w&o.99 ch1

It is possible to learn how to teach well. That is the thesis of this book. We want to help new

professors get started toward effective, efficient teaching so that they can avoid the “new

professor horror show” in the first class they teach. And by exposing them to a variety of

theories and methods, we want to open the door for their growth as educators. Since one goal

is immediate and the second is long-term, we have included both immediate how-to

procedures and more theoretical or philosophical sections. Written mainly for Ph.D. students

and professors in all areas of engineering, the book may be used as a text for a graduate-level

class or by professionals who wish to read it on their own. Although our focus is engineering,

much of this book should be useful to teachers in other technical disciplines. Teaching is a

complex human activity, so it’s impossible to develop a formula which guarantees that it will

be excellent. But by becoming more efficient, professors can learn to do a good job and end

up with more time to do other things such as research.

The majority of engineering professors have never had a formal course in education, and

some can even produce a variety of challenging rationalizations why such a course is

unnecessary:

1 I didn’t need a teaching course.

2 I learned how to teach by watching my teachers.

3 Good teachers are born and not made.

4 Teaching is unimportant.

INTRODUCTION:

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 1

1.1. WHY TEACH TEACHING NOW?

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

5 Teaching courses have not improved the teaching in high schools and grade schools.

6 Engineers need more technical courses.

7 If I am a good researcher, I will automatically be a good teacher.

8 Even if a teaching course might be a good idea, none is available.

1 The first criticism can be answered in several ways. Just because someone did not need

a teaching course does not logically imply that he or she would not have benefited from one.

What is more important, times have changed. In the past, young assistant professors received

a good deal of on-the-job training in how to teach. New assistant professors were mentored

in teaching and were expected to teach several classes a semester. Now, mentoring is in

research, and an assistant professor in engineering at a research university may teach only one

course a semester. In the past the major topic of discussion with older professors was teaching;

now it is research and grantsmanship. Because of these changes, formal training in teaching

methods is now much more important. Van Ness (1989) has presented a detailed description

of the changes in chemical engineering education which closely match changes in other areas

of engineering education.

The problems facing engineering education have also changed. According to demographic

studies, the number of traditional engineering students—white, male eighteen-year olds—is

expected to go through a minimum from 1992 to 1994 and then increase very slowly

(Hodgkinson, 1985; Reynolds and Oaxaca, 1988). In order to have enough engineers to

remain internationally competitive, we must recruit, teach, and retain nontraditional students

such as women and underrepresented minorities. There is also a moral imperative for reaching

out to these nontraditional students. They offer different challenges and require different

educational methods. A related problem is how to encourage enough U.S. citizens, particu-

larly women and minorities, to earn a Ph.D. and then become educators. Many students see

the workloads of assistant professors as oppressive and do not want the sword of the tenure

decision hanging over their heads. A course on efficient, effective teaching would reduce the

trauma of starting an academic career and help these students to see the joys of teaching.

2 You undoubtedly learned something about teaching from your teachers, but what if they

were bad teachers? Even if you did have good teachers, this method at best gives the new

professor a limited repertoire and does not provide for any of the necessary practice. This

approach also does not help you incorporate new educational technology into the classroom

unless you have had the rare opportunity to take a course from one of the pioneers in these

areas. An opinion contrary to this is given by Highet (1976, p. 112), who argues that a course

on education during graduate study is not needed since students can learn by watching good

and bad teachers.

3 Some of the characteristics of good teachers may well be inborn and not made, but the

same can be said for engineers. We expect engineers to undergo rigorous training to become

proficient. It is logical to require similar rigorous training in the teaching methods of

engineering professors. Experience in teaching engineering students how to teach shows that

everyone can improve her or his teaching (e.g., see Wankat and Oreovicz, 1984; Stice, 1991).

Even those born with an innate affinity for teaching or research can improve by study and

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

practice. Finally, in its extreme, this argument removes all responsibility and all possibility

for change from an individual.

4 There is no doubt that teaching is very important to students, parents, alumni,

accreditation boards, and state legislatures. Unfortunately, at many universities research is

more important than teaching in the promotion process. When assistant professors are denied

tenure, it is because of lack of research, not because they have not been good teachers. An

efficient teacher can do a good job teaching in the same amount of time an inefficient teacher

spends doing a poor job. New professors who study educational methods will likely be better

prepared to teach and will be more efficient during their first years in academia.

