The following is a list of all publications generated by the Foundation Coalition, listed by author. These documents require the use of the Adobe Acrobat software in order to view their contents.

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

1996

• McInerny, S., Stern, H.P., Haskew, T.A., 1996, “A Multidisciplinary Junior Level Course in Dynamic Data Acquisition,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper describes a Junior-level multidisciplinary laboratory course concerning industrial applications of dynamic data acquisition and analysis. The course, developed as part of the NSF Foundation Coalition and initially targeted for electrical, mechanical, and industrial engineers, consists of four weeks of introductory material followed by four modules, each concerning a specific application of signal acquisition and analysis. The modules emphasize qualitative understanding of concepts and are designed to illustrate the principles involved in data acquisition and analysis, to demonstrate industrial applications of engineering concepts, to exploit the varied experiences of the individuals within the multidisciplinary student teams, and to introduce students to the equipment and processes necessary to take meaningful measurements and interpret their significance. Each application-specific module is designed to be independent, and the modules may be taken in any order. By employing a modular structure, the class can be easily modified in the future to accommodate additional disciplines, such as aerospace engineering.

• Rogers, G., Sando, J., 1996, “A Qualitative, Comparative Study of Students' Problem Solving Abilities and Procedures,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: Currently, two freshmen curricula exist at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. This creates a unique opportunity to compare the problem-solving, team training and technology utilization abilities of students who completed the Integrated First-Year Curriculum in Science, Engineering and Mathematics (IFYCSEM) pilot program to the abilities of students who completed the traditional freshman engineering curriculum. This study seeks to identify the differences that exist between the techniques of sophomores who were IFYCSEM students and sophomores who were in the traditional first-year curriculum when they are confronted with a complex problem in a group setting. This study will also address the link between observed behaviors during problem-solving sessions and students' performance on standardized tests designed to assess problem solving predispositions and abilities.

• Mashburn, B., Monk, B., Smith, R., Lee, T., Bredeson, J., 1996, “Experiences with a New Engineering Sophomore Year,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper discusses first-year experiences in the implementation of a new engineering sophomore year at The University of Alabama (UofA). This curriculum development process is a part of The National Science Foundation’s Foundation Coalition (FC) Program at UofA. To provide background for the new sophomore year, the paper discusses the philosophy behind the UofA FC effort. This philosophy focuses on improving the classroom culture of engineering education. This is to be accomplished through teaming, course integration, and technology enabled classrooms. With this philosophy as a starting point, the paper discusses new course objectives, the course development process, and firstyear results. The course development process includes discussion of faculty input procedures, input from other FC campuses, and related experiences from the UofA FC freshman year. The paper describes four new courses that resulted from this development process. In conjunction with FC philosophy, these courses integrate mathematics and engineering, and introduce teaming and technology into the classroom. Results from the first year are discussed, including quantitative assessment, student journal comments, instructor impressions, and departmental reactions. Particular attention is paid to how the classroom is affected by team assignments and in-class computer use. Concluding comments include pros and cons of the new sophomore year, and plans for its refinement in the coming years.

1997

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 1997, “Designing Process-Based Software Curriculum,” Proceedings of the Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training.
• Corleto, C.R., Stewart, J., Tipton, A., 1997, “Evaluation of a First-Year Integrated Engineering Curriculum,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: Since fall 1995, the First-Year Integrated Engineering Curriculum (FYIEC) has been offered at Texas A&M University-Kingsville (TAMUK). This curriculum is the result of the efforts by the Foundation Coalition, an NSF funded engineering coalition, to produce an enduring foundation for student development and life-long learning.

• Haskew, T.A., Stern, H.P., McInerny, S., 1997, “Industrial Applications of Dynamic Data Acquisition - First Semester Experiences in a Multidisciplinary Laboratory Course,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education.

  Abstract: A junior-level multidisciplinary laboratory course centered around industrial applications of dynamic data acquisition and analysis is described. The course was developed with funding from an NSF Instrumentation and Laboratory Improvement (ILI) grant and is offered as a NSF Foundation Coalition (FC) course. It is also open to traditional engineering students. In the course, teams of four (maximum) students are drawn from more than one discipline and with complementary interests and skills. It is intended that the associations developed within and amongst the teams will enable cooperative, multidisciplinary design projects in the senior year.

