Workshop Facilitators and Descriptions
 

General

1. Principles for Classroom and Curricular Innovation  
The workshop examines four disciplines that provide theoretical foundations for initiative by the Foundation Coalition:  learning theory, active/cooperative learning, technology-enabled learning, and curriculum integration. The section on learning theory examines how our understanding of how people learn has changed during the past fifty years. The section on active/cooperative learning examines rationale for active/cooperative learning and the five guiding principles of cooperative learning:

  • positive interdependence,
  • individual accountability,
  • growth in social skills,
  • group processing, and
  • face-to-face interaction.

The section on technology-enabled learning surveys applications of technology to engineering education across the country. Finally, the section on curriculum integration examines the rationale behind curriculum integration and examples of curriculum integration. Detailed description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University

 

Active/Cooperative Learning

2. Active/Cooperative Learning:  Introduction and Applications  Description coming soon.
Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
César Malavé, Texas A&M University
P. K. Imbrie, Purdue University
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama


3. Active/Cooperative Learning:  After the Basics  The workshop is intended for faculty members who have some experience in using active/cooperative learning (ACL) in their courses. The goals of the workshop are to develop criteria for evaluating ACL methodologies and help faculty members apply these criteria to evaluate their current uses of ACL and then improve them. The workshop examines the following topics:

  • ACL methodologies and applications,
  • features of good ACL implementations,
  • criteria for evaluating ACL methodologies, and
  • how to improve ACL implementations using evaluation criteria.

Participants share positive and negative experiences with ACL and discuss why positive experiences worked and negative experiences failed. Participants then develop criteria to evaluate the use of ACL and use these criteria to improve the use of ACL in their classes. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
César Malavé, Texas A&M University
P. K. Imbrie, Purdue University
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama

4. Active/Cooperative Learning in Capstone Design Courses  The workshop is intended for faculty members who use or might consider using active/cooperative learning in their capstone design courses. The workshop has three objectives:

  • identify a set of professional skills and design skills for a capstone course,
  • discuss strategies for teaching skills, particularly active/cooperative learning strategies, and
  • develop active/cooperative learning activities for teaching professional and design skills.

Participants examine the professional skills that might be developed in a capstone design course, e.g., communication skills, teaming skills, problem-solving skills, and then develop active/cooperative learning activities to enhance these skills. Next, participants examine the steps in the design process. Finally, participants develop active/cooperative learning activities to teach design skills. Detailed description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama

 

Student Teams in Engineering

5. Student Teams in Engineering: Introduction and Applications  Workshop participants will develop their abilities to use student teams in a variety of different settings in the engineering curricula. The objectives of the workshop are to improve knowledge and skills in the following areas:

  • organizing students into teams,
  • setting expectations for team behavior,
  • guiding students to resolve team conflicts,
  • facilitating cooperative learning using teams, and
  • grading assignments submitted by student teams.
Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
César Malavé, Texas A&M University
P. K. Imbrie, Purdue University
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama

6. Converting Group Projects into Team Projects  The workshop is intended for faculty members who want to increase their effectiveness in using student teams in extended assignments, such as design projects. Participants will work together to identify important aspects that they must consider when using teams. They will share ideas on team formation, training, self-assessment, and peer evaluation and develop guidelines for dealing with these issues. They will explore ways in which the instructor can monitor teams, intervene when appropriate, and grade individual students working on team projects. The workshop will be highly interactive with participants working in small teams to develop, present, critique, and revise their ideas for using teams on student projects. Detailed description coming soon.
Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
César Malavé, Texas A&M University
P. K. Imbrie, Purdue University
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama


Assessment and Evaluation

7. Concept Inventory Assessment Instruments for Engineering Science  Description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Don Evans, Arizona State University

8. Developing an Assessment and Evaluation Plan  Workshop participants will

  • gain knowledge about writing program and course objectives and outcomes,
  • gain familiarity with various methods for assessment data collection and reporting,
  • gain knowledge about appropriate selection and implementation of assessment tools, and
  • learn about using assessment data for program and course evaluation and enhancement.

