This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago Library]On: 19 November 2014, At: 05:35Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Applied Environmental Education &CommunicationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueec20

International Experiential LearningCourse DesignAndrew Curtis Elmore aa University of Missouri-Rolla , Rolla, Missouri, USAPublished online: 24 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Andrew Curtis Elmore (2006) International Experiential Learning Course Design,Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 5:2, 117-125, DOI: 10.1080/15330150600648978

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15330150600648978

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 5:117–125, 2006Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1533-015X print / 1533-0389 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15330150600648978

International Experiential Learning Course Design

Andrew Curtis Elmore, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Missouri, USA

International experiential learning projects have increased in popularity overrecent years, and many of these projects focus on environmental topics in thedeveloping world. An experimental course in International Groundwater Studieswas developed to bridge the gap between extracurricular service type programs andacademically-based study abroad programs. The course included online instructionin order to accommodate varying student schedules, and an eight-day field trip toGuatemala was included in the curriculum. These challenging situational factorsled to the decision to apply formal design theory to the course, and qualitativeself-reported data were collected to evaluate the effectiveness of theformally-designed course to address both the course learning objectives as well asconcerns regarding collaborative functionality between students who had had littlein-person interaction prior to traveling.

The growth of service-based programs such asEngineers Without Borders and academic pro-grams such as the Worcester Polytechnic Insti-tute’s (WPIs) Global Perspective Programs in-dicate that college students’ interest in interna-tional experiential learning opportunities is onthe increase. Davis and Mello (2003) stated thatthe number of Americans studying abroad hasgrown 45 percent in recent years, whereas theactual length of study time has decreased to al-low greater access to the programs. The focus ofmany of these projects is the environment, es-pecially with respect to factors that directly im-pact human health. Sustainable water supplies,energy supplies, and sanitation systems are fre-quently the focus of environmental science andengineering students engaged in international

Address correspondence to Andrew CurtisElmore, Assistant Professor of GeologicalEngineering, University of Missouri-Rolla, 127McNutt Hall, Rolla, MO 65409. E-mail:elmoreac@umr.edu

projects. Davis and Mello (2003) cited interestin the WPI program from the American Soci-ety of Engineering Education, the National Sci-ence Foundation, and the Accreditation Boardfor Engineering and Technology as evidencethat international study programs have appealbeyond individual institutional campuses. Theinterest in international experience has evenevolved to the point where students do notleave the U.S. in a program described by Puzon(1999) where interns gain international experi-ence by working for foreign embassies locatedin the U.S.

While students may become involved ininternational studies through an interest in trav-eling or to address the desire to help others,there is a unique benefit associated with in-ternational experiential learning. McKeachie(1999) defined experiential learning as “abroad spectrum of educational experiences,such as community service, fieldwork, sen-sitivity training groups, internships, cooper-ative education involving work in business

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

118 A. C. ELMORE

or industry, and undergraduate participationin faculty research.” The inclusion of an in-ternational component creates an enhancedversion of experiential learning which chal-lenges the participant’s identity, understand-ing of their home culture, and their out-look on the global job market (Davis andMello, 2003). In some international expe-riential learning programs as described byHaddad (1997), engineering students explic-itly investigated links between technology andsociety.

However rewarding the benefits of inter-national experiential learning may be, thereare significant challenges associated with de-veloping an academic program around the in-ternational experience. Service-based programsare often categorized as extracurricular, andwhile individual motivation to participate inthese typically short term projects may be high,the incorporation of such opportunities intohigher education pedagogy may be challenging.For example, study-abroad academic programstypically require institutional changes such as re-ducing academic terms from 15 to 7 weeks toreduce financial burdens associated with ex-tended overseas living costs.

An experimental course in InternationalGroundwater Studies was developed at theUniversity of Missouri-Rolla (UMR) to bridgethe gap between extracurricular service typeprograms and academically-based study abroadprograms. The three-credit-hour course wasconducted during the standard 15-weeksemester used at UMR, and the course in-cluded a field trip to Guatemala over SpringBreak. Challenging situational factors providedmotivation for applying formal course designtheory during the execution of the class.

