Freshman Programs - Matt Ohland, Clemson University

In the Freshman Engineering Programs workshop, participants will discuss a variety of approaches to engineering curriculum in the freshman year. The workshop will engage participants in practicing these different approaches. The workshop is best suited to those interested in learning about trends in freshman engineering and particularly those introducing a curriculum for engineering freshmen or who already have a freshman curriculum and want to infuse it with active, experiential, and cooperative learning methods. The facilitator is able to provide contact information for practitioners of various approaches in order to facilitate their implementation at a new site.

Useful Concepts in Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment - Barbara Moskal & Ashlyn Huchinson, Colorado School of Mines
Designers: Barbara Moskal, Jon Leydens, Micheal Pavelich
Main Topic Area: Evaluation and Outcomes Assessment

The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology currently requires that engineering institutions directly demonstrate that their engineering programs are having an impact upon what students know and can do. Two types of data are often collected to meet this need: qualitative data and quantitative data. Engineering educators need to be well versed in the collection and analysis of both forms of data.

The purposes of the proposed workshop are as follows:

• To clarify when a qualitative method is a more appropriate form of data collection than a quantitative method and vice versa.
• To review the meaning of the terms "validity" and "reliability" and discuss the importance of these concepts in both qualitative and quantitative research.
• To provide specific examples of both qualitative and quantitative research that has been drawn from the engineering education literature.
• To contrast the methods and analysis techniques that are used in qualitative and quantitative research.
• To illustrate how qualitative and quantitative research may be combined for specific purposes using mixed methods approaches.

The proposed workshop will be constructed in a manner that supports the activity involvement of participants. Participants will be invited to discuss key concepts and ideas in both a large and small group settings. Activities will also be developed that encourage the participants to reflect on the effectiveness and improvement of their own assessment practices.

Team Toolbox: Activities & Suggestions for Facilitating Project Teams - Mark Tichon, College of Engineering, University of Tennessee
Main Topic Area: Engineering Fundamentals

This workshop demonstrates facilitating project design teams and offers practical suggestions and activities for improving workgroup performance. The activities presented represent a series of mini-lectures and class exercises used to promote team development in a yearlong engineering project design course for first-year students. These short activities are useful in engaging college students and getting them to examine the effectiveness of their own teams. Attention is paid to group process, with different activities suggested for different points in the project design cycle, from icebreakers at team inception through reflection on strengths and areas for improvement at project completion. Included in this paper are semi-structured exercises for many various situations, including increasing communication, examining group norms, managing conflict, providing guidelines for creative brainstorming, monitoring team progress, and utilizing strengths of all team members. The information offered here is intended to give fresh ideas to those who work with teams so that they may more easily and confidently incorporate a focus on group process into project design courses.

Foundations of Good Teaching: The Necessary Ingredients in the Transition from Teacher-Centered to Student-Centered Education - Jerry W. Samples, University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown
Main Topic Area: Better Teaching – Better Learning

This workshop is designed to emphasize, explore, and develop the fundamental teaching skills used in the development of more advanced teaching strategies. The workshop will be in two segments; one addressing the fundamentals that lead to exceptional teaching and learning, and the second addresses the skills that translate into student centered learning along with the additional strategies required to make the transition. Interestingly enough, many engineering faculty have attended classes, seminars and been involved in study groups that were student-centered. Making this work in the classroom is the challenge when there is uncertainty of the results and lack of fundamental teacher preparation.
Addressed throughout these workshops will be good teaching techniques, developing objectives, preparing and delivering classes, assessing class impact and student learning, communications, peer/self assessment, student input/critiques, how to let go of the podium, student involvement, listening, questioning, facilitating, and adding excitement. Attendance will influence effectiveness and efficiency in the classroom, and hopefully lead to better time and stress management and more efficiency in the classroom.

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. He is currently the Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.

K-12: A Systems Approach for Design-Based Learning - Matthew M. Mehalik & Yaron Doppelt, Learning Research and Development Center

Design-based learning engages students in ways that enhance their abilities to solve real-life problems and to reflect on their learning processes. This style of active learning enables students to relate such problems to science concepts. Even though national and state science standards specify requirements for curriculum in middle schools to address these goals, the current learning environment has room for considerable improvement in these areas, and these improvements have significant implications for preparing students for engineering school.

