Bridging diverse institutions, multiple engineering departments, and industry: A case study in assessment planning
Journal of Engineering Education, Apr 1998 by McMartin, Flora, Van Duzer, Eric, Agogino, Alice
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Synthesis Coalition's assessment planning was financially supported by the National Science Foundation Engineering Education Coalitions Program (Award No. EEC 9625456). The authors wish to thank all the Synthesis Coalition project leaders, students, and industrial board members who contributed their energy, ideas, and thoughts to the assessment planning process and the tools developed with their advice and counsel.
*"The Synthesis Coalition has been funded by the NSF Engineering Education Coalition program since 1990. The primary goal of the Synthesis Coalition is to improve the effectiveness of engineering education by emphasizing embedded computing and mechatronics.
- Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »
*Participants are asked to write on 3x5 notecard any questions about what remained "muddy" or unclear about a presentation. The cards were collected and analyzed by the presenter in order the identify areas which required more explanation or clarification.
*Clearly, with the practical limitations of assessment, no list could cover every possible ability that engineers need. However, given the importance of developing commitment and a common foundation for assessment across such diverse institutions, the critical issue was gaining consensus around a sub-set of abilities the Synthesis Coalition's participants could agree on as important.
REFERENCES
1. Guba, E., and Y. Lincoln, Fourth-Generation Evaluation, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1989.
2. Herman, J. L., P. R. Aschbacher, and L. Winters, A Practical Guide to Alternative Assessment, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA, 1992.
3. Pavelich, M. J., B. M. Olds, and R. L. Miller, "Real-World Problem Solving in Freshman-Sophomore Engineering," New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 61, 1995.
4. Davis, B. G., "Demystifying Assessment Learning from the Field of Evaluation," New Directions for Higher Education, no. 67,1989, pp. 5-21.
5. North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, "Assessment: Comments from the Assessment Plan Review Process," Assessment Update, vol. 5, no. 5,1993, pp. 8-9.
6. Angelo, T., and K. P. Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1993.
7. Cross, K. P., "On College Teaching," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 82, no. 1, 1993, pp. 9-15.
8. Brereton, M. F., J. Greeno, L. Leifer, J. Lewis, and C. Linde, "Innovative Assessment of Innovative Curricula: Video Interaction Analysis of Synalysis Exercises, " Proceedings, 1993 ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, 1993, pp. 1286-1291.
9. Aglan, H., and S. Ali, "Hands-On Experiences: An Integral Part of Engineering Curriculum Reform," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 85, no. 4,1996, pp. 327-330.
10. Hsi, S., C. M. Hoadly, and M. C. Linn, "Lessons for the Future of Electronic Collaboration from the Multimedia Forum Kiosk," Speculations in Science and Technology, Special Issue on Education, vol. 18, no. 4, 1994, pp. 265-277.
11. Hsi, S., M. C. Linn, and J. Bell, The Role of Spatial Reasoning in Engineering and the Design of Spatial Instruction," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 86, no. 2,1997, pp. 151-158.