The course was offered as an upper divi-sion class which permitted students to take it foreither undergraduate or graduate credit. Fivegraduate students and five undergraduate stu-dents enrolled in the course. Nine of the stu-dents were full or part time students at the UMRcampus and one student was a full time pro-fessional working in Kansas City, approximately200 miles distant from Rolla, Missouri. The

students’ majors were science and engineer-ing programs including: geological engineer-ing, petroleum engineering, civil engineering,environmental engineering, geology, and geo-physics. Five female and five male students en-rolled in the course. All of the students werenative English-speakers, and none of them wasfluent in Spanish or the indigenous languagesof the highlands of Guatemala. A bilingual vol-unteer fluent in English and Spanish was iden-tified to help the students with interpretationbefore, during, and after the trip.

COURSE DESIGN

The development of sustainable groundwatersupplies is a significant interest area for envi-ronmental engineering and science students.The western highlands of Guatemala provideexcellent opportunities for students and re-searchers interested in evaluating unexploredwater resources. Given that exposure to water-related environmental studies is relatively com-mon through geoenvironmental curricula aswell as extracurricular activities such as partic-ipation in local Stream Teams and EngineersWithout Borders, the characterization of thequantity and quality of various water suppliesat a study site in Guatemala both appealed tostudents and appeared to be an appropriate the-matic goal for the UMR course.

The upper division course was the firstcourse in known UMR history to include an in-ternational field trip as a formal element of thesyllabus. A target enrollment of eight studentswas identified for the initial class offering, andinstructor concern regarding potential underenrollment in the course led to the decisionto provide online instruction. The rationale forthis decision was that the flexibility of the on-line environment would permit students withotherwise conflicting schedules to enroll in thecourse, thereby increasing the number of po-tential students available for the course. The

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING COURSE DESIGN 119

selection of online instruction was supported byinformation presented in Poirier and Feldman(2004) who found that online courses could beas, or more, effective than comparable coursestaught in the classroom because of increasedopportunities for instructor-student communi-cation. As a side note, the concerns regardingunderenrollment appeared misplaced becausethe course was eventually over enrolled with 10students.

In addition to the previously discussedreferences regarding international experientiallearning, sources of information regarding on-line course design were reviewed. Aisami (2004)described the eight-step instruction systemsdesign model for designing and developingcourses for the online environment. Salter,Richards, and Carey (2004) presented a formalprogram for online and classroom instructionaldesign based on the five principals of tasks,tools, tutorials, topics, and teamwork.

Ambrose and Amon (1997) presented acourse design process consisting of the five fac-tors identified by the Davidson and AmbroseResearch-Teaching Analogy: audience, objec-tives, scope and content, learning activities, andfeedback which partially addressed the SevenPrinciples for Good Practice in Undergradu-ate Education. Farr, Lee, Metro, and Sutton(2001) describe the four essential elements ofa successful engineering capstone design classas: (1) using a real world problem, (2) us-ing many analytical tools in a team-based envi-ronment, (3) closing nontechnical competencyissues, and (4) using a total design process.The UMR course, while not strictly an engi-neering competency course, had parallels in-cluding, but not limited to: (1) water supplyis a real world problem in Guatemala; (2) col-lection of water quality and quantity data re-quired cooperative interaction between the stu-dents; (3) the students did not speak Spanish, soan interpreter was used to facilitate in-countrycommunication, and (4) the course would bea total experience beginning with planning,continuing with data collection, and endingwith communicating the results to the outsideworld.

Fink (2003) provided a detailed descrip-tion of a more generic integrated course de-sign process as summarized in Table 1. Fink’sintegrated course design theory consists of 12steps organized into an initial phase of identify-ing strong primary components, an intermedi-ate phase of assembling components, and phasefor finalizing the course design. The broadernature of Fink’s work relative to the other liter-ature reviewed provided the basis for selectionfor the UMR course.

