Manno, Vincent P

English

Purdue E-Pubs

Leveraging Engineering Education Innovation toRedefine Undergraduate EducationVincent (Vin) P. MannoProvost & Dean of FacultyProfessor of EngineeringPolytechnic Summit 2017Purdue Polytechnic InstituteJune 20171Questions for Today2• How did we get here?• What are the data telling us?• What are the desirable learning outcomes? • Any reflections from Olin experience?• Can engineering education innovation be a lever for rebalancing 21st Century education?This is not a new challenge –Washington Roebling graduated from RPI in 1857!“…the terrible treadmill of forcing an avalanche of figures and facts into young brains not qualified to assimilate them…I am still busy trying to forget the heterogeneous mass of unusable knowledge that I could only memorize…”3World War II, Cold War, Postwar Economy:Swing the pendulum from vocational to professional41945: “Science won the war.”Engineering becomes Engineering Science. Pendulum swings too far, society and education change530 years of calls for change follow…Walker, E.A., Pettit, J.M., and Hawkins, G.A., Goals of Engineering Education: Final Report of the Goals Committee, 1968.ASEE Engineering Deans Council and Corporate Roundtable, The Green Report: Engineering Education for a Changing World, 1994.Current realities - rebalance content and process6• There will never be enough time to ‘cover’ the material.• We do not retain what we do not use.• Information is a means not an end.Teamwork, communication, creativity, leadership, entrepreneurial thinking, ethical reasoning, global contextual analysisEducating engineers beyond technology7Questions for Today8• How did we get here?• What are the data telling us?• What are the desirable learning outcomes? • Any reflections from Olin experience?• Can engineering education innovation be a lever for rebalancing 21st Century education?Current realities – who are our students?9• Average of independence ~ 29 years old• 31M people have partially completed college • >40% of undergraduate population is over 25Observations from USA undergraduate degree data (Department of Education)• Small percentage of engineering degrees• Balkanization of American higher education – A&S vs Engineering vs Business rather than integratedTotal 2001 20151.24M 1.89MEngineering 58k/4.7% 98k/5.2%Engr Tech 14k/1.2% 17k/0.9%CS/IS 44k/3.5% 60k/3.1%9.4% 9.2%Business 264k/21.1% 364k/19.2%Biology 61k/4.9% 110k/5.8%Health 76k/6.1% 216k/11.4%10Implications - USA compared to the world (Department of Education)• Tipping point for impact – societal priorities, government policy, active and informed citizenship…Engineering Physical SciencesUSA 5% 11%Poland 11% 10%Japan 16% 7%                         Finland                    20% 9%South Korea 24% 12%China                       32%                   13%11• 113th Congress (2015) – Engineers:1.4%, No college: 5.0%12Sample implication – government policy13• 98% of Provosts/CAOs say their institutions effective/somewhat effective at preparing students for work life. • 11% of business leaders strongly agree that graduating students have skills and competencies needed for success.Gallup data –Disconnect of the academy and non-academic world14• Purpose – what you do and how much you like it• Social – relationships, love of life• Financial – reduced stress, security• Community – engagement with others• Physical – health and well-beingGallup data –Undergraduate experience affects quality of lifeQuestions for Today15• How did we get here?• What are the data telling us?• What are the desirable learning outcomes? • Any reflections from Olin experience?• Can engineering education innovation be a lever for rebalancing 21st Century education?Learning outcomes forFoundational Engineering Education(?)16• Foundational o Provide a strong platform upon which to build a career but more importantly o Prepare for an engaged life• Engineering o Leverage intrinsic motivation, technical skills and context to create and solveo Practice at engineering – (self-)empowerment of realization• Education o Convert information to knowledge (insight?)o Learn how to learn and to want to learnGoals of foundational engineering educationLet’s Try It!(Prototype)Why Doesn’t it Work?(Test)The Excitement of Engineering17EmpowermentCurriculum  Culture“Making universities and engineering schools exciting, creative, adventurous, rigorous, demanding, and empowering milieus is more important than specifying curricular details” , Charles Vest, NAE & MIT President emeritus18Culture trumps curriculum19• Culture needs to have a scaffold• Student as partners – engaged and intrinsically motivated• Continuous curriculum innovation• Connect educational theory and practice• Broader (contextual) definition of engineeringAttitudes and behaviors20• Motivation – provide opportunities for students to do something (Felder & Silverman, 1988)• PBL/PjBL courses…spark some significant changes in students’ cognitive and behavioral strategy… (Lord et al., 2012)• Students in lecture-only courses did not connect their perceived ability to do engineering with the outcomes they would experience as engineers (Atadero et al., 2015)Active learning better serves the meta-goals for success in the engineering professionFeasibility ViabilityDesirabilityINNOVATIONOveremphasized inEngineering EducationEmbed in theprograms andculture21Questions for Today22• How did we get here?