Recent Advances in Recent Advances in Engineering Education at Engineering Education at

ASUASU

by:by:

Professor Avinash C. Singhal, P.E., Sc.D.Professor Avinash C. Singhal, P.E., Sc.D.

Arizona State University, Tempe AZ, USAArizona State University, Tempe AZ, USA

andand

Peter NeubauerPeter Neubauer

Undergraduate Engineering StudentUndergraduate Engineering Student

Arizona State University, TempeArizona State University, Tempe

January 1999January 1999

ASU 1999: ACS/2

•Education involves two primary components: Education involves two primary components: teaching and learning. teaching and learning. •Some ASU Engineering faculty have Some ASU Engineering faculty have consciously built quality aspects into the consciously built quality aspects into the course using a student learning assessment course using a student learning assessment known as known as Levels of LearningLevels of Learning. . •The concepts of expectations documents and The concepts of expectations documents and checklists, are examined in detail with the idea checklists, are examined in detail with the idea of bringing this concept to other higher level of bringing this concept to other higher level engineering courses. engineering courses.

AbstractAbstract

ASU 1999: ACS/3

ObjectivesObjectives

Several faculty members at Arizona State University have Several faculty members at Arizona State University have always been intrigued by the idea of implementing "quality always been intrigued by the idea of implementing "quality and excellence" in the engineering education, viz. :and excellence" in the engineering education, viz. :

How to introduce quality and excellence in a course such as How to introduce quality and excellence in a course such as ECE 100, andECE 100, and

Find a “magic pill” that can be used to build excellence into Find a “magic pill” that can be used to build excellence into education.education.

This paper will explore various methods and approaches This paper will explore various methods and approaches necessary to produce quality in both education and the necessary to produce quality in both education and the learning levels of students.learning levels of students.

ASU 1999: ACS/4

DefinitionDefinition

Total quality management and quality Total quality management and quality in the work place are not necessarily in the work place are not necessarily the same as quality in education.the same as quality in education.

Quality is demonstrated by a set of Quality is demonstrated by a set of distinguishing attributes and distinguishing attributes and characteristics.characteristics.

Excellence is superior quality.Excellence is superior quality.

ASU 1999: ACS/5

Profile of the Modern Profile of the Modern StudentStudent

Many students hold a part-time or even a full-time job Many students hold a part-time or even a full-time job while attending school.while attending school.

Some students are trying to support families.Some students are trying to support families. Students come from diverse backgrounds and have Students come from diverse backgrounds and have

different learning styles and needs.different learning styles and needs. These and other pressures detract from the time that a These and other pressures detract from the time that a

student can devote to learning.student can devote to learning. Students tend to poorly utilize resources such as class Students tend to poorly utilize resources such as class

time, professor office hours, study guides, and textbooks. time, professor office hours, study guides, and textbooks. Textbooks are often difficult for the average student to Textbooks are often difficult for the average student to

comprehend. Examples are frequently too simple to be comprehend. Examples are frequently too simple to be useful on more complex problems.useful on more complex problems.

ASU 1999: ACS/6

IntroductionIntroduction

More than 30% of new More than 30% of new engineers lack engineers lack

knowledge expected by knowledge expected by industry in areas such industry in areas such

as quality control, as quality control, manufacturing, or manufacturing, or

computer applications.computer applications.

Percentage of Engineers Who Lack Expected Skills

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Quality Control Manufacturing ComputerApplications

Skill Areas

Perc

enta

ge o

f Engin

eers

Maul, Gary; “Engineering Students Not Learning Job Skills in College,” Ohio State University, Industrial Engineering, (funded by NSF), Materials Performance, v.34 March, 1995 p 14.

ASU 1999: ACS/7

Assessment of Student Assessment of Student LearningLearning

Homework product assessment:Homework product assessment:

1. Students need to become familiar with the new 1. Students need to become familiar with the new method used to assess work products,method used to assess work products,

2. This assessment process focuses on the quality of 2. This assessment process focuses on the quality of the work product.the work product.