  The course consists of four weeks of introductory material followed by four laboratory modules, each concerning a specific application of signal acquisition and analysis. Currently, these modules include speech encoding and enhancement, machinery sound power measurement, machine condition monitoring, and motor condition monitoring. Each module is designed to be independent and the modules may be presented in any order. The course concludes with a culminating design project. Three instructors are involved in teaching the course, one from Mechanical Engineering and two from Electrical Engineering.

  In this paper, information on the course structure, content, hardware and software is provided. Problems encountered in the first semester are recounted and adjustments to the course structure are suggested to address these problems.

  Some of the problems are common to any new laboratory course. Other difficulties are unique to the structure of this FC course, including those associated with multi-disciplinary team teaching, and technology enabled education. Methods of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of instruction are proposed. Despite start up difficulties, the Fall 1996 student reviews were highly enthusiastic. There has students demand for the course to offered again in the Fall 1997 semester.

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 1997, “Integrating Software Process in Computer Science Curriculum,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

1998

• Cordes, D., Parrish, A., Dixon, B., Borie, R., Jackson, J., Hale, D., Hale, J., Sharpe, S., 1998, “An Inter-Disciplinary Software Engineering Track Emphasizing Component Engineering,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper describes the establishment of an integrated track in software engineering for three distinct academic disciplines at the University of Alabama: Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and Management Information Systems. This integrated track focuses on component engineering, and is being developed by a team of faculty from all three programs.

• Schexnayder, C., Wiezel, A., 1998, “Construction Education Using the World Wide Web,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: Lecturing is not the purpose of teaching. The purpose is transferring knowledge. The World Wide Web (WWW) helps in distributing information, but can it improve the quality and effectiveness of transferring knowledge? An Arizona State University undergraduate estimating course employs the WWW to support instructional delivery of technical materials. Cooperative learning, multi-media tools, and other electronic resources enhanced the WWW structured course. This course delivery system, using the latest developments in information technology, enables students and instructor to work closely and cohesively in many new ways. Requiring students to use WWW technology and cooperative learning concepts supports knowledge transfer and enables the instructor to effectively reach individual students. The delivery system builds student interest, supports the development of “people” skills, and enhances student teacher communication. Student surveys show that the system does improve the quality and effectiveness of transferring knowledge.

• Sathianathan, D., Sheppard, S., Jenison, R., Bilgutay, N.M., Demel, J.T., Gavankar, P., Lockledge, J., Mutharasan, R., Phillips, H., Poli, C., Richardson, J., 1998, “Freshman Design Projects: Lessons Learned in Engineering Coalitions,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: NSF established the Engineering Education Coalition programs for the purpose of creating systemic changes in engineering education. Coalitions are groups of institutions of higher learning who work collaboratively to achieve their coalition's mission. The first Coalition program was established in 1990. There are now eight Engineering Education Coalitions representing some 59 Universities (roughly 20% of all of the undergraduate institutions in the United States).

  Most coalitions have developed freshman design projects to increase the interest of new engineering students and to begin the integration of design across the curriculum. These activities are multi-week project approach, where students are engaged in hands-on experimental learning. The projects require that the members of the team must work together to complete the task. The multi-week projects dominate the course and the project theme motivates both the fixed and the flexible content covered during the course.

  This special session will discuss the various types of freshman design projects used and lessons learned by the Engineering Coalitions. Short presentations from the various coalitions will review what has been done and the lessons learned. The sessions will be interactive, involving the audience in the discussion of these lessons learned. A list of projects used in the coalitions along with a list of publications will be made available.

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 1998, “In Support of Student Process Improvement,” Proceedings of the Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training.
• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 1998, “The Acquisition of Expertise in Software Engineering Education,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

1999

• McInerny, S., Stern, H.P., Haskew, T.A., 1999, “Applications of Dynamic Data Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Education, 42:4, 276-280.

  Abstract: This paper describes a junior-level multidisciplinary laboratory course centered around industrial applications of dynamic data acquisition and analysis. The course was developed with funding from an NSF Instrumentation and Laboratory Improvement (ILI) grant and is offered as a NSF Foundation Coalition (FC) course. It is also open to traditional aerospace, electrical, industrial, and mechanical engineering students. In the course, teams of four (maximum) students with complementary interests and skills are drawn from more than one discipline. It is intended that the associations developed within and among the teams will enable cooperative multidisciplinary design projects in the senior year. The course consists of four weeks of introductory material followed by four laboratory modules, each concerning a specific application of signal acquisition and analysis. Currently, these modules include speech encoding and enhancement, machinary sound power measurement, machine condition monitoring, and motor condition monitoring. Each module is independent, so the modules may be presented in any order. The course concludes with a small design project. Three instructors have been involved in teaching the course, one from mechnical and two from electrical engineering.