• What are the data telling us?• What are the desirable learning outcomes? • Any reflections from Olin experience?• Can engineering education innovation be a lever for rebalancing 21st Century education?A little bit of information about Olin(Needham MA near Babson and Wellesley colleges)23• Founded in 1997, first graduates in 2006• Total enrollment of about 350 • Nearly 50% women• BS degrees in ECE, ME, E• No academic departments• ~40 Faculty – renewable contracts• Merit (50% for all) plus need blind aid• 100s of visitors and several collaboratorsOne faculty – one combined mission – one curriculum24Typical response:No TenureNo DepartmentsThe reality:No TenureNo DepartmentsEmphasize connectivity and why do we careJust in time (not just in case) learning25Nearly 75% of the curriculum is independent of major.Strong common technical foundation for all students.Academic affairs, student life  Academic life26Integrate practice at engineering and ‘soft’ skills professional skills 27Integrative learning -Competency and confidence to use ‘power tools’28Desired Outcome:Competence and confidence in choosing and using the “power tools” (tools, concepts, ways of thinking) of design and analysis.Integrative learning –e.g. Quantitative Engineering Analysis (QEA)29• Strengthen analysis through synthesizing math, physics and engineering science in a project-based environment• Alternative to disconnected courses embedded in the first years of engineering programs.• Two-semester, double-wide (i.e. eight credits each term) course sequence – launched January 2016• Created by a team of Olin faculty and studentsSubstantive and ‘real’ experiencesSCOPE or Affordable Design & Entrepreneurship (ADE)SCOPE• Sponsored • Mid-burner project• Professional mentor• ~5 students• No Olin IP claims/NDAsADE• Donations• Non-profit – international• People, impact, humility,  justice•~5 students • No Olin IP claims/NDAs30Faculty development and assessment: Internal and external impact – recognition and relevance31(Elsewhere) Tenure based on demonstrated professional accomplishments in teaching, research and scholarship, and service … will continue to contribute in all of these areas at a level of excellence … through the indefinite future.• Three Buckets – disconnected, size of each bucket?• Individual not institution, separate not integrated, static not dynamic for the indefinite future• No mention of mission - personal and institutional             Teaching             Research Service A new model –consensus developed by faculty and administration32• Robust annual feedback, embedded faculty development• Reappointment (looking forward) vs Promotion (retrospective) • 19 cases so far  case law and processes evolving• Implications for institutions with tenure systemsCan engineering education innovation be a lever for rebalancing 21st Century education?33• YES• Balanced and integrated education with a foundational engineering core is best positioned in the academy to be the driver of such a system.• Important and positive impact on who studies engineering or who includes engineering in their studies - engineering profession, quality of life, society.• What does this mean about educational models? Faculty responsibilities and competencies? Academic culture, reward system, priorities? Industry role? ABET?...Take-away 1 - Learning to learn is hard fun34Take-away 2 – Students should have goals and take responsibility35Take-away 3 - Failures will happen:Learn from them, control their size36Take-away 4 - Practice being comfortable with discomfort(It’s hard!)37We need to collaborate and co-create:Virtuous cycle and feedback loop38Curriculum InnovationExternal Engagementcurriculumfaculty developmenteducation and facilitationcontinuous innovationnew and innovative approachesoutside perspectivereflection and questioningcontextual opportunitiescultureThese choices are ours to make –as educators, as students, as parents, as alumni, as taxpayers, as schools, as  companies, society…They are the choices between the past and the future.Goldberg & Somerville, 2014.39The time is now to build the right foundations –e.g. Purdue Polytechnic Summit 2017Thank you for inviting me.What do you think?40

Leveraging Engineering Education Innovation to Redefine Undergraduate Education

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&amp;context=polytechsummit

Leveraging Engineering Education Innovation to Redefine Undergraduate Education

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Purdue E-Pubs