The presenters will conduct a workshop for which participants will follow a systems design approach for building electrical alarm systems in order to learn electricity concepts. This approach is the same as what eighth grade science teachers and their 900 students in 39 classes experienced in the spring of 2004 in an urban, public school district.

The learning module is intended to engage participants (teachers and students) in active learning concepts, design activities, systems thinking methods, and portfolio assessment. The project enables participants to design, construct, document, and reflect on their experience during a design process of an electrical alarm system. The module integrates several system thinking concepts, such as: thinking of needs and purposes, generating alternative solutions, making choices, and reflecting. Participants engage in tasks similar to the ways engineers practice design and analyze systems.

The researchers have integrated their individual previous research experiences in project-based learning, systems engineering, and design for creating a student module, a teacher’s guide, a series of workshops, observation tools, a knowledge test, a learning environment questionnaire and portfolio assessment scaffolding as part of this project.

In addition to running the workshop, the researchers will briefly present preliminary findings, such as: teacher strategies for implementing this module, various classroom atmospheres, and student portfolio assessments. The presenters will also report on several dimensions of the development and implementation of this module, discussing characteristics of design-based learning, differences between design-based learning and inquiry-based learning, teacher reflection and professional development, and performance of high and low achievers in this learning environment.

Offshoring: The New Challenge for Engineering Educators and Employers - Larry Shuman, University of Pittsburgh

Having begun a major change process less than ten years ago, is engineering education now destined to undergo a second crucial change? And, will companies be forced by a combination of economic and global conditions to utilize their engineers in an entirely new manner? Specifically, have the two complex processes of economic and political development, motivated by globalization, enhanced electronic communication capabilities and recessions in the advanced industrial countries resulted in substantially increased worldwide competition for engineering jobs and engineering talent?

It is now evident that countries like China and India, with large, well-educated workforces, have learned how to move large population segments into the advanced industrial economy, in a similar manner to Japan, Korea and Taiwan before them. Further, like Korea and Taiwan, they are continuing to build universities in order to produce larger numbers of engineering and science talent to attract additional foreign direct investment, acquire advanced technology, and pursue export-led growth strategies.

As an increasingly larger portion of the science and engineering labor pool is being viewed more like a commodity then a profession, a growing number of less developed countries, with low wage rates and an abundance of young, intellectual capital are competing for work that less than four years ago was performed by highly paid engineering professionals, many of whom were in short supply. While we do not know the extent of this shift in work from the G-8 nations to offshore locations, we feel that the trend is, for the most part, permanent and irreversible. Hence, an issue that will soon confront engineering educators is how to ensure that our graduates will continue to bring value to a market place where their salary demands are three or four times greater than their international competitors. Concomitantly, the complementary issue facing companies will be how to redefine the roles and assignments given to engineers, especially those in the early stages of their careers so that they receive that value.

This workshop will provide an overview to this controversial issue, review some of the limited data that is currently available and present some of the proposed alternatives to both engineering education and the country.

Teaching Engineering Design In Middle Schools: Pedagogical Strategies And Instructional Materials
- Larry G. Richards, University of Virginia

At the University of Virginia, we have undertaken a major project to design, implement, test, and distribute Engineering Teaching Kits (ETKs). These kits introduce engineering concepts and methods into existing middle school science and math classes. Students learn about essential engineering functions such as design, build, analyze, test, and redesign. ETKs promote awareness of the nature of engineering, and stimulate excitement about its practice. They also help develop an appreciation for the tradeoffs involved in the practice of engineering, and how engineering decisions impact society and the environment.

This project involves faculty and students at the University of Virginia (from both education and engineering), teachers and students in local middle schools, and administrators and parents. Teams of fourth-year Mechanical Engineering students participate as part of their senior design experience. We identify topics from middle school science, math, and technology courses that have interesting engineering applications, and then help students learn science and math in the context of engineering design. ETKs include real-world constraints: budget, cost, time, risk, reliability, safety, and customer needs and demands, and each involves a design challenge that requires creativity and teamwork.