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 1999, “Reflective Essays in Software Engineering,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.
• Sims-Knight, J.E., 1999, “Reflective Essays in Software Engineering Education,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

2000

• Fowler, E., Sims-Knight, J.E., Pendergrass, N.A., Upchurch, R.L., 2000, “Course-based Assessment: Engaging Faculty in Reflective Practice,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: The College of Engineering (COE) at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth has begun to implement course-based assessment as part of our curricular continuous improvement program. The targeted faculty are those who are developing innovative courses supported by the Foundation Coalition (FC), a collaborative project funded by National Science Foundation. We began in Spring, 1999, and have since tried five different strategies—taking faculty to a two-day assessment workshop, a general lecture on embedding an assessment-based continuous improvement loop into courses, a written set of guidelines, individual meetings with faculty, and an interactive half-day workshop. We discovered that faculty accept and implement assessment-based continuous improvement in their classes once they understand that (a) it is in their control, (b) it can be done in ways that are cost-effective in terms of time, and (c) that it can reduce frustration in teaching because it makes visible aspects of courses that can be improved.

2001

• Courter, S.S., Lewis, D., Reeves, J., Eapen, J., Murugesan, N., Sebald, D., 2001, “Aligning Foundation Coalition Core Competencies and Professional Development Opportunities: A University of Wisconsin-Madision Case Study in Preparing a New Generation of Engineers,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: Faculty within the Foundation Coalition (FC) are working together to prepare a new generation of engineers by strengthening both undergraduate and graduate students’ educational foundations and helping them develop core competencies. The coalition links together six institutions: Arizona State University, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Texas A & M University, University of Alabama, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and University of Massachusetts- Dartmouth. Partner institutions are diverse in terms of size, age, public/private, student body characteristics, and experience in educational reform, but all share a commitment to the improvement of engineering education. With the goal of student learning in mind, the Foundation Coalition defines core competencies to be the abilities that educators must develop, continuously improve, and use in order to “create a new culture of engineering education that is responsive to technological changes and societal needs” – the FC vision. The core competencies are curriculum integration; cooperative and active learning; utilization of technology-enabled learning; assessment-driven continuous improvement; recruitment, retention, and graduation of women and under-represented minorities; teamwork and collaboration; and management of change. The University of Wisconsin-Madison helps faculty, staff, and teaching assistants develop and use these core competencies in myriad ways.

  This paper describes two professional development opportunities at the University of Wisconsin- Madison, College of Engineering: the New Educators’ Orientation (NEO) and the Teaching Improvement Program (TIP). While NEO introduces the core competencies, each TIP workshop incorporates one or more of the FC competencies. The program director and graduate student cochairs use the competencies to guide workshop selection and design. This paper traces the development of both NEO and TIP; the incorporation of the FC core competencies, vision, mission, student outcomes, and objectives; the impact on curricula as reported on evaluations; lessons learned; and plans for future professional development opportunities. Four case studies illustrate how graduate students, the next generation of engineers, develop the core competencies through professional development opportunities including TIP and NEO.

• Secola, P.M., Smiley, B.A., Anderson-Rowland, M.R., Castro, M., Tomaszewski, B., 2001, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Saturday Academies in an Engineering Outreach Program,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: Women in Applied Sciences and Engineering (WISE) Investments is an innovative program that introduces middle school and high school girls to the exciting world of engineering and technology. Funded by a National Science Foundation grant, WISE Investments seeks to provide an intervention at both the middle school and high school levels by showing that engineering has real world applications; by demonstrating the problem-solving approach of engineers; by correcting misperceptions; and by providing positive engineering information and role models.

  Female students in grades 6 through 12 were recruited to commit to a one-year program where they enrolled in eight Saturday Academies held once each month during the 1999-2000 school year. They were exposed to engineering through industry tours, mentoring sessions with college female engineering students, and hands-on projects from eight disciplines of engineering. The students were exposed to basic concepts and skills that illustrated engineering as meeting a human need to solve human problems.

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 2001, “The Learning Portal,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: Undergraduate engineering education is experiencing a paradigm shift, from teacher-centered to student-centered pedagogy characterized by student teamwork and integrative curricula 1. The research and experiences underlying this shift have revealed that effective learners not only learn actively, but they develop an awareness of their skills in learning, and engage in self-assessment and reflection. Research in psychology has found that the reflective process engages students and helps them develop, particularly as self-regulated learners. As the educational enterprise undergoes this radical change, there is an increased recognition of the need for methods that allow students to develop such cognitive and metacognitive skills.