Some of the following atypical challengesassociated with the UMR course provided anopportunity to test Fink’s course design theoryqualitatively:

� Students might be apprehensive about travelto Guatemala.

� Students might not feel connected to eachother or to the instructor because online in-struction reduced in-person contact prior tothe trip.

� Students might be intimidated by the experi-ential learning aspect of collecting environ-mental data in Guatemala.

� Logistical problems associated with interna-tional travel might prevent some or all of thestudents from collecting the data needed tocomplete their assignments.

Initial Course Design

The initial phase of the course design activi-ties resulted in the identification of the specificcontext of the teaching and learning situationknown as situational factors. The primary situ-ational factor was the concern that online in-struction would preclude students from beingsufficiently interpersonally connected to par-ticipate effectively in the cooperative learningopportunities when performing field work inGuatemala.

The identification of learning goals wascompleted during the initial course design bythe development of the assertive statement “Ayear after this course is over, I (the instructor)want and hope that the students will:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

120 A. C. ELMORE

Table 1Integrated Course Design Process (After Fink, 2003)

Initial Design Phase—Building Strong Primary Components1. Situational factors

Special instructional challengesStudent, department, institution, societal expectationsConsistency with larger curricular context

2. Learning goalsWhat does the instructor want the students to learn by the end of the semester?What should the students retain several years after the completion of the course?

3. Feedback and Assessment ProceduresWhat procedures will help the students learn?The basis for issuing a course grade

4. Teaching and learning activitiesEmphasis on rich learning experiences and in-depth reflective dialogueCoherent course structure focuses on interdependent sequence of learning activities

5. Primary components integrationAre Components 1–4 consistent with each other?

Intermediate Design Phase—Assemble Primary Components6. Course structure

Identification of course segments based on contentAssigning class time to segments, and developing segment sequence

7. Instructional strategySpecific sequence of learning activities including both in- and out-of-class activities

8. Overall scheme of learning activitiesIntegration of Components 6 and 7The integration process results in the development of a week-by-week course schedule

Final Design Phase—Finalize Course Design9. Grading system

Identify learning activities to be gradedDevelop relative weight of individual learning activities

10. Possible problemsIdentification of potential operational problems such as availability of library reserves relative to numberof students

11. SyllabusCommunicates highlights of course design to studentsCourse goals, course structure including exam/homework due dates, grading procedures

12. Course and teaching evaluationCollection of feedback regarding course components during and/or after semester

� Have the ability to plan a relatively simplefield data collection program,

� Demonstrate an improved ability to commu-nicate in writing,

� Be able to provide constructive peer reviewand conversely address peer comments,

� Be comfortable performing self-assessment,and

� Have an intermediate concept of water sup-ply characterization activities.

Peer assessment was selected as a primaryfeedback and assessment activity in conjunctionwith instructor assessment. The concept ofpaired peer review, or Study Buddies, also pro-vided a means for development of interpersonalconnections before the Guatemala field trip. A

schedule for assignment assessment was estab-lished for both the instructor’s assessment andthe peer assessment.

The teaching and learning activities wereidentified during the initial course designphase. Traditional lecture and examination for-mats were discarded in favor of activities whichmore closely addressed the course’s experien-tial learning objectives. Some of the learningactivities included:

� A series of introduction assignments to facil-itate student socialization,

� Developing a work plan for collecting fielddata including the identification of equip-ment and supplies necessary for field datacollection,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING COURSE DESIGN 121

Table 2Potential Data Collection Topics

Topic no. Topic description

1 Groundwater quality measured in deep well samplesWhat are the potential sources of contamination both naturally-occurring and man-made?

2 Groundwater quantity from deep wellIs the groundwater supply sustainable?Does the static water level in the well change with time as a result of groundwater extraction?Are changes in the water level correlated with changes in precipitation?How much groudwater is extracted from the well?

3 Water quality from springs, shallow hand-dug wells, and surface water (lake)What are the potential sources of contamination both naturally-occurring and man-made?

4 Water quantity from springsIs the supply sustainable? Does the flow change seasonally?Are changes in the flow correlated with changes in precipitation?