5 There is a general trend toward reducing the number of courses in pedagogy and

increasing the number of content courses for both grade school and high school teachers.

However, there is no trend toward zero courses or no practice in how to teach. The optimum

number of courses in teaching methods undoubtedly lies between the large number required

of elementary school teachers and the zero number taken by most engineering professors.

6 The demand for more and more technical courses is frequently heard at both the

undergraduate and graduate levels. At the graduate level some of the most prestigious

universities require the fewest number of courses. Thus, arguments that instructors must cover

more technical content lack conviction at the graduate level. Courses on teaching can be very

challenging and can open up entirely new vistas to the student. A course on teaching methods

will be useful to all students even if they go into industry or government since logical

organization and presentation of material are important in all areas.

7 Unfortunately, most research shows that there is almost no correlation between effective

teaching and effective research (see Section 17.3 for a detailed discussion). Frequently heard

comments to the contrary often appear to be based on examples of good researchers who are also

good teachers, while ignoring examples of good teachers who do not do research and examples of

good researchers who are poor teachers. This should not be interpreted as a statement that

engineering professors should not do research. Ideally, they should strive to do both teaching and

research well, and they should be trained for both functions.

8 There are a few courses in teaching in engineering colleges (e.g., Wankat and Oreovicz, 1984;

Stice, 1991), and at the University of Texas at Austin the teaching course has been offered since

1972 (Stice, 1991). Many, if not most, universities offer teaching workshops either before the

semester starts (e.g., Felder et al., 1989) or during the semester (e.g., Wentzel, 1987). Professional

societies such as the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) also frequently offer

effective teaching programs.

There are additional good reasons for learning how to teach. Teaching when you don’t know

how may be considered unethical! Canon 2 of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and

Technology (ABET) states, “Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their compe-

tence” (see Table 12-1). Since teaching is a service, teaching when one is not competent is probably

unethical. Also, the ASEE Quality of Engineering Education Project concluded, “All persons

preparing to teach engineering (the pretenure years) should be required to include in their

preparation studies related to the practice of teaching” (ASEE, 1985, p. 156).

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Exactly what characterizes a good teacher? Many adjectives come to mind when this

question is asked: stimulating, clear, well-organized, warm, approachable, prepared, helpful,

enthusiastic, fair, and so forth. Lowman (1985) synthesized the research on classroom

dynamics, student learning, and teaching to develop a “two-dimensional model” of good

teaching. The most important dimension is intellectual excitement which represents the

teacher’s “obligation to knowledge and society” (Elbow, 1986, p. 142). This dimension

includes content and performance. Since most engineering professors think content is the most

important, making this dimension the most important agrees with common wisdom in the

profession. Included in intellectual excitement are organization and clarity of presentation of

up-to-date material. Since a dull performance can decrease the excitement of the most

interesting material, this dimension includes performance characteristics. Is the professor

energetic and enthusiastic? Does the professor clearly show a love for the material? Does the

professor use clear language and clear pronunciation? Does the professor engage the students

so that they are immersed in the material?

The second dimension identified by Lowman is interpersonal rapport which is the teacher’s

“obligation to students” (Elbow, 1986, p. 142). Professors develop rapport with students by

showing an interest in them as individuals. In addition to knowing every student’s name, does

the professor know something about each one? Does he or she encourage them and allow for

independent thought even though they may disagree with the professor? Is the professor

available for questions both in and out of class? Although engineering professors do not

uniformly agree that interpersonal rapport is important, students consistently include this

dimension in their ratings of teachers (see Section 16.3.2). Note that at times the content and

rapport sides of teaching conflict with each other (Elbow, 1986).

How do these two dimensions interact? The complete model is shown in Table 1-1.