  This paper presents our explorations in defining and constructing a system that helps students organize their work, review their and others’ work, and reflect on their progress. The system we are building includes the support tools for student-centered knowledge construction and management. We examine our early prototypes and discuss how our experiences with those systems led to the current system requirements. These requirements include the knowledge/document management, self-assessment, reflection, planning, and collaboration. We discuss the intended uses for the system, and provide examples from our current uses of the system to highlight the potential. The paper includes a review of the literature supporting our work.

• Sims-Knight, J.E., Upchurch, R.L., 2001, “What's Wrong with Giving Students Feedback?,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper reviewed the extensive evidence on the effectiveness of feedback on learning. The research supported five claims about feedback. First, informational feedback is effective in domains with clear right or wrong answers when tested immediately after training. Second, when the same maximal feedback conditions are tested for retention or transfer, they are less effective than conditions with less feedback. Third, feedback can draw attention away from the learning task. Fourth, feedback apparently plays a minor role in actual classroom situations. Fifth, teaching students to provide their own feedback and explanation is an effective alternative. These findings suggest that instructors may be more effective if they put less effort into grading and commenting on students’ products and more effort into structuring their courses to help students learn how to assess and reflect on their state of learning themselves. Two specific pedagogical strategies are suggested. First, giving students more assignments than the instructor could grade or comment on will provide more of the kinds of practice they need to develop expertise. Second, helping students to learn how to assess and reflect on their state of learning will help them learn how to provide their own feedback and thus help them to become independent life-long learners.

2002

• Stern, H.P., Pimmel, R.L., 2002, “An Instructional Module for Engineering Ethics,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper describes a short (3 class-hour) module developed to teach engineering ethics. The module has been designed for simple integration into a standard technical course, minimally impacting existing curricula and effectively introducing the need for engineering ethics, the key components in an engineering code of ethics, and resources for help in resolving ethical conflicts. Case studies are used, showing directly how certain ethical issues relate to the practice of engineering and prompting lively in-class discussions. Using cooperative and active learning techniques, the class develops its own code of engineering ethics and compares their code to the professional society codes within their discipline. Test data shows that after taking the module, students are more capable of stating the key components of an engineering code of ethics and are more knowledgeable concerning resources available for resolving ethical dilemmas. Testing also shows that the students have a high awareness of the issues involved in engineering ethics and that, after taking the module, they are significantly more confident concerning their ability to address ethical conflicts in their future professional practice.

• Powers, T.A., Sims-Knight, J.E., Topciu, R.A., Haden, S.C., 2002, “Assessing Team Functionality in Engineering Education,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: The present study used a series of team process checks modeled on those developed at Arizona State University to assess team functioning. Team members completed these forms individually and then collectively the members assessed the team as a whole. These process checks were compared to faculty ratings of the teams. The students’ individual knowledge about teaming skills was also assessed and the relationship of these various measures to performance was examined. Two distinct dimensions of team functioning appear to be measured by the team process check: agency and affiliation. The process checks were positively correlated with faculty ratings, and the agency dimension of the scale predicted team project scores in one of the classes evaluated but not in the other two.

• Pimmel, R.L., , ., Stern, H.P., 2002, “Changes in Student Confidence Resulting from Instruction with Modules on EC 2000 Skills,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: EC 2000 requires that engineering programs demonstrate that their graduates have acquired the set of skills identified in Criteria 3 (a)-(k). Because of a scarcity of instructional material on many of these topics, a team of engineering faculty members developed a set of short modules for teaching several of them. The modules, which contain learning objectives, a justification, student exercises and assignments, and an instructor’s guide, require three 50-minute class periods and can be integrated into a standard engineering course. We tested each module in a classroom setting with a diverse group of engineering students. Using before and after module surveys, the students indicated their agreement with statements concerning their confidence in their ability to do specific tasks derived from the module’s learning objectives using a five-point scale (1 for “Strongly Disagree” to 5 for “Strongly Agree”). We also obtained analogous data with a control group not involved in the instruction. In 13 of the 15 modules, the data showed an improvement in the students’ confidence to perform these tasks as a result of the instruction. The average improvement was approximately 0.50, indicating that, on the average, one-half of the students indicated an increase in their confidence to do these tasks.