5 Water quantity from shallow hand-dug wells and rainwater collection systemsIs the supply sustainable? Does the supply change seasonally?Are changes in the well water level correlated with changes in precipitation?What is the frequency and duration of precipitation events—daily and seasonally?

6 Water quality from rainwater collection systems and commercial water vendorsWhat are the potential sources of contamination both naturally-occurring and man-made?

7 Water quality from commerical water vendorsWhat are the potential sources of contamination both naturally-occurring and man-made?

8 Per capita water consumption at Hogar del NinosWhat is the weekly consumption of water? How many people are using the water?

9 Future per capita water consumption at public spigot, church camp, and schoolWhat is the quantity of water that will be required for each of these groups of people?What is the quantity of water that each of these people use today? What source of water do theyuse?

10 Communication and education of water users and support agenciesHow do we inform the inhabitatants of Lemoa about our project in a non-threatening manner?What unified method do we use to collect data (especially quantity data) over time?For example, can we ask local elementary school classes or the children at the orphanage to help?How do we communicate our efforts to future volunteer teams that may visit Lemoa?How do we publicize the relief work at Lemoa to humanitarian groups in the US?

� Identifying on-campus sources for the fieldequipment and supplies and/or fundingsources to acquire the field equipment andsupplies,

� Collection of the field data in Guatemala, and� Development of individual final reports doc-

umenting the field efforts and addressing theindividual water supply topics.

Intermediate Course Design

A thematic course structure was developed byidentifying a phased chronological sequence ofactivities: preparation, field activities, and re-porting. The study site for the course was lo-cated in San Sebastian de Lemoa (Lemoa) in

the Department of Quiche. The instructor’sprevious groundwater research at Lemoa in-dicated that there was a wide variety of wa-ter sources used by the indigenous popula-tion of Lemoa. These sources included waterpiped from springs 15 km distant from thevillage, deep groundwater from a profession-ally drilled 240 m well, precipitation collectedfrom rooftop systems, surface water from a locallake, shallow groundwater from hand-dug wells,and water purchased from local bulk haulers.Each student was required to select one uniquecombination of water source and either waterquality or quantity as their study topic. Table 2lists the topics that were provided to the stu-dents. Students were permitted to select one ofthe topics or to propose a new topic. None of thestudents proposed new topics, so all 10 of the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

122 A. C. ELMORE

topics were addressed. Although the studentswere required to select individual study top-ics, many of the topics required interdependentdata collecting activities. For example, Topics1, 3, 6, and 7 consisted of characterizing wa-ter quality of different water sources. Poten-tial sources of contamination for each sourceneeded to be identified while a consistent setof water quality standards for all sources wasneeded before water quality testing procedurescould be identified. The identification of poten-tial sources of contamination typically requiredindividual work while the identification of a sin-gle set of water standards required group re-search and consensus. This activity fostered co-operative learning which was defined by Smith,Sheppard, Johnson, and Johnson (2005) as pos-itive interdependence between students with in-dividual and group accountability.

Poirer and Feldman (2004) provided thebasis for the instructional strategy selected dur-ing the intermediate phase of the course de-sign. They found that E-mail and threaded dis-cussion were effective instructional tools used inonline courses. The use of E-mail was discour-aged for the International Groundwater Stud-ies class, and instead students were asked tosubmit questions via the online bulletin board.Student work products such as investigationwork plans and peer review comments on thework plans were also submitted via the bul-letin board. Instructor assessments of the workproducts were posted on the bulletin board,but the grades were communicated to the stu-dents via E-mail to maintain privacy. In thismanner, all of the students’ work was avail-able to the class so as to increase communityknowledge.

The Spring Break field trip dictated the se-quence and schedule of learning activities, andthe overall scheme of learning activities was de-fined in a week-by-week calendar for the course.

Final Course Design

The course grade was weighted by the coursesegments identified during the development of

the course structure. The preparation phase ofthe project was weighted as 25 percent of theoverall course grade, the field activities weregiven a weight of 50 percent, and reporting wasgiven a weight of 25 percent.