So far, eight ETKs have been field tested in middle schools: Under Pressure – designing a submersible vehicle; RaPower – solar model car design; Brainiacs – brain tumor treatment technology, Catapults In Action – projectile motion; Alternative Energy Resources – wind power; Destructural Mechanics engineering materials and the design of structures; Pump-It-Up – fluid flow, blood circulation and artificial heart pumps; and Losing Stability - designing stable floating structures. Three other ETKs are nearing completion on topics in Basic Chemistry, Aerospace Engineering, and Invention and Design. At least five new ETKs will be completed this year.

In this workshop, we will highlight several major projects in K-12 Engineering Education, review the educational theory underlying our approach and its pedagogical implications, describe our senior design course and the processes of developing and testing ETKs, and demonstrate the key features of several ETKs. Finally, we will outline the lessons we have learned about interacting with middle school teachers, students, and administrators.

Funding for VMSEEI is provided by NSF Award Number ECC 0230609 and The Payne Family Foundation

Excellence and Quality Assurance in Engineering Education by Program Accreditation: Recent Developments and Experiences from Europe and USA - Guenter Heitmann, Technical University Berlin, Germany Mary Besterfield-Sacre, Pittsburgh University

Europe in the frame of the so called Bologna Process is harmonizing its higher education systems by implementing a common two-tier structure, corresponding to the bachelor-master system in the USA and other countries. Recently also the level was included as a third cycle. 40 European countries are now involved in this process, among them Russia since 2003. The different objectives and measures of this process comprise various measures for increasing competitiveness and gaining excellence, e.g. by improving the quality assurance systems and implementing program accreditation on national and partly European level. In engineering education various activities have recently been started towards outcomes accreditation, based on recognized, if not European standards, and to establish quality assurance and management systems, if possible with a transnational or European dimension.

This workshop will start with an information section about current developments in Europe with regard to Engineering Education, devoted primarily to program accreditation and quality assurance. It will continue with an exchange of experiences gained in Europe and the USA focused among other issues on the enhanced functions of accreditation, the advantages and problems of outcomes orientation, the design of curricula to match established criteria, the definition of standards and the challenge for universities and program providers to go beyond standards and create special quality or excellence labels.

IPPD - Considerations for Creating Sustainable Multidisciplinary Capstone Design Programs - Keith Stanfill, University of Florida

The Integrated Product and Process Design (IPPD) program is an innovative undergraduate engineering education initiative developed at the University of Florida in 1994 under the auspices of the Southeastern University and College Coalition for Engineering Education (SUCCEED) initiative that in turn was sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Pilot testing was done in the 1995 academic year, and since then the program has been offered as a two-semester course available to senior engineering and business students. The students work in five to seven member interdisciplinary teams, under the direction of one faculty member who acts as a technical coach. Each team also includes the participation of a liaison engineer representing an industrial sponsor, namely a private company, or a government agency or laboratory, which charters the design team with the task of designing and building authentic products and processes of financial or strategic value to the sponsor.

Through ten years of experience the administrators and faculty of the IPPD program have become skilled at identifying industry sponsors and defining achievable projects for multidisciplinary teams of senior students. Each year the IPPD program hosts approximately 27 industrially-sponsored projects carried out by a group of over 150 students who are supervised by 25 faculty from different engineering disciplines. Since 1995, 213 sponsored projects have been identified, defined and completed. Over 1200 students from more than 12 academic disciplines have participated in the two-semester program. More than two-thirds of the projects come from repeat sponsors. Industry praises the IPPD effort as an outstanding experiential educational program, with benefits for students, faculty, and industry.

Crafting a sustainable program such as IPPD is a complex undertaking. Managing this process of complex change requires establishing a vision, identifying the skills needed, determining incentives for the stakeholders, marshalling the resources to create the program, and developing a comprehensive action plan for implementation. Participants will explore the model the University of Florida used to develop, implement, and institutionalize the IPPD program. Templates will be provided to begin the process of creating a customized implementation plan that addresses the constraints and unique needs present in the participants’ home institutions.

Student Learning - Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M

Workshop participants will explore four key ideas in learning.

• Understanding as Structured Knowledge: Understanding is a frequently stated goal of engineering education; however, as shown by the literature on learning objectives and learning taxonomies understanding must be precisely defined in order to be assessed. Researchers suggest that most attributes of understanding are reflected in structured knowledge: accessing information from different perspectives, explaining in one’s own words, making applications to novel situations, and to discern connections between knowledge. Thus, understanding may be solidified through the restructuring of their knowledge. Of the three categories of learning strategies identified by Weinstein: rehearsal, elaboration, and organization, students tend to be most familiar with rehearsal. Yet, elaboration and organization are most applicable to enhancing structured knowledge. Classroom approaches to improving learning strategies in the elaboration and organization categories include concept maps, advance organizers, comparative organizers, and analogies and metaphors.
  
• Conceptual change: The role of prior knowledge is assuming a critical role in explaining and facilitating learning. Prior knowledge is extremely difficult to change and inaccurate prior knowledge, such as misconceptions poses an obstacle to learning new concepts since learners tend to accommodate new information without correcting misconceptions. However, research is showing that repairing misconceptions can be promoted by providing new conceptual categories in which learners can place new knowledge and create self-explanations. Learners can incorporate strategies that would allow them to learn about their misconceptions and take steps to repair them. Likewise, faculty members can learn about misconceptions and learning activities that facilitate conceptual change.
  
• Metacognition, self-directed learning, self-regulated learning: Metacognition refers to the ability to think about, monitor, and control cognitive processes such as problem solving, remembering, and learning. Past lines of research have addressed improving the accuracy of metacognition, increasing metacognitive performance, teaching metacognitive strategies, social factors in metacognition, and the application of metacognition to scientific problem solving. Current lines of research have been directly applied to the function of metacognition in studying material for courses amongst other aspects of metacognition. Research on metacognition has matured to the point of offering evidence-based guidance on improving learning to both teachers and learners.
  
• Transfer: Ultimately, learners are intended to apply their learning in contexts different from those in which the material was learned. However, transferring learning from one context to another is very challenging. Definitions of transfer vary, but its relevance to STEM education is evident in descriptions of transfer as preparation for future learning and of how past learning can affect future task performance. Learning activities can be designed to increase the likelihood that learners will be able to transfer their learning beyond its original context. For example lectures may be redesigned to encourage engagement in effective processing, particular discourse mechanisms may be used to promote deep learning/comprehension, and assessment may be based on the theory of successful intelligence, etc.
  

For each key idea, participants will address the following questions:

• What is it?
• Why would I want to know?
• How might I use it in the classroom?

At the end of the workshop participants should be able to:

• Have greater confidence in their ability to describe each of the four key ideas related to learning
• Describe how they might translate their understanding into teaching their courses differently

Product Realization: Curriculum Design and Resources for both Graduate and Undergraduate Programs - Mike Lovell, University of Pittsburgh

Since 1999 the School of Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh has sought to address the assertions of a blue-ribbon report for the American Society for Engineering Education that “engineering education must not only teach the fundamentals of engineering theory, experimentation, and practice but be relevant, attractive and connected.” The continuing focus on emerging technologies and new product development also responds to a crucial element of the modern business environment, since approximately half of all revenues currently generated in the U.S. economy are derived from products and services developed in the last five years. As a result, we have created cross-disciplinary programs in product realization at both the undergraduate and graduate level. We have infused our curriculum and research program with unique opportunities to develop students’ essential entrepreneurial and leadership skills and to promote active learning environments, team projects, and inter- and multidisciplinary collaboration. To facilitate this endeavor, the School established the Swanson Center for Product Innovation (SCPI) – a learning environment that connects four laboratories that parallel the new product’s developmental lifecycle of design, prototyping and manufacturing. The SCPI enables both undergraduate and graduate engineering students to work collaboratively on innovative, interdisciplinary design projects. This workshop provides attendees with an overview of how an institution may develop similar undergraduate and graduate programs in product realization, the requisite resources for building and maintaining the learning environment, as well as prototyping and manufacturing alternatives through the NCIIA support R.A.P.I.D.

Student Learning - Gordon Lawrence, PhD, University of Florida Professor of Instructional Leadership, retired.

How students mentally process what we teach. Research using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument has revealed distinct differences in students’ mental processes as they try to get their minds around the content presented by books and teachers. As we all know, some students learn better from textbooks than others. The research give us clues as to why this happens and what kinds of instruction work better for the other students. In this interactive workshop we will also examine our own preferred ways of teaching and get some ideas of how to reach students whose mental processing is most different from our own. The session will include a brief explanation of what the MBTI measures.