3. Past student data from ECE 100 is used to establish 3. Past student data from ECE 100 is used to establish the impact the method of grading/assessment has the impact the method of grading/assessment has upon the quality of student 'learning'.upon the quality of student 'learning'.

ASU 1999: ACS/8

SourcesSources

Three new programs promoted by other Three new programs promoted by other organizations have been examined in an organizations have been examined in an attempt to find the best method of attempt to find the best method of education.education.

1. Drexel University E1. Drexel University E4 4 ProjectProject

2. Arizona State University ECE100 Course2. Arizona State University ECE100 Course

3. The Gateway Engineering Education 3. The Gateway Engineering Education CoalitionCoalition

ASU 1999: ACS/9

Arizona State University Arizona State University ECE 100 CurriculumECE 100 Curriculum

The General Process The General Process Some engineering faculty have built the quality Some engineering faculty have built the quality

aspect into the curriculum by undertaking a five aspect into the curriculum by undertaking a five step assessment process.step assessment process.

Submitted work products, session activities, Submitted work products, session activities, and session participation are assessed and session participation are assessed according to this according to this Five Step Assessment Process.Five Step Assessment Process.

The terms The terms meets expectations, exceeds meets expectations, exceeds expectations, expectations, or or needs improvementneeds improvement are are assigned to each product, activity, or session.assigned to each product, activity, or session.

http://www.asu.edu/courses/ece100

ASU 1999: ACS/10

AssumptionsAssumptions

Quality cannot be defined but can be Quality cannot be defined but can be recognized when it is present.recognized when it is present.

Quality is determined by the teacher, Quality is determined by the teacher, not the student.not the student.

It is only possible to do your job well It is only possible to do your job well when you understand what is expected.when you understand what is expected.

Everyone wants to, and can, do quality Everyone wants to, and can, do quality work.work.

ASU 1999: ACS/11

Types of QualityTypes of Quality

1. Expected quality: These are basic 1. Expected quality: These are basic characteristics that the instructor assumes characteristics that the instructor assumes are present in generally similar work are present in generally similar work products.products.

2. Revealed quality: These are items that 2. Revealed quality: These are items that instructors talk about when describing what instructors talk about when describing what would make a work product better.would make a work product better.

3. Exciting quality: These are characteristics 3. Exciting quality: These are characteristics which make the work product outstanding or which make the work product outstanding or excellent.excellent.

Requirements Demonstration

ASU 1999: ACS/12

Needs vs. SatisfactionNeeds vs. Satisfaction

REQUIREMENT NOTPRESENT

PRESENT EFFECT OFMORE

Expected Dissatisfaction Unaware No effect

Revealed Dissatisfaction Satisfaction IncreasedSatisfaction

Exciting Unaware Satisfaction IncreasedSatisfaction

Requirements Demonstration

ASU 1999: ACS/13

Conclusions - AssessmentConclusions - Assessment

Gateway Works, Gateway Engineering Education Coalition. 1998.

ASU 1999: ACS/14

ASU Special GradingASU Special Grading

ExceedsExpectations

E

A work product

Work Product Expectations

NeedImprovement

NI

MeetsExpectations

M

Does it MeetExpectations?

Does it ExceedExpectations?

ASU 1999: ACS/15

Five Step Assessment Five Step Assessment ProcessProcess

1. Faculty set expectations using checklists before 1. Faculty set expectations using checklists before assigning homework.assigning homework.

2. Students do the homework and make a self-2. Students do the homework and make a self-assessment using the checklists.assessment using the checklists.

3. Homework is assessed for meeting quality 3. Homework is assessed for meeting quality standards, and then reassessed for achieving an standards, and then reassessed for achieving an exceeds.exceeds.

4. If the student’s work does not meet expectations, 4. If the student’s work does not meet expectations, they are given a second opportunity to convert their they are given a second opportunity to convert their ‘needs improvement’ to ‘meets.’‘needs improvement’ to ‘meets.’

5. Homework cannot achieve ‘exceeds’ during a 5. Homework cannot achieve ‘exceeds’ during a second submittal.second submittal.

ASU 1999: ACS/16

Needs Improvement and Needs Improvement and Exceed ExpectationsExceed Expectations

All parts of the work product must meet All parts of the work product must meet expectations otherwise it will receive expectations otherwise it will receive “needs improvement.”“needs improvement.”