Participants should be familiar with preparation of course syllabi and lessons. Familiarity with ABET EC 2000 is desirable but unnecessary. Workshop participants will practice developing objectives and outcomes and explore the various types of assessment methods that can be used to gather data related to objectives and outcomes. Then they will examine criteria that can be used to guide selection of assessment tools. Finally, they will explore how data might be collected, analyzed, reported, and used to close the loop in improving programs and courses. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Ann Kenimer, Texas A&M University
Emily Fowler, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Rita Caso-Esposito, Texas A&M University
Susan Haag, Arizona State University


9. Developing Measurable Objectives and Outcomes for Programs and Courses  Accreditation, both ABET accreditation and regional accreditation, requires that institutions and engineering programs develop measurable objectives and learning outcomes for both courses and programs. In this hands-on interactive workshop, participants will learn how to develop objectives and outcomes for both courses and programs. Then participants will learn how to tie outcomes to assessment methods and how to make appropriate assessment choices. Finally, participants will be introduced to strategies and actions for reaching the chosen outcomes along with associated terminology. Participants should have some experience in constructing course syllabi. Workshop leaders will provide support materials, including a glossary of terms, and program and course objective templates. Familiarity with ABET EC 2000, Criteria 2 and 3, is desirable but unnecessary. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Susan Haag, Arizona State University
Ann Kenimer, Texas A&M University
Emily Fowler, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Rita Caso-Esposito, Texas A&M University


10. Course Objectives and Classroom Assessment  In this workshop, participants will gain experience in writing learning objectives for a single class or topic and gain experience in developing assessment tools for a single class or topic. Participants will develop a set of guidelines for preparing learning objectives and then practice developing objectives for either a learning module or a course. Next, participate will develop guidelines for assessment tools and then practice preparing assessment tools for a learning activity, a single class or a group of classes. The workshop is highly interactive and participants are expected to active contribute. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama
Susan Haag, Arizona State University
Ann Kenimer, Texas A&M University
Emily Fowler, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Rita Caso-Esposito, Texas A&M University



Curriculum Integration

11. Curriculum Integration:  Why and How  
The workshop examines four disciplines that provide theoretical foundations for initiative by the Foundation Coalition:  learning theory, active/cooperative learning, technology-enabled learning, and curriculum integration. The section on learning theory examines how our understanding of how people learn has changed during the past fAt the end of the workshop, participants will be able to

  • use concept maps to graphically capture relationships among different concepts in an engineering course or curriculum,
  • describe how our understanding of learning supports the need for curriculum integration, and
  • develop underlying concepts for an integrated curriculum project.

In a longer version of the workshop, participants will also be able to explain how an integrated curriculum and draw on various implementations of integrated curricula to illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of integrated curricula. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University
P. K. Imbrie, Purdue University



Technology-enabled Learning

12. Technology-enabled Learning in Engineering  
The workshop asks participants to examine roles that technology might play in improving the preparation of engineering graduates. First, participants contribute possible applications for technology. Then, the facilitators survey applications of technology in a number of engineering programs across the country and the classrooms that were either constructed or renovated to facilitate the use of technology. Usually, participants raise many questions about the design of the classrooms and how faculty members teach in the classrooms. Facilitators address the questions and ask other participants to contribute to the dialog. Finally, participants are asked to identify factors that promote and hinder applications of technology to engineering education. Detailed description.
Available facilitator:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University



13. Designing Innovative Classrooms for Education in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Engineering  Description coming soon.
Available facilitators:
David Cordes, University of Alabama
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University



Curricular Change

14. Curricular Change, Resistance, and Leadership
Change increasingly characterizes higher education. Therefore, the workshop has been designed to help participants engage knowledge about change and how they might use the knowledge to modify their own ideas about how to promote change. Workshop participants will be able to

  • define the concept of a change model,
  • articulate their own change model,
  • describe characteristics of individual change,
  • describe the origin of resistance, types of resistance, and possible responses to resistance,
  • describe processes that promote and hinder change in organizations,
  • define organizational culture and its implication for change, and
  • explore alternative models for change.
Detailed description.