The international travel component of thecourse was explicitly considered during the de-velopment of the course grading strategy. It wasacknowledged that the students and the instruc-tor would not be able to prevent the airline frommisplacing or losing luggage, nor would thestudents and instructor be able to control theconditions which might be encountered at thestudy site. For example, the residents living atthe study site might not agree to take studentsto water supply springs so that a water qualitysample could be collected. Thus the grade forthe field activities phase was based on the de-velopment of an Illustrated Field Journal. Thedaily journal entries were required to includesuch information as (but not limited to):

� Activities performed,� Data collected,� Deviations from work plan,� Personal observations regarding the physical

and cultural environment.

The instructor reviewed each individual journaldaily in the field to ensure that data were be-ing recorded in a timely manner. In addition towritten text, the journal requirements includedat least eight figures, drawings, photographs, orother mediums of personal expression.

The primary post-field learning activityconsisted of developing a report. The studentswere presented with a choice of the reportingvenues listed in Table 3. The weighted gradingscheme summarized in Table 3 was developedto account for the different difficulty levels as-sociated with the different reporting venues.The students were given the opportunity tocollaborate with each other on the reportingproducts, but they were warned that the samegrade would be assigned to each collabora-tor because a mechanism to identify individ-ual efforts would not be established. This pro-vided incentive for careful selection of potentialcollaborators.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING COURSE DESIGN 123

Table 3Reporting Work Product Weighting

Venue

Maximumpoints possible

(out of 100)

1 Papers submitted to refereedjournal

100

2 Presentations submitted totechnical conference

90

3 Posters submitted to technicalconference

80

4 Articles submitted tonewspapers or othergeneral interest publications

85

5 Presentations at localprofessional, technical,and/or general interest civicorganization meetings

85

6 Fact sheets, videos,webpages, or othercommunication media thatmay be distributed toproject sponsors (more thanone deliverable required forgrade)

85

The review of the course design did notidentify potential operational problems beyondthose previously discussed, and an expanded syl-labus consisting of approximately 20 pages wasdeveloped for the course. The expanded syl-labus Table of Contents presented in Table 4shows that the majority of the content was infor-mation regarding the course design includingwork product definition and grading scheme.

Table 4Expanded Syllabus Table of Contents

Section

1.0 Introduction1.1 Welcome1.2 Course description1.3 Previous work in Lemoa, Guatemala1.4 Course communications2.0 Hydrogeologic characteristics3.0 Tasks, work products, assessment3.1 Tasks

3.1.1 Water system expansion3.1.2 Water supply data collection

3.2 Work products and assessment3.2.1 Preparation3.2.2 Field activities3.2.3 Reporting

4.0 References

The final step of the course designwas the identification of the course evalua-tion. Self-reporting through anonymous onlinecourse evaluations was used at the conclu-sion of the course to characterize qualita-tively the achievement of selected learningobjectives.

QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENTOF THE COURSE THROUGHSELF-REPORTING

The field work was executed without majorproblems, and if the rigor of the reporting workproducts is indicative of the student involve-ment, the class was very successful. Two studentsprepared papers for refereed journal submittal,two students prepared papers for presentationat technical conferences, and the remainderof the students submitted at least one articleto news and general interest publications. Fur-thermore, if informal student comments are aneffective meter of success, the course may bejudged as very successful because one-half ofthe students expressed interest in participatingin the class again if it were to be offered in thefuture.

The relatively low number of students par-ticipating in the course reduced the potentialutility of a more rigorous characterization tech-nique. The feedback questions were also usedto characterize the effectiveness of the coursedesign with respect to developing collaborativefunctionality between students who had had lit-tle in-person interaction prior to the Guatemalatrip. The questionnaire consisted of multiplechoice questions. The questionnaire providedfree answer space for students who wished toexpand on or explain their multiple choice se-lections. The following is a summary of the re-sults of the online course evaluations includingselected free answer responses.