There is no “partial credit.”There is no “partial credit.” Expectations must be met before a Expectations must be met before a

student should try to exceed student should try to exceed expectations.expectations.

ASU 1999: ACS/17

Needs Improvement - Needs Improvement - ResubmissionResubmission

When a product is assessed as “needs When a product is assessed as “needs improvement,” the student has one improvement,” the student has one week to correct the problems and week to correct the problems and resubmit the product.resubmit the product.

A resubmitted work product cannot A resubmitted work product cannot receive an exceeds.receive an exceeds.

A work product may only be A work product may only be resubmitted once.resubmitted once.

ASU 1999: ACS/18

Exceeding ExpectationsExceeding Expectations

It is not possible to define in advance a It is not possible to define in advance a work product that exceeds work product that exceeds expectations.expectations.

The instructor can recognize when The instructor can recognize when expectations have been exceeded.expectations have been exceeded.

Determining what features may excite Determining what features may excite the teacher is a trial and error process.the teacher is a trial and error process.

Repeating the same exciting feature Repeating the same exciting feature can only earn a “meet.”can only earn a “meet.”

ASU 1999: ACS/19

ChecklistsChecklists

A checklist ...A checklist ... … … reduces the possibility of multiple reduces the possibility of multiple

interpretations with written and/or oral interpretations with written and/or oral instructions.instructions.

… … is a collection of Yes/No questions is a collection of Yes/No questions that enumerate the 'Expectation that enumerate the 'Expectation Requirements'. Requirements'.

… … is always complete and cannot be is always complete and cannot be changed after it is issued.changed after it is issued.

ASU 1999: ACS/20

Creation of ChecklistsCreation of Checklists

1. List the learning objectives for the 1. List the learning objectives for the assignment.assignment.

2. List all the characteristics that must be 2. List all the characteristics that must be present in the homework for a student to present in the homework for a student to demonstrate that the learning objective has demonstrate that the learning objective has been met.been met.

3. Refine the list until it contains only definitive 3. Refine the list until it contains only definitive Yes/No questions. In some cases, the Yes/No questions. In some cases, the checklist may contain a scale to rate a given checklist may contain a scale to rate a given trait of a work product.trait of a work product.

ASU 1999: ACS/21

Sample ChecklistSample Checklist

Checklist Example

ASU 1999: ACS/22

Sample Expectations DocumentSample Expectations Document

Expectation Document

ASU 1999: ACS/23

ASU Special GradingASU Special Grading

ASU 1999: ACS/24

Assessment and GradesAssessment and Grades

Number of Exceeds:

Number of Need Improvements:

Number of No Submittals:

Number of Class Participation

Problems:

Final Letter Grade:

ASU 1999: ACS/25

Negative ReactionsNegative Reactions

Since we give the students the right to self-Since we give the students the right to self-assess the product, one unwanted side effect assess the product, one unwanted side effect is that the students usually build up an is that the students usually build up an unrealistically high expectationunrealistically high expectation of their own of their own grade on the product. Thus, the real grade is grade on the product. Thus, the real grade is usually a letdown. usually a letdown.

As a result, a few students show their As a result, a few students show their frustrations, and this requires proper frustrations, and this requires proper handling by the faculty member. handling by the faculty member.

ASU 1999: ACS/26

Teaching Methods and Teaching Methods and Student Retention of Student Retention of

MaterialMaterial

Lecture

Reading

Audio-Visual

Demonstration

Discussion Group

Practice by Doing

Teach Others / Immediate Use

5%

10%

20%

30%

50%

75%

90%

RetentionRate

A survey of previous ECE 100 students reveals that interactive teaching methods are the most effective.

ASU 1999: ACS/27

Student Rating of Student Rating of Teaching MethodsTeaching Methods

Lab Projects

17%

HTMI

12%

Modeling18%

Work Products13%HTMI

12%

Design Notebooks

8%

Textbook8%

Lectures7%

Presentation Sandwich

6%

Lab Projects17%

Concepts Quizzes

4%

Journal3%

Videos4%

This survey of 400 ECE 100 students per year over 8 years shows the specific techniques and materials that students felt were most useful for the learning process (ECE 100/ASU course, surveys, 1990-

98).

