James R. Rowland

Interdisciplinary team teaching

Four principles are presented for team teaching involving faculty from different departments and with different technical specialties. The emphasis of the paper is on the opportunities for interdisciplinary cooperation where each professor provides a unique strength to the teaching team. Personal experiences are cited for the past academic year in team teaching a differential equations and linear algebra course both fall and spring semesters. Recommendations for improvements in this teaching model are suggested.

Work in Progress: Redesigning the EE Service Course

The traditional EE service course has been redesigned to focus more precisely on the needs of the other engineering majors. Experiences at the University of Kansas described in this paper appear to be applicable as well to a large number of mid-size engineering programs. Previously, a single four-hour comprehensive EE service course had been taught for many years in both Fall and Spring semesters as either a required or elective course for students in aerospace, architectural, chemical, petroleum, civil, and mechanical engineering. Course objectives included preparing students for the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination for professional licensing and providing background EE material for advanced courses in other engineering curricula. The redesigned format features multiple courses that would be offered only once during each academic year and tailored to the needs of specific engineering majors. Without additional faculty allocation, a three-hour course on circuits and machines would be offered in Fall semesters and a three-hour course on circuits, electronics and instrumentation (including a two-hour subset version) plus a separate one-hour laboratory in Spring semesters. The new format replaces the previous single EE service course beginning in Fall 2006

Finding and facing the Frontiers at FIE Conferences

Each year since the founding in 1971, Frontiers in Education Conference participants have sought the newest innovations and concepts in engineering education, i.e., the true frontiers at the cutting-edge of the profession. While those frontiers have obviously changed over the past 42 years, the primary objective of identifying and addressing them has remained at the forefront. This WIP paper describes what was perceived as the main frontiers in each of four periods corresponding to the four decades since the first conference by examining papers from two sample conferences in each decade. In addition to a careful analysis of selected FIE Proceedings, results of a brief survey of long-time FIE leaders and more recent participants are presented as further evidence on identifying the recognized frontiers for each period. Changes during the intervening years of the conference included more formal presentations, required reviews before accepting papers, and references to clearly show the relevance of each paper within the body of knowledge. Currently, papers are categorized as innovative practice, research-to-practice, or research; an emphasis on STEM research nationally has created engineering education departments within universities. Faculty and staff from these departments regularly present their research results at FIE Conferences. The overall goal for conference organizers and program chairs is to make certain not only that accepted papers point to existing frontiers as the major focus of the FIE Conference each year but also include invited speakers, sessions, panels, and keynote addresses that focus on other emerging frontiers.

The correlation between GPA and percent effort on the Guaranteed 4.0 Plan

Beginning with spring 2005, the academic scholarship students in three programs have been introduced to the Guaranteed 4.0 Plan designed by Donna O. Johnson. The students are given specific assignments on the 4.0 Plan to encourage them to organize their time and to use it more effectively. The academic performance of the two freshman NACME scholars cohorts to use the 4.0 Plan was strikingly better than the first semester GPAs for the first two freshman NACME classes which did not have the 4.0 Plan. A students success depends on their renewed commitment each semester to an effective use of their time. In this paper the semester GPA of the students is correlated with their self-reported percent of the 4.0 Plan that they used that semester. A better understanding of these relationships should be helpful to students when they plan their semester with the goal of doing well academically.

Interdisciplinary team teaching improvements

Interdisciplinary team teaching improvements are described for a sophomore mathematics course on differential equations and linear algebra offered at the University of Kansas every semester in a team environment by mathematics and engineering professors. The five-hour course is required for engineering, computer science, and atmospheric science majors. Significant improvements are described beyond the team teaching experiences reported at FIE 1996. In response to a recent ABET visit, a coordinating committee composed of engineering and mathematics professors who had been involved with the course mandated several changes to be initiated in fall 2002. The implementation and success of these course changes are described from the viewpoints of the engineering professor (the author), mathematics professor, teaching assistants, and sophomore students in the course. The author had team-taught the course twice previously, served on the coordinating committee, and teamed up with one of the mathematics professors to teach during the initial semester under a new format. This paper describes recent improvements in the interdisciplinary team-taught course, discusses the strategy of using and coaching teaching assistants for weekly recitations, and describes a process for continuous improvement in compliance with EC 2000.