Lowman (1985) divides intellectual development into high (extremely clear and exciting),

medium (clear and interesting), and low (vague and dull). He divides the interpersonal rapport

dimension into high (warm, open, predictable, and highly student-oriented), medium (rela-

tively warm, approachable, democratic, and predictable), and low (cold, distant, highly

controlling, unpredictable). To interpersonal rapport we have added a fourth level below

low—punishing (attacking, sarcastic, disdainful, controlling, and unpredictable)—since we

1.2. THE COMPONENTS OF GOOD TEACHING

Intellectual

Excitement Punishing Low Moderate High

High

Moderate

Low

6'. Intellectual

Attacker

3'. Adequate

Attacker

1'. Inadequate

Attacker

Interpersonal Rapport

6. Intellectual

Authority

3. Adequate

1. Inadequate

8. Masterful

Lecturer

5. Competent

2. Marginal

9. Complete

Master

7. Masterful

Facilitator

4. “Warm fuzzy”

TABLE 1-1 TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF TEACHING (Modified from Lowman, 1985)

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

have observed professors in this category.

The numbering system in Table 1-1 indicates that professors improve their teaching much

more quickly by increasing their intellectual excitement than by developing greater rapport

with students. For example, a professor who is high in interpersonal rapport and low in

intellectual excitement (position 4) will be considered a poorer teacher than a professor who

is high in intellectual excitement and low in interpersonal rapport (position 6). Because their

strengths are very different, these two teachers will excel in very different types of classes.

The professor in position 4 will do best with a small class with a great deal of student

participation, whereas the professor in position 6 will do best in large lecture classes. Our

impression based on a very unscientific sample is that most engineering professors are in the

broad moderate level of intellectual excitement and are at all levels of interpersonal rapport.

The difference between these teachers and those at the high level of intellectual excitement is

that the latter either consciously or unconsciously pay more attention to the performance

aspects of teaching. Fortunately, all engineering professors can improve their teaching in both

dimensions, and position 5 (competent) is accessible to all. Although becoming a complete

master is a laudable goal to aim for, teachers who have attained this level are rare.

Hanna and McGill (1985) contend that the affective aspects of teaching are more important

than method. Affective components which appear to be critical for effective teaching include:

• Valuing learning

• A student-centered orientation

• A belief that students can learn

• A need to help students learn.

These affective components are included in the model in Table 1-1. High intellectual

excitement is impossible without valuing the learning of content and a need to present the

material in a form which aids learning. High interpersonal rapport requires a student-centered

orientation and a belief that students can learn.

A few comments about the punishing level of interpersonal rapport are in order. Since most

students will fear such a professor, they will do the course assignments and learn the material

if they remain in the course and aren’t immobilized by fear. However, even those who do well

will dislike the material. In our opinion and in the opinion of the American Association of

University Professors (see Table 17-3), this punishing behavior is unprofessional. The only

justification for a punishing style is to train students for a punishing environment such as that

confronted by boxers, POWs, sports referees, and lawyers. Professors who stop attacking

students immediately move into the level of low interpersonal rapport and receive higher

student ratings.

Teaching is an important activity of engineering professors, both in regard to content and

in relation to students. New professors are usually superbly trained in content, but often have

1.3. PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

very little idea of how students learn. This book is based on what may possibly be a

revolutionary hypothesis: Young professors will do a better job teaching initially if they

receive education and practice in teaching while they are graduate students or when they first

start out as assistant professors. They will be more efficient the first few years and will have

time for other activities.

The teaching methods covered in this book go beyond the standard lecture format, although

it too is covered. Unfortunately, for too many teachers lecturing is often synonymous with

teaching. In an attempt to broaden the reader’s repertoire of teaching techniques, we include

other teaching methods which may be more appropriate for some courses. Because advising

and tutoring are closely tied to teaching, we also include these one-to-one activities. And since

we believe that learning to become a good problem solver and learning how to learn are two

major goals of engineering education, we also cover methods for teaching students to attain

these goals.

Engineering professors invariably serve as models of proper behavior. Thus, an engineer-

ing professor should be a good engineer both technically and ethically, not using his or her

position to persecute or take advantage of students. We agree with Highet (1976, p. 79) that

in general students are likely to be immature and that “our chief duty is not to scorn them for

this inability to comprehend, but to help them in overcoming their weakness.” A well-

developed sense of fairness is almost uniformly appreciated by students.

Our position on human potential is that people want to learn. Therefore, we search for ways

to stop demotivating students while realizing that a few discipline problems always exist.