ASU 1999: ACS/28

ASU ECE100 GoalsASU ECE100 Goals

Each student will begin to be a self-regulated Each student will begin to be a self-regulated learner.learner.

While students at the freshman level cannot While students at the freshman level cannot be expected to solve actual engineering be expected to solve actual engineering problems, they can practice the problem problems, they can practice the problem solving skills necessary for future classes. solving skills necessary for future classes.

Teams can be a tremendous help and can Teams can be a tremendous help and can actually eliminate many frustrations.actually eliminate many frustrations.

Bellamy, L; McNeill, B.; Singhal, A.C.; A New Approach to Engineering Education, Arizona State University, 1997.

ASU 1999: ACS/29

Levels of LearningLevels of Learning

There are six major categories that There are six major categories that classify an individuals’ learning. In classify an individuals’ learning. In order of increasing complexity and order of increasing complexity and learning, these are learning, these are Knowledge, Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Synthesis, and and EvaluationEvaluation..

The ECE 100 faculty used these The ECE 100 faculty used these categories to define the educational categories to define the educational goals for the students.goals for the students.

ASU 1999: ACS/30

ASU ECE100 SummaryASU ECE100 Summary

All course assignments must be clearly and All course assignments must be clearly and completely defined.completely defined.

Each assignment is assessed based on Each assignment is assessed based on compliance with these clearly stated compliance with these clearly stated expectations.expectations.

Many individuals, both faculty and students, Many individuals, both faculty and students, find the assessment system challenging.find the assessment system challenging.

ASU 1999: ACS/31

Drexel’s EDrexel’s E44 Project Project

EE44 is short for is short for An An EEnhanced nhanced EEducational ducational EExperience in xperience in EEngineering.ngineering.

The EThe E44 Project is the basis for the five Project is the basis for the five year engineering program at Drexel year engineering program at Drexel University in Pennsylvania.University in Pennsylvania.

http://www.ece.drexel.edu/ECE/

ASU 1999: ACS/32

EE44 Goals GoalsThis program emphasizes, among other things:This program emphasizes, among other things:

1.The unifying and interdisciplinary aspects of 1.The unifying and interdisciplinary aspects of engineeringengineering

2.The importance of computer technology as an 2.The importance of computer technology as an aid to learning aid to learning

3.Teamwork and practical experience3.Teamwork and practical experience

4.The importance of continuous and vigorous 4.The importance of continuous and vigorous lifelong learninglifelong learning

5.The role of the engineer in the competitive 5.The role of the engineer in the competitive global economyglobal economy

Donald H. Thomas and Alan Lawley, “Drexel’s E4 Project,” JOM, March 1991, p.33-34.

ASU 1999: ACS/33

Retention RateRetention Rate

During the first During the first year, the student year, the student retention rate for retention rate for

the school of the school of engineering was engineering was

90%. This is 90%. This is almost 40% almost 40%

more than the more than the national average.national average.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

National Average Drexel's E4Program

Group

Retention Rate for the School of Engineering (Drexel)

Donald H. Thomas and Alan Lawley, “Drexel’s E4 Project,” JOM, March 1991, p.35.

ASU 1999: ACS/34

Integrated CurriculumIntegrated Curriculum

The curriculum seeks to couple science The curriculum seeks to couple science and mathematics with engineering.and mathematics with engineering.

A single course integrates both calculus A single course integrates both calculus and physics while another teaches both and physics while another teaches both chemistry and biology.chemistry and biology.

““Science and math are introduced as Science and math are introduced as needed, on a just-in-time basis, to solve needed, on a just-in-time basis, to solve real engineering problems.”real engineering problems.”

http://www.ece.drexel.edu/ECE/

ASU 1999: ACS/35

TechnologyTechnology

Computers and Computers and computational tools computational tools are central elements are central elements to Drexel’s to Drexel’s Curriculum.Curriculum.

