Robert Martello

The Olin curriculum: thinking toward the future

In 1997, the F. W. Olin Foundation of New York established the Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Needham, MA, with the mission of creating an engineering school for the 21st century. Over the last five years, the college has transformed from an idea to a functioning entity that admitted its first freshman class in fall 2002. This paper describes the broad outlines of the Olin curriculum with some emphasis on the electrical and computer engineering degree. The curriculum incorporates the best practices from many other institutions as well as new ideas and approaches in an attempt to address the future of engineering education.

Work in Progress: Understanding Discomfort: Student Responses to Self-Direction

The literature consistently reports that students express some degree of discomfort when they are thrown into self-directed learning environments. In this paper, we present the preliminary results of an investigation of the causes of student discomfort in several different self-directed project-based courses. Our results suggest that student motivation and opportunities for the development of deep understanding and transferable skills are important in creating a positive self-directed learning experience. Negative experiences and student discomfort in self-directed environments may stem from problems with self-regulation, low self-perceptions of content learning, lack of personal engagement with the topic, and difficulties related to the social learning environment

Model collaboration for advancing student-centered engineering education

The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) and the Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering (Olin) are establishing a student-centered hands-on interactive approach to engineering education (similar to Olins) at UTEP, where it will reside in UTEPs innovative B.S. in Leadership Engineering (LE) program. The goal of the proposed collaboration is to catalyze UTEPs educational innovation through a cross-campus collaboration between the two institutions by incorporating the Olin educational process, both design and features, into the first offerings of the Bachelor of Science in Leadership Engineering (BSLE) program. Specifically, the collaboration includes faculty exchanges between the two institutions; a series of retreats for planning and assessment; curriculum development; and student recruitment practices. The 21st century workplace demands a new engineer - one who effectively contributes to solving problems using innovation, creativity, and strategic foresight. Graduates of the Olin-UTEP developed Bachelor of Science in Leadership Engineering (LE) program will possess these attributes through the programs rigorous yet flexible major in engineering, and in-depth study of leadership and its effect upon technology and society. In this panel we will share the context for our innovative approach, key features of the partnership to date, and acclaim the value of inter-institutional sharing.

Work in progress: How do first-year engineering students develop as self-directed learners?

Although self-direction is among the most critical skills required of todays engineering graduates, the complex processes through which individuals develop the attitudes, beliefs, and skills of lifelong, self-directed learners remains unclear. In this ongoing mixed-methods investigation, we draw on existing motivation and self-regulated learning theories to examine how undergraduate students at two institutions develop as self-directed learners during their first two years of their engineering programs. Preliminary findings indicate that both groups of first-year students make progress as self-directed learners, even after their first semester of college. However, the data indicate marked differences in specific areas of self-directed learner growth at the two institutions. Compared to those at the large public university, students at the small private college report stronger learning goal orientations, help-seeking behaviors, and metacognitive strategy use. We discuss how the learning opportunities and environments may contribute to these differences in learner development.