• Upchurch, R.L., Sims-Knight, J.E., 2002, “Portfolio Use in Software Engineering Education: An Experience Report,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: This paper discusses the use of an electronic portfolio in a software engineering course at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. The Learning Portal provides the standard function of such systems for students to post their work. It also provides a syllabus function so instructors can post all information and assignments to the Portal. It goes beyond these basic functions, however, to facilitate reflective practice. It allows both students and faculty to give feedback to student work, and it collects various types of student work, including survey forms that require students to reflect upon their work. It also provides functions for team interaction. In this paper we will describe how the electronic portfolio was used in this course, including what artifacts were captured and how students used the system. We conducted an interview study of students after they finished the course to ascertain how they felt the portfolio changed the way they learned, the issues they encountered in working within such an environment, and their perspectives on how such a support system might influence their behavior in the future.

• Stern, H.P., Brown, M.A., 2002, “Short Instructional Modules for Teaching Ethical and Societal Issues Within an Engineering Curriculum,” Proceedings of the ASEE Southeastern Section Conference, Gainesville FL, April 2002.

  Abstract: Engineering employers and academic accreditation agencies are now insisting that societal and ethical issues be included in the standard engineering curriculum. We have developed and tested short (three class-hour) modules on three of these issues—engineering ethics, an awareness of the societal impact of engineering, and knowledge of contemporary issues. These modules have been designed for simple integration into standard technical courses, effectively introducing key concepts and promoting student awareness, showing directly how the issues relate to the practice of engineering and minimally impacting the existing curricula. This paper provides details of each of the modules—objectives, outlines for each class, in-class exercises, assignments, assessment guidelines, and techniques for bridging the material into specific engineering disciplines. We have tested each of the modules on a group of students, and the data from our tests show that students who complete the modules increase their awareness of ethical, societal, and contemporary issues and significantly increase their self-confidence with respect to these issues, feeling more capable of addressing them in their professional practice.

• Pimmel, R.L., , ., Stern, H.P., 2002, “Student Evaluation of Instructional Modules on EC 2000 Criteria 3 (a) - (k) Skills,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: A team of engineering faculty members has developed a set of fifteen instructional modules for teaching several skills identified in EC 2000 Criteria 3 (a)-(k). Module developers designed them for a week of classes in upper-level engineering courses and incorporated active/cooperative learning and web-based resources. In addition to the standard instructional material, each module contained learning objectives, a justification, student exercises and assignments, and an instructor’s guide discussing the use of the material and the grading of student work. To determine students’ reaction to these modules, we had instructors, who were not the module developers, teach them to a class of engineering students. The students completed extensive evaluation forms, including a series of questions where they indicated their agreement with a set of positively oriented statements on the material using a five-point scale (1 – “Strongly Disagree” to 5 – “Strongly Agree”). These data indicated a positive student reaction to the instructional material. For example, the overall average scores on the statements about the learning objectives, justification, teaming activities, and homework were 4.1, 4.2, 3.9, and 3.9, respectively. The two modules with the highest overall average scores dealt with ethics (4.4) and oral communications (4.4); the two with the lowest overall average scores dealt with lifelong learning (3.6) and contemporary issues (3.7).

• Sims-Knight, J.E., Upchurch, R.L., Powers, T.A., Haden, S.C., Topciu, R.A., 2002, “Teams in Software Engineering Education,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: The ability to work as an effective member of a development team is a primary goal of engineering education and one of the ABET student learning outcomes. As such, teaming has received increased attention in both the classroom and the literature over the past several years. Instructors of software engineering courses typically organize students into teams but expect, erroneously, that students learn the skills they need and learn to avoid dysfunctional patterns simply by working in teams. This paper describes the development of tools that can incorporate an assessment-based continuous improvement process on team skills into engineering classes. The primary focus in on the development of (1) a self-report assessment tool that would provide pointers toward improvement and (2) a test of students' knowledge of best teaming practices. The paper also describes a first pass at embedding these assessment tools into a continuous improvement process.