Teaching is an important activity of engineering professors. Since they must also be involved

in varying amounts of research, administration, advising, committee work, consulting, and so

forth, we emphasize both effectiveness and efficiency.

Throughout this book we will base teaching methods on known learning principles. Many

comments on what works in teaching are scattered throughout. In this section we will list many

of the methods that are known to work. The ideas in this section are based on Chapters 13 to

15, papers by Chickering and Gamson (1987), Durney (1973), Irey (1981), and Wales (1976),

books by Lowman (1985), Elbow (1986), McKeachie (1986), and Peters and Waterman

(1982), and the government brochure What Works (1986).

1 Guide the learner. Be sure that students know the objectives. Tell them what will be

next. Provide organization and structure appropriate for their developmental level.

2 Develop a structured hierarchy of content. Some organization in the material should

be clear, but there should be opportunities for the student to do some structuring. Content

needs to include concepts, applications and problem solving.

3 Use images and visual learning. Most people prefer visual learning and have better

1.4. WHAT WORKS: A COMPENDIUM OF LEARNING PRINCIPLES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

retention when this mode is used. Encourage students to generate their own visual learning

aids.

4 Ensure that the student is active. Students must actively grapple with the material. This

can be done internally or externally by writing or speaking.

5 Require practice. Learning complex concepts, tasks, or problem solving requires a

chance to practice in a nonthreatening environment. Some repetition is required to become

both quick and accurate at tasks.

6 Provide feedback. Feedback should be prompt and, if at all possible, positive. Reward

works much better than punishment. Students need a second chance to practice after feedback

in order to benefit fully from it.

7 Have positive expectations of students. Positive expectations by the professor and

respect from the professor are highly motivating. Low expectations and disrespect are

demotivating. This is a very important principle, but it cannot be learned as a “method.” A

master teacher truly believes that her or his students are capable of great things.

8 Provide means for students to be challenged yet successful. Be sure students have the

proper background. Provide sufficient time and tasks that everyone can do successfully but

be sure that there is a challenge for everyone. Success is very motivating.

9 Individualize the teaching style. Use a variety of teaching styles and learning exercises

so that each student can use his or her favorite style and so that each student becomes more

proficient at all styles.

10 Make the class more cooperative. Use cooperative group exercises. Stop grading on

a curve and either use mastery learning or grade against an absolute standard.

11 Ask thought-provoking questions. Thought-provoking questions do not have to have

answers. Posing questions without answers can be particularly motivating for more mature

students.

12 Be enthusiastic and demonstrate the joy of learning. Enthusiasm is motivating and

will help students enjoy the class.

13 Encourage students to teach other students. Students who tutor others learn more

themselves and the students they tutor learn more (What Works, 1986). In addition, students

who tutor develop a sense of accomplishment and confidence in their ability.

14 Care about what you are doing. The professor who puts teaching “on automatic”

cannot do an outstanding job.

15 If possible, separate teaching from evaluation. If a different person does the

evaluation, the teacher can become a coach and ally whose goal is to help the student learn.

At the end of each chapter we will step aside and look philosophically at the chapter. These

“metacomments” allow us to look at teaching from a viewpoint that is “outside” or “above”

the teacher. In class we use metadiscussion to discuss what has happened in class. In this

chapter we set up a strawman who argued against courses on teaching methods and then

knocked him down. The strawman is real in some universities, and we have met him many

1.5. CHAPTER COMMENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

times while developing the course this book is based on. This book is written in a pragmatic,

how-to-do-it style. There are philosophical and spiritual aspects of teaching which are given

little attention. A good counterpoint to this book is Palmer’s (1983) book on the spiritual

aspects of education.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Discuss the goals of this book.

• Answer the comments of critics.

• Explain the two-dimensional model of teaching.

• Discuss some of the values which underlie your ideals of teaching.

• Explain some applications of learning principles to engineering education.

1 Many additional critical comments can be made about the need for a teaching course.

Develop both a critical comment and your response to this comment.

2 Good teachers must remain intellectually active. Brainstorm at least a dozen ways a

professor can do this during a forty-year career.

