U.S. engineering education for the 21 st century “How could/should ASEE contribute?!’

1. Highlights of a Major, Multi-year ASEE Initiative Leah A. JamiesonPurdue UniversityJack R. LohmannGeorgia Institute of Technology…and 105 colleagues

2. U.S. engineering education for the 21st century “How could/should ASEE contribute?!’ Discussion & Planning “Year of Dialogue” Two-Phase Project 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 • Objective today • Share highlights of the report • Tell you where we’re headed • Hear from you! Phase 2 (Final) Report Phase 1 Report June 2009 Phase 2 Report Fall 2010 105 contributors 100’s! 1,000’s?

3. a universal and fundamental question… …and the report’s major recommendation Q: “How can we create an environment in which many exciting, engaging, and empowering engineering educational innovations can flourish and make a significant difference in educating future engineers?” A: “Create and sustain a vibrant engineering academic culture for scholarly and systematic educational innovation — just as we have for technological innovation — to ensure that the U.S. engineering profession has the right people with the right talent for a global society.”

4. a foundational premise how we teach is as important as what we teach Pedagogy cannot make up for a lack of content — but inattention to pedagogy can seriously compromise learning High-quality learning environments are the result of attention to both content and how people learn

5. the focus of the report Integrating what we want inthe “next generation” engineer withwhat we know about how people learn into a field of inquiry and practice focused onengineering learning

6. who, what, and how Most reports emphasize “what” needs to change (e.g., topics to cover, experiences to offer) “Who” should drive the change and “how” have not been as fully discussed — but they largely determine how quickly and how well “what” occurs and how it is sustained

7. “how” educational innovation looks today How do we bridge the divide? (Engineering) education researchers Engineering education practitioners

8. a proposed model More than “proposed,” used in practice by leading scholars Educational Practice which help improve identifies and motivates Answers Insights Questions Ideas that results in which lead to “Challenge-based Instruction in an Introductory Biomedical Engineering Course”(p. 8) Educational Research

9. building capacity and connecting the communities Engineering education innovation depends on a vibrant community of scholars and practitionersworking in collaborationto advance the frontiers ofknowledge and practice…and it also depends on support – • Adequate fiscal resources • Appropriate facilities • Reputable journals • Highly-regarded conferences • Prestigious recognitions Educational Practice Answers Insights Questions Ideas Educational Research

10. “who” should drive change? engineering education depends on many stakeholders, but… • …engineering faculty and administrators are key • they determine the content of the program • they decide how it is delivered • they shape the environment in which it is offered

11. encouraging, supporting, and empowering faculty • It’s the reward system. • Nah, duh! • No doubt, we need to continue to assure evaluation processes are transparent and they do reward educational innovation • However, the proposed model has many of the same metrics used to evaluate faculty success in scholarly and systematic technological innovation

12. more specifically • The role of faculty members is not to impart knowledge — it is to design learning environments that support the process of knowledge acquisition • Strengthen career-long professional development — starting with doctoral students • Create supportive environments (e.g., R&D units, resources, HR practices) • Form broader collaborations — engineering education innovation is a cross-disciplinary endeavor

13. integrating “what” we know about engineering with “what” we know about learning • An examination of recent literature, program announcements, conference themes, etc. make clear that a considerable amount of attention is being directed at making our engineering programs more — • engaging (e.g., active learning) • relevant (e.g., experiential, real-world) • welcoming (studies show repeatedly that the most effective way to improve persistence is to improve the quality of the learning experience)

14. for those ready to get started Some suggested actions (pp. 21-26)

15. Phase 2 — “catalyzing a conversation” feedback from the broader engineering community • 1. Web site for individual comments from anyone, open until June 2010 www.asee.org • 2. Focused discussions at conferences, ASEE Section meetings, etc.

16. Phase 2 — “catalyzing a conversation” feedback from the broader community • 3. Invited samples of engineering programs • random sample: 100 universities, 200 departments • 55 additional universities • sample of engineering technology programs

17. a research study Project Team Barbara M. Olds, Chair Colorado School of Mines Maura J. Borrego, Vice Chair Virginia Tech Mary Besterfield-Sacre University of Pittsburgh Lori Breslow Massachusetts Institute of Technology Monica F. Cox Purdue University Lorraine N. Fleming Howard University Lisa R. Lattuca Pennsylvania State University James W. Pellegrino University of Illinois at Chicago Sarah K.A. Pfatteicher University of Wisconsin-Madison Questions • Departments: Survey of extent to which report elements are being practiced and to what extent they are viewed as important. • Chairs/Heads/Deans: What are the principal opportunities and challenges you face helping your department/college create a culture of scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education?

18. a synthesis of broad community input Phase 1 Phase 2 A final report summarizing the feedback (perhaps even consensus!) on how best to proceed to rapidly to create and sustain a culture of scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education [ Title: TBD ]

19. “think - pair - share” Think: Pick one of the questions 1,2,3. For 3-4 minutes, think and write your response on the card. Pair: Turn to your neighbor, introduce yourself. Talk about your responses. Share: Share your responses with the group. We’ll collect the index cards at the end of the session.

20. your turn: help advance the next phase How can you, your home organization, or other organizations,including CDIO, act on the report’s ideas? 1. [Who] What examples of the cycle of educational practice and research stand out in your mind? 2. [How] How can innovation as a cycle of educational practice and research be practiced more effectively? [What] What can we do to make engineering programs more engaging, relevant, or welcoming based on what we know about learning?

21. Phase 2 — how you can continue to help • 1. Web site for individual comments from anyone, open until June 2010 • 2. Continue the conversation • in workshop W3A • at 14:00 today. 3. If asked, participate in the research survey

22. Thank you!Report and survey form for individual responses:www.asee.org(upper right-hand block)orhttp://asee.org/about/board/committees/EEGE/upload/CCSSIEE_Phase1Report_June2009.pdf(direct link to report)lhj@purdue.edujlohmann@gatech.edu

24. Continuing the Conversation2010 International CDIO ConferenceWorkshop W3AMaura BorregoVirginia Tech

25. Focus on Chapter 5 Suggested Actions Some suggested actions (pp. 21-26)

26. Suggested Actions for Many Groups • Engineering Faculty Members, Chairs and Deans • American Society for Engineering Education • Professional Engineering Societies • ABET and Accreditation Agencies • Industry • Funding Agencies

27. Faculty member-focused recommendations • Link engineering education practice and research • Support and recognize educational innovation • Prepare future faculty (graduate students) • Enhance faculty experience in industry

28. Student experience-focused recommendations • Integrate the curriculum – multiple disciplines and student careers stages within projects • Promote learning through entrepreneurship • Educate the global engineer • Develop students as leaders • Promote learning through service (service-learning)

29. “think - pair - share” Think: For 3-4 minutes, think and write down your response. Pair: Turn to your neighbor, introduce yourself. Talk about your responses. Share: Share your responses with the group. We’ll collect written feedback at the end of the session.

30. What can one person do? • Many of these recommendations require coordination among many people working within and beyond a university– what actions can you take to move engineering education innovation forward without waiting for others?