This animation was This animation was created by a freshman created by a freshman in their engineering in their engineering program. program.

Gateway Works, Gateway Engineering Education Coalition. 1998. http://www.ece.drexel.edu/ECE/

ASU 1999: ACS/36

Drexel’s EDrexel’s E44 Project Project SummarySummary

The traditional classes are integrated to The traditional classes are integrated to reduce redundant teaching.reduce redundant teaching.

The use of technology is emphasized for all The use of technology is emphasized for all students.students.

The program seeks to establish “a strong The program seeks to establish “a strong foundation in basic science, mathematics, foundation in basic science, mathematics, and the fundamentals of engineering.”and the fundamentals of engineering.”

ASU 1999: ACS/37

EE44 vs ECE vs ECE 100100

A traditional grading system A traditional grading system is used.is used.

Group presentations and Group presentations and studying are encouraged.studying are encouraged.

The use of technology is The use of technology is integrated with the integrated with the curriculum.curriculum.

The curriculum for art, The curriculum for art, science, and engineering science, and engineering disciplines are tightly disciplines are tightly integrated.integrated.

A grading system that emphasizes A grading system that emphasizes quality through the use of terms like quality through the use of terms like ‘meets expectations,’ ‘exceeds ‘meets expectations,’ ‘exceeds expectations,’ and ‘needs expectations,’ and ‘needs improvement’ is used. Assignments improvement’ is used. Assignments are clearly and explicitly defined with are clearly and explicitly defined with expectation documents and checklists.expectation documents and checklists.

Team work and team projects are Team work and team projects are emphasized.emphasized.

A special section emphasizes modeling A special section emphasizes modeling with computer technology.with computer technology.

Another special section tightly Another special section tightly integrates science, art, mathematics, integrates science, art, mathematics, and engineering courses.and engineering courses.

Conclusion - A new program that integrates the best parts from each plus new ideas is necessary.

ASU 1999: ACS/38

Conclusions: Checklists-Conclusions: Checklists-ExpectationsExpectations

The checklists used in ECE100 are still under The checklists used in ECE100 are still under development.development.

The application of checklists outside the ECE100 The application of checklists outside the ECE100 curriculum seems very limited.curriculum seems very limited.

Effective assessment and evaluation is necessary Effective assessment and evaluation is necessary for each class, individual student, and curriculum.for each class, individual student, and curriculum.

Clearly defined expectations, like those found in Clearly defined expectations, like those found in the ASU ECE 100 course, are important and the ASU ECE 100 course, are important and effective since the student knows exactly what is effective since the student knows exactly what is expected.expected.

ASU 1999: ACS/39

Conclusions - AssessmentConclusions - Assessment

A new assessment method that is based on clearly defined A new assessment method that is based on clearly defined expectations and a traditional point system seems to be ideal.expectations and a traditional point system seems to be ideal.

Any assessment system should be constantly evaluated and Any assessment system should be constantly evaluated and refined. An expectation document is useful to build quality into refined. An expectation document is useful to build quality into education.education.

An expectation document is useful to build quality into education.An expectation document is useful to build quality into education. More development is needed to convert quality oriented grade to More development is needed to convert quality oriented grade to

traditional ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ grades.traditional ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ grades. The The meets expectations, exceeds expectations, meets expectations, exceeds expectations, or or needs needs

improvementimprovement system currently used by the ASU ECE100 course system currently used by the ASU ECE100 course seems inadequate.seems inadequate.

This approach produces significant frustrations and objections in This approach produces significant frustrations and objections in many students, graders, and instructors.many students, graders, and instructors.

ASU 1999: ACS/40

Internet TechnologyInternet Technology Authoring material based on new technology requires a Authoring material based on new technology requires a

monumental effort on the part of the faculty.monumental effort on the part of the faculty. Internet technologies are intimidating to a large number of faculty.Internet technologies are intimidating to a large number of faculty. It is not a question of It is not a question of when when or or ifif, it is a question of , it is a question of how soonhow soon.. Multimedia presentations offer a multitude of teaching possibilities. Multimedia presentations offer a multitude of teaching possibilities. The Internet has destroyed the time constraints associated with The Internet has destroyed the time constraints associated with

traditional university courses. traditional university courses. E-mail offers a direct link between students, instructors, and E-mail offers a direct link between students, instructors, and

industry representatives.industry representatives. By offering instruction via the Internet, a “24 hour” campus can be By offering instruction via the Internet, a “24 hour” campus can be

created. This will allow students to learn at any time, from any created. This will allow students to learn at any time, from any place, and at any pace.place, and at any pace.