3 Discuss the values which influence your teaching.

4 Determine the positions in Table 1-1 of engineering professors you have had as an

undergraduate or graduate student. What could these professors have done to improve their

teaching? (If this assignment is turned in, do not identify the professor by name.)

ASEE, “Quality of Engineering Education Project,” Eng. Educ., 153 (Dec. 1985).Durney, C. H., “A

review: Principles of design and analysis of learning systems,” Eng. Educ., 406 (March 1973).

Chickering, A. W. and Gamson, Z. F., "Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education,"

AAHE Bull., 3 (March 1987). (AAHE is the American Association for Higher Education.)

Elbow, P., Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching, Oxford University Press,

New York, Chapter 7, 1986.

Felder, R. M., Leonard, R., and Porter, R. L., “Oh God, not another teaching workshop,” Eng. Educ.,

622 (Sept./Oct. 1989).

Hanna, S. J. and McGill, L. T., “A nurturing environment and effective teaching,” Coll. Teach., 33(4),

177 (1985).

1.6. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: TEACHING ENGINEERING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Highet, G., The Immortal Profession: The Joys of Teaching and Learning,Weybright and Talley, New

York, 1976.

Hodgkinson, H. L., “All One System. Demographics of Education: Kindergarten Through Graduate

School, “ The Institute for Leadership, Washington, DC, 1985 (pamphlet).

Irey, R. K., “Four principles of effective teaching,” Eng. Educ., 285 (Feb. 1987).

Lowman, J. Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips, 8th ed., D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA, 1986.

Palmer, P. J., To Know as We Are Known: A Spirituality of Education, Harper Collins, San Francisco,

1983.

Peters, T. J. and Waterman, R. H., Jr., In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run

Companies, Harper and Row, New York, 1982.

Reynolds, W. A. and Oaxaca, J. (Co-chairs), “Changing America: The new face of science and

engineering,” Interim Report of the Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped in

Science and Technology, Washington, DC, 1988.

Stice, J., “The need for a ‘how to teach’ course for graduate students,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 65, 1991.

Van Ness, H. C., “Chemical engineering education: Will we ever get it right?” Chem. Eng. Prog., 85

(1), 18 (Jan. 1989).

Wankat, P. C. and Oreovicz, F. S., “Teaching prospective faculty members about teaching: A graduate

engineering course,” Eng. Educ., 84 (1984).

Wales, C. E., “Improve your teaching tomorrow with teaching-learning psychology,” Eng. Educ., 390

(Feb. 1976).

Wentzel, H. K., “Seminars in college teaching: An approach to faculty development.” Coll. Teach., 35,

70 (1987).

What Works, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC, 1986. (Copies can be obtained by writing

to What Works, Pueblo, CO, 81009).

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

EFFICIENCY

Efficiency has long been a topic of considerable interest in the popular press. If you pick

up an airline magazine out of boredom as you circle the airport for the fifth time, chances are

there will be an article on some aspect of efficiency. Despite this popular interest, however,

most professors and students are inefficient. A little formal study of efficiency and some

practice can tremendously improve one’s productivity.

Most new professors work long hours and still feel they don’t have time to do everything

they want or need to do. By being more efficient they could do more research and do a better

job of teaching. An efficient teacher can do a good job teaching a course in less time than it

takes an inefficient teacher to do a mediocre job. It is also important to train both graduate and

undergraduate students to become professionals. Engineers are more effective if they are

trained to be efficient. We contend that part of this training should be done in school (it does

not hurt to be an efficient student either).

Being efficient requires both an attitude and a bag of tricks. We have placed this chapter

near the beginning so that the importance of efficiency can be emphasized throughout the

book. The bag of tricks will be discussed in this chapter and to a lesser extent throughout the

book. This chapter is a considerable extension and revision of Wankat (1987), and it draws

upon the books by Lakein (1973) and Covey (1989) for many of the basic ideas.

CHAPTER 2

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

People need a reward for being efficient. What will you gain if you get the task done well

in less time? To achieve what you want, you first need to set goals. If you are serious about

developing a more efficient and productive work style, you need to set both short- and long-

term goals. Do this for work and leisure. To illustrate, a young professor’s lifetime goals may

include the following:

Be promoted to associate professor and then to professor

Become a recognized technical expert

Be recognized