The course evaluations showed that 60 per-cent of the students felt like they were strangers

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

124 A. C. ELMORE

or on the fringe of a cohesive group at the begin-ning of the class. The remaining 40 percent feltthat they were either accepted as members of, orwere participants in a cohesive group, and noneof the students felt highly connected to a cohe-sive group at the beginning of the class. By theend of the field trip, 80 percent of the studentsresponded that they were highly involved asmembers of a cohesive group, and no studentsresponded that they were on the fringe of thegroup or strangers at the end of the field trip.Students also stated that they were motivated toexpend additional effort on the class becauseof the nontraditional setting and because theyperceived the class to be “real world.” One stu-dent stated that he or she was only interestedin traveling to Guatemala and did not have anyinterest in the course content.

Two of the students who participated in theclass returned to Guatemala during the nextacademic term to collect additional water con-sumption and water quality data. During thattrip, the students learned about two water sup-ply development projects, and they initiated agrass roots effort to raise funds for the two newprojects upon return to the U.S. At the dateof this writing, three graduate and undergrad-uate students and two alumni, or one-half ofthe students in the class, have been involvedin these new service projects. It is believed thatthis phenomenon may be indicative of the pre-liminary development of a life-long interest inthe subject matter specifically and learning ingeneral.

SUMMARY ANDCONCLUSIONS

An experimental course was developed to pro-vide international experiential learning forengineering and science students within theframework of a traditional university 15-weeksemester. Online instruction was used as astudent recruiting tool, and the combinationof an international field trip and online in-

struction provided the motivation for applyingFink’s theory of integrated course design. Boththe instructor’s experience as well as qualita-tive self-reported student data indicated thatFink’s integrated course design theory was a use-ful tool during the planning and implementa-tion of the International Groundwater Studiescourse.

However, it is concluded that it is reason-able to streamline the course design processthrough consolidation of some of the 12 steps.For example, the evaluation of the course andteaching could be preliminarily developed dur-ing the selection of the learning goals. Thecourse structure, overall set of learning activi-ties, integration of the component parts, grad-ing system, and course syllabus could be devel-oped concurrently. Consolidation of the coursedesign process into fewer steps could make theapplication of the course design theory more ap-pealing to some instructors. Although the self-reported data presented in this article may beinteresting in a qualitative or anecdotal manner,the testing of Fink’s integrated course designtheory would benefit substantially from a morerigorous and quantitative analysis on a largersample of students. Nevertheless, the applica-tion of Fink’s Integrated Course Design theoryis recommended for consideration for courseswith nontraditional situational factors such asthose identified for the International Ground-water Studies course.

REFERENCES

Aisami, R. S. (2004). Developing and managing web-enhanced courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Devel-opment, 16(3), 19–25.

Ambrose, S. A., & Amon, C. H. (1997). Systematic designof a first-year mechanical engineering course at CarnegieMellon University. Journal of Engineering Education. April,173–181.

Davis, P. W., & Mello, N. A. (2003). Beyond study abroad.International Educator, 12(1), 40–48.

Farr, J. V., Lee, M. A., Metro, R. A., & Sutton, J. P.(2001). Using a systemic engineering design processto conduct undergraduate engineering management

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING COURSE DESIGN 125

capstone projects. Journal of Engineering Education, April,193–197.

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences, Anintegrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Haddad, M. R. (1997). Engineering students abroad. Journalof Chemical Education, 74(7), 757–759.

McKeachie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, andtheory for college and university teachers, 10th ed. Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company.

Poirier, C. R. & Feldman, R. S. (2004). Teaching in cy-berspace: Online versus traditional instruction using a

waiting-list experimental design. Teaching of Psychology,31(1), 59–62.

Puzon, B. (1999). Embassy scholars go international. LiberalEducation, 85(3), 52–56.

Salter, D., Richards, L., & Carey, T. (2004). The ‘T5’ de-sign model: An instructional model and learning envi-ronment to support the integration of online and campus-based courses. Educational Media International, 41(3), 207–217.

Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson,R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement. Journal of Engi-neering Education. January, 87–101.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 0

5:35

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14