ASU 1999: ACS/41

Conclusions - Conclusions - Internet TechnologyInternet Technology

The Web provides complete The Web provides complete independence. A student can learn independence. A student can learn from any place, at any time, and at any from any place, at any time, and at any pace. pace.

Web and Internet technologies are Web and Internet technologies are here to stay.here to stay.

Book publishers are quickly converting Book publishers are quickly converting to Web technology.to Web technology.

ASU 1999: ACS/42

Virtual LabsVirtual Labs

Virtual Lab Sample - A GeneratorVirtual Lab Sample - A Generator

Students can Students can use use computerized computerized virtual labs virtual labs to to perform perform many many experiments experiments and to and to visualize visualize concepts and concepts and principles principles presented in presented in a class.a class.

http://home.augsburg.baynet.de/walter.fendt/physengl/generatorengl.htm

ASU 1999: ACS/43

Other ExamplesOther Examples

Professor Siegfried Holzer (holzer@vt.edu) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

John C. Russ Materials Science and Engineering Dept.,

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

ASU 1999: ACS/44

Other ExamplesOther Examples

Professor Siegfried Holzer (holzer@vt.edu) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

ASU 1999: ACS/45

ConclusionConclusion

Pioneers and faculty leaders are needed Pioneers and faculty leaders are needed to develop and author new material and to develop and author new material and demonstrations for engineering courses.demonstrations for engineering courses.

While no universally accepted While no universally accepted assessment method exists, a new, assessment method exists, a new, modern, assessment system needs to be modern, assessment system needs to be developed that better suits the demands developed that better suits the demands of professors and students. of professors and students.

ASU 1999: ACS/46

Final Note - Further Final Note - Further ResearchResearch

Develop multimedia presentations including video Develop multimedia presentations including video demonstrations to augment the existing teaching demonstrations to augment the existing teaching methods used in other engineering courses. This is a methods used in other engineering courses. This is a monumental task that will require significant time monumental task that will require significant time and effort.and effort.

Use this technology, including interactive video Use this technology, including interactive video capabilities, to perform experiments related to the capabilities, to perform experiments related to the mechanics courses in a virtual lab.mechanics courses in a virtual lab.

Prepare a CD-ROM to distribute at technical Prepare a CD-ROM to distribute at technical presentations emphasizing quality and excellence presentations emphasizing quality and excellence achieved at ASU. Include video technology.achieved at ASU. Include video technology.

ASU 1999: ACS/47

AcknowledgementAcknowledgement

Financial support from CIEE/ASUFinancial support from CIEE/ASU Undergraduate students: Thomas Undergraduate students: Thomas

Bowers, L. Hedayt, Jason Kajita, Bowers, L. Hedayt, Jason Kajita, and Peter Neubauerand Peter Neubauer

Graduate Students: K. Graduate Students: K. Ramanathan and N. ShahRamanathan and N. Shah

ASU 1999: ACS/48

Literature CitedLiterature Cited

1. Altbach, Philip G., Kelly, Gail P., and Weis, Lois, 1. Altbach, Philip G., Kelly, Gail P., and Weis, Lois, Excellence in Education: Perspectives Excellence in Education: Perspectives on Policy and Practiceon Policy and Practice, New York, Prometheus Books, 1985., New York, Prometheus Books, 1985.

2. Bellamy, L; McNeill, B.W.; Singhal, A.C.; 2. Bellamy, L; McNeill, B.W.; Singhal, A.C.; A New Approach to Engineering EducationA New Approach to Engineering Education, , Arizona State University, Tempe, 1997.Arizona State University, Tempe, 1997.

3. Bloom, Benjamin C, 3. Bloom, Benjamin C, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive DomainDomain, 1984., 1984.