Available facilitator:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University


15. Process of Curricular Change:  Case Studies across the Foundation Coalition  Description coming soon.
Available facilitators:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University
Prudence Merton, Texas A&M University


Learning

16. How Do We Learn?
 Description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University


Learning Communities

17. Inclusive Learning Communities:  Lessons from Foundation Coalition Experiences
Inclusive learning communities should provide increased social support within an academic context for students as they confront challenging engineering curricula. Students, faculty, and industry work together to build the framework for supporting diverse student communities. The workshop is intended to explore the various approaches that have been attempted across the Foundation Coalition and the results that the institutions are seeing. An interactive-intensive format for the workshop allows extensive participation by attendees. Upon completion, participants will be able to

  • define inclusive learning communities and list their objectives,
  • describe strategies that have been used to initiate and sustain inclusive learning communities,
  • examine quantitative and qualitative data that have been assembled for inclusive learning communities at the Foundation Coalition partner institutions,
  • explore additional strategies that may be used to initiate and sustain inclusive learning communities, and
  • develop preliminary plans for initiating inclusive learning communities on their campuses.
Detailed description coming soon.

Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University



18. Faculty Learning Communities Professional development for faculty in the area of teaching often focuses on issues of methodology and strategy—information and support for utilization of particular techniques with the goal of enhancing learning in the classroom. However, the workshop format is not generally designed to substantively address a critical element of the faculty role in the learning/teaching dynamic:  individual beliefs and experiences regarding learning.
Faculty Learning Communities (FLC)—a collaborative initiative at Texas A&M University—teams interdisciplinary groups of faculty participants to examine the issue of learning:  what it is (and is not), what we want it to be, how it happens, what it looks like, etc. Using a format that includes ninety-minute weekly meetings, recommending readings from literature on learning, reflection exercises, individual and collaborative tasks, etc., FLC provides faculty with an opportunity to explore the topic of learning from the perspective of multiple disciplines, validating what they know as learners themselves while helping them develop a common language and theory base for dialogue about learning. This solidifies a foundation that increases communication and encourages exploration of beliefs and knowledge, creating recognition and appreciation of similarities and differences across disciplines and allowing growth and change in personal conceptualizations of learning. The sustained nature of the interaction—occurring in the context of their weekly responsibilities—provides an increased sense of collaboration and community. Through participation in FLC, faculty members draw ideas, energy, and perspective from their exchange that they incorporate into their thinking about, and practice of, learning and teaching. Detailed description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Jean Layne, Texas A&M University


19. Retention of Undergraduate Students in Engineering  Description coming soon.
Available facilitators:
Karan Watson, Texas A&M University
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University



First-year Engineering Curricula

20. First-year Curricula and Programs Across the Foundation Coalition
Description coming soon. Detailed description.
Available facilitators:
Jim Morgan, Texas A&M University
Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University


Sophomore Engineering Curricula

21. Conservation and Accounting Framework:  A Unified Approach to Engineering Science
Description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Don Richards, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology



Course Modules

22. Teaching EC 2000: Integrating Student Outcomes "a–k" into Engineering Courses The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) issue Engineering Criteria 2000 (EC 2000) for accrediting engineering programs. One of the unique features of EC 2000 is Criterion 3 on student outcomes. Criterion 3 specifies eleven student outcomes, known colloquially as "a–k," that each graduate should be able to demonstrate. The workshop is designed to help faculty use modules that have been developed for teaching skills associated with these student outcomes. After completing the workshop, participants will be able to discuss

  • why engineering faculty should be interested in teaching "a–k" skills,
  • what it means to teach "a–k" skills,
  • where and when programs should teach "a–k" skills,
  • who should teach "a–k" skills, and
  • how engineering faculty might teach "a–k" skills.

Participants will examine a methodology for teaching "a–k" skills and sample some of the modules that have been developed. Participants should have some familiarity with ABET EC 2000 Criteria 2 and 3. Detailed description coming soon.
Available facilitator:
Russ Pimmel, University of Alabama