty and the need for substantiating the existence of financial exigencywhen most of the losses may be covered by property insurance, FEMA and work interruptioninsurance. AAUP’s efforts, though laudable, have had little impact on the overall outcome.American Association of University Professors (AAUP) ReviewAAUP, as a watch dog for university faculty, sent a team of experts into the New Orleans area in2006 in order to evaluate the process used by each New Orleans university in eliminating tenuredfaculty. The report of this team is not yet finalized.Regarding faculty
AC 2008-1097: INFLUENCE OF THE NEW CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OFKNOWLEDGE ON ACCREDITATION CRITERIAStephen Ressler, United States Military Academy Colonel Stephen Ressler is Professor and Head of the Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the U.S. Military Academy (USMA) at West Point. He earned a B.S. degree from USMA in 1979, a Master of Science in Civil Engineering degree from Lehigh University in 1989, and a Ph.D. from Lehigh in 1991. An active duty Army officer, he has served in a variety of military engineering assignments around the world. He has been a member of the USMA faculty for 16 years, teaching courses in engineering mechanics, structural engineering, construction, and
knowledge framework, specifically, ASCE’s Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge(BOK) as it undergoes revision for a Third Edition in 2018.The roots of this change go back into the last century when ASCE organized the Task Committeefor the First Professional Degree in 1999 and instructed it to develop an implementation strategyfor ASCE's new vision and policy. [12] It had identified the fundamental issue as the increasinginadequacy of the four year bachelor's degree as "formal academic preparation for the practice ofcivil engineering at the professional level in the 21st century." [12]The Task Committee for the First Professional Degree report cited examples of this wereinadequate communication skills, inability to manage projects profitably and
increased minimum formaleducation requirements for licensure to a master’s degree or other advanced professional degreeover time.Concerns over the adequacy of a bachelor’s degree as the formal educational requirement forlicensure are not new. They can be traced as far back as the Mann Report in 1918 [9]. Since thattime, numerous other scholarly works have addressed this concern, and will not be detailed here.Until 2018, most recently through their Raise the Bar Initiative, ASCE and others advocated forincreasing the minimum educational requirements for licensure from a baccalaureate degree to amaster’s degree (or equivalent), to no avail. Scholarly works offer reasons why this initiative wasunsuccessful so we will not outline them here [4]. Further