Asee peer logo

Linking Student Outcomes To Instructional Practices: Phase 1

Download Paper |


2004 Annual Conference


Salt Lake City, Utah

Publication Date

June 20, 2004

Start Date

June 20, 2004

End Date

June 23, 2004



Conference Session

Engineering Education Research

Page Count


Page Numbers

9.873.1 - 9.873.14



Permanent URL

Download Count


Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Stephanie Cupp

author page

Paolo Moore

author page

Norman Fortenberry

Download Paper |

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Session 1630

Linking Student Learning Outcomes to Instructional Practices – Phase I

Stephanie Cupp, Paolo Davidian Moore, and Norman L. Fortenberry National Academy of Engineering Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education

Abstract This paper begins to test the assumption that stakeholders in engineering education know what set of teaching and learning practices by faculty and students will lead to desired student learning outcomes. The work reported here seeks 1) to identify from published sources, a set of desired engineering student learning outcomes, and 2) to characterize and categorize teaching and learning practices. Desired student learning outcomes identified in published sources mirrored twelve of the engineering accreditation criteria supplemented by five additional outcomes not explicitly addressed within current accreditation criteria: a) multidisciplinary systems thinking, b) business aspects of engineering practice, c) appreciation for diversity, d) good work ethic and commitment to continuous quality improvement, and e) logical thought process. Sixty-one percent (11) of the learning outcomes are categorized as Technical, and 39% (7) are categorized as Social.

With respect to teaching and learning practices, an initial investigation uncovered six published sources that collectively identified 146 practices. It is noteworthy was that all of the identified practices were for actions by faculty and teachers – not students. We place the practices into a five-dimensional taxonomic structure. An effort to link “effective” practices to specific outcomes is suggested for future work.

I. Introduction Over the past fifty years, the engineering community has engaged in periodic self-examination and issued various calls for reform of engineering and science education 1 within the context of more general calls for education reform 2-5. A frequently heard comment at recent engineering education meetings is "We know what the problem is, and we know what works – we don't need any more studies, we just need to get on with it." The assumptions imbedded in this statement are that stakeholders in engineering education know not only what set of student learning outcomes we are trying to achieve, but also what set of teaching and learning practices by faculty and students will lead to those learning outcomes. This paper seeks to begin testing these assumptions. Validating the assumptions holds the promise of allowing us to monitor faculty teaching and student learning behaviors to determine if progress, both within individual institutions and nationally, is being made toward widespread use of “effective” practices and, ultimately, to achievement of desired student outcomes.

“Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering"

Cupp, S., & Moore, P., & Fortenberry, N. (2004, June), Linking Student Outcomes To Instructional Practices: Phase 1 Paper presented at 2004 Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--13175

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2004 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015