• Schweiker, M., Moore, D.J., Voltmer, D.R., 2002, “The Design of an Enhanced Curricular Evaluation + Portfolio (ECE+P) Software System,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: A process for curricular monitoring and providing feedback for the continuous improvement of curricula was presented recently by Moore and Voltmer. The original process was designed to include instructors, administrators, and external reviewers. A subsequent study of the existing software and enhanced capabilities led to an expansion of the vision and scope of the original evaluation process. The study precipitated the design of a new software system that expands the curricular monitoring to include the student. Improved interaction between the student and instructor as well as grading capabilities is included in the expanded system, the Enhanced Curricular Evaluation + Portfolio (ECE+P) system. An additional enhancement enables every student to store private files and create secure portfolios to which studenst can grant viewing rights to external guests. The ECE+P system was designed using a Unified Modeling Language (UML) software development tool that allows requirement change to be incorporated easily. The tool also provides system specifications that can be implemented using various platforms. A discussion of the ECE+P system and the UML tool will be included in the full paper and presentation.

2003

• Bowe, N., Taylor, L., Smith, K., Zuckerman, R., Moore, D.J., 2003, “Getting Engineers to Think and Act like Entrepreneurs,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology is pioneering the education of undergraduate entrepreneurial engineers. Engenius Solutions is a program funded through a grant from the Lilly Foundation. The project, at Rose-Hulman, is offering capital and other resources to help undergraduate engineers understand what it takes to recognize opportunities and turn them into entrepreneurial ventures. Students, faculty, and staff are encouraged to submit ideas to Engenius Solutions for evaluation and review. Following an in-depth qualification procedure, those deemed to have potential are then given project resources including student project teams, prototyping support, work space, Intellectual Property support, and project management to help develop their idea. Engenius Solutions also provides financial, marketing, and business insight to assist their clients (students, faculty, staff) in taking ideas from concept to market. Future plans include accepting clients from outside the Rose-Hulman community. The program is driven by a core management team of four undergraduate students managing the program with limited oversight provided by a Board of Governors. The board consists of faculty and staff from multiple disciplines across the campus.

  This paper will present an overview of the program, including the management philosophy for both the funded program and the individual client projects. Also covered is a discussion of the underlying project objective—allowing students to run a project, with limited faculty oversight, in an effort to allow engineers to become better acquainted with the business world and more capable of effectively handling interactions between entrepreneurs and large companies. The main focus of the paper will be on the benefits and opportunities provided by allowing students to work on exciting new ideas and projects and on developing their own intellectual property in a multidisciplinary setting. Specifically to be included are the interactions among different engineering disciplines, interactions between engineering disciplines and business disciplines from other schools, and how this will enhance the overall engineering education.

• Evans, D.L., Gray, G.L.., Krause, S.J., Martin, J.K.., Midkiff, C., Notaros, B.M., Pavelich, M., Rancour, D., Reed-Rhoads, T., Steif, P., Streveler, R., Wage, K.E., 2003, “Progress on Concept Inventory Assessment Tools,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference.

  Abstract: The Foundation Coalition and others have been working on the development of Concept Inventory (CI) assessment instruments patterned after the well-known Force Concept Inventory (FCI) instrument of Halloun and Hestenes. Such assessment inventories can play an important part in relating teaching techniques to student learning. Work first got started two years ago on CIs for the subjects of thermodynamics, solid mechanics, signals and processing, and electromagnetics. Last year work got under way on CIs for circuits, fluid mechanics, engineering materials, transport processes, and statistics. This year work began on chemistry, computer egineering, dynamics, electronics, and heat transfer. This panel session will discuss the progress on these concept inventories. More importantly, the panelists will discuss the early student data that are emerging from the process of continuous improvement of the instruments. Results will be compared to the data collected by Hake that are segregated by how the content was managed and delivered (e.g., "traditional" lecture mode compared to the "interactive engagement" mode, as defined by Hake). Discussions of effective practices for use in the development of CIs will also be discussed.

• Gray, G.L.., Evans, D.L., Cornwell, P.J., Costanzo, F., Self, B., 2003, “Toward a Nationwide Dynamics Concept Inventory Assessment Test,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference.

  Abstract: This paper describes our efforts to develop a national concept inventory test in undergraduate dynamics, that is, a Dynamics Concept Inventory. This paper presents the current state of development and discusses future efforts and directions of this project.

2004

• Simoni, M.F.., Herniter, M.E.., Ferguson, B.A.., 2004, “Concepts to Questions: Creating an Electronics Concept Inventory Exam,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, 1793.

  Abstract: Concept inventory exams are standardized tests that have been carefully designed to point out the common misconceptions that students have in a specific body of knowledge. We are currently developing an electronics concept inventory (ECI) exam for basic electronic circuits. In this paper, we present an example that is particular to the ECI to illustrate the general process that was used to select the core concepts and then create and revise questions. In addition, we address the current and future state of the ECI and invite open discussion to improve the content of the ECI.