4. Campbell, W.E., Smith, K.A., 4. Campbell, W.E., Smith, K.A., New Paradigms for College TeachingNew Paradigms for College Teaching, Interaction Book , Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN, 1997.Company, Edina, MN, 1997.

5. Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, S.F., 5. Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, S.F., Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate EducationEducation, Wingspread Journal 9(2), 1987., Wingspread Journal 9(2), 1987.

6. Culver, Richard S., Educating for Maturity: Perry's Model for Intellectual Development, 6. Culver, Richard S., Educating for Maturity: Perry's Model for Intellectual Development, International Journal of Applied Engineering Education, International Journal of Applied Engineering Education, 1987, Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 457-1987, Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 457-463.463.

7. Goldberg, David E., "Life Skills and Leadership for Engineers", 1995, McGraw-Hill, NY.7. Goldberg, David E., "Life Skills and Leadership for Engineers", 1995, McGraw-Hill, NY.

8. Krathwohl, David R., 8. Krathwohl, David R., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook II: Affective Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook II: Affective DomainDomain, 1984., 1984.

9. Lawley, “Drexel’s E4 Project,” JOM, March 1991, p. 35.9. Lawley, “Drexel’s E4 Project,” JOM, March 1991, p. 35.

ASU 1999: ACS/49

Literature Cited (cont’d)Literature Cited (cont’d)

10. Mangieri, John N., 10. Mangieri, John N., Excellence in EducationExcellence in Education, Fort Worth, Texas Christian University Press, , Fort Worth, Texas Christian University Press, 1985.1985.

11. Maul, Gary; “Engineering Students Not Learning Job Skills in College,” Ohio State 11. Maul, Gary; “Engineering Students Not Learning Job Skills in College,” Ohio State University, Industrial Engineering, (funded by NSF), Materials Performance, v.34 March, University, Industrial Engineering, (funded by NSF), Materials Performance, v.34 March, 1995 p 14.1995 p 14.

12. McCormick, Betty, 12. McCormick, Betty, Quality and Education: Critical LinkagesQuality and Education: Critical Linkages, New Jersey, Eye on Education, , New Jersey, Eye on Education, 1993.1993.

13. McNeill, Barry W. and Bellamy, Lynn. 13. McNeill, Barry W. and Bellamy, Lynn. Introduction to Engineering Design, Introduction to Engineering Design, The McGraw-The McGraw-Hills Publishing Companies, Inc. NY, 1998.Hills Publishing Companies, Inc. NY, 1998.

14. Pudlowski, Z. J., An Integrated Approach to Curriculum Design for Engineering Education, 14. Pudlowski, Z. J., An Integrated Approach to Curriculum Design for Engineering Education, International Journal of Applied Engineering EducationInternational Journal of Applied Engineering Education, 1987, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 11-26., 1987, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 11-26.

15. Singhal, A.C., 15. Singhal, A.C., Computer ModelingComputer Modeling, Burgess Press, MN, ISBN 0-8087-99495, 1997., Burgess Press, MN, ISBN 0-8087-99495, 1997.

16. Singhal, A.C., “Quality and Excellence in Engineering Education”, CIEE/CEAS Faculty 16. Singhal, A.C., “Quality and Excellence in Engineering Education”, CIEE/CEAS Faculty Educational Improvement Final Report, ASU, 19 Dec 1998. Educational Improvement Final Report, ASU, 19 Dec 1998.

16. Smith, Karl A., Education Engineering: Heuristics for Improving Learning Effectiveness and 16. Smith, Karl A., Education Engineering: Heuristics for Improving Learning Effectiveness and Efficiency, Efficiency, International Journal of Applied Engineering EducationInternational Journal of Applied Engineering Education, 1987, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. , 1987, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 365-372.365-372.

17. Waks, Shlomo, A Methodology for Determining Engineering Curriculum Contents, 17. Waks, Shlomo, A Methodology for Determining Engineering Curriculum Contents, Journal Journal of Engineering Educationof Engineering Education, July 1994, pp. 219-225., July 1994, pp. 219-225.