Preparing for an accreditation visit using ABET Engineering Criteria 2000

Engineering Criteria 2000 contains two kinds of items: (1) requirements which must be satisfied, as well as (2) other evidence mentioned that may be used but is not required. Since the new criteria include a number of items of both kinds not considered directly in the present Topics Criteria a longer lead time is needed for the initial preparation. These items are grouped in this paper and a common-sense time schedule suggested for implementation in preparing for an accreditation visit under Engineering Criteria 2000 for programs in electrical engineering and computer engineering at the University of Kansas in the Fall of 2000. A particular emphasis is placed on the program outcomes and assessment criterion. Comparisons with the Topics Criteria are presented and recommendations made on avoiding some common problems. Selected information from a working symposium in April 1997 at Rose-Hulman on best assessment practices in engineering education is also included.

Frontiers in education—have we made a difference? If so, what?

The IEEE Education Society started the Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) in 1971, a time of concern for its survival for financial and membership reasons, a time of unrest in the engineering education community around the world, and as is so common, a time of great challenge and opportunities. FIE began with about 100 attendees in Atlanta, led by Demetrius Paris. It expanded by adding the Educational Research and Methods (ERM) Division of ASEE in 1973, and the IEEE Computer Society (CS) in 1995. FIE ventured outside the USA in 1974, and continued taking on new challenges, and by giving young scholars in engineering education research a venue for interaction and evaluation of their work. These scholars are asking good questions-important questions, questions that challenge us all, and are getting answers that are improving our education. In turn, these answers lead to new and more challenging questions. This is a journey, not a destination. While not the only contributor, this conference has made a difference-it is small enough for much interaction, big enough for bringing together new scholars with “old-timers.” Both authors have complete files of all FIE Proceedings. Some of this history will be traced, but the emphasis will be on results and a look at the future.

EE service course redesign: A three-year study

Electrical engineering service courses at the University of Kansas have been modernized over the past three years from a “one-size-fits-all” format marked by student disinterest and low attendance to multiple courses that are tailored to the needs of specific majors in the other engineering fields. A focus session in 2005 with faculty from the other engineering departments resulted in a three-hour service course on electric circuits and machines tailored to the needs of architectural and civil engineering students in fall semesters (05 to 08). A different service course on circuits, electronics, and instrumentation has been developed for mechanical and aerospace engineering students in spring semesters (06 to 09). An associated one-hour lab is offered during spring semesters. Motivational features include a grading procedure based on daily short quizzes and block exams and (2) occasional classroom presentations of student-driven mini-cases on topics such as resistance strain gauges that demonstrate applications specific to the other engineering fields. This paper both consolidates and expands Works-In-Progress papers presented at the most recent three FIE Conferences by (1) identifying the contributions of laboratory exercises, (2) providing comparative data not previously available, and (3) describing newly revised motivational features.

Integrating lifelong learning into a feedback controls course

Lifelong learning is being featured as a detailed application of the technical content of a senior feedback controls course required for electrical, computer and mechanical engineering students. Related course objectives are: (1) to motivate engineering students before graduation to pursue lifelong learning throughout their careers; and (2) to use feedback control concepts to enhance the importance of lifelong learning. Results are reported for a class of 46 students during the spring 1999 semester at the University of Kansas, USA.

Modernizing probability and statistics engineering curricula

This Work-in-Progress paper describes an ongoing project for modernizing the probability and statistics program component for electrical and computer engineering majors at the University of Kansas. Traditionally in engineering curricula around the nation, this three-hour senior-level course has at most focused on the probability of overlapping events, properties and examples of discrete and continuous random variables, and only rudimentary statistical principles involving confidence intervals, hypothesis testing, and linear least-squares curve fitting. Some courses nationwide emphasize only probability and random variables, some focus only on the statistical aspects of data handling, and a few also include small projects that feature computer-generated pseudo-random numbers. ABET has program criteria that require graduates to have some knowledge of probability and statistics. Usually, programs seek to satisfy this requirement by one of these single self-contained three-hour courses. What is needed to modernize the curricula is a more comprehensive treatment that not only improves the course and extends these concepts beyond into the senior capstone and other courses but also prepares graduates for more extensive probability and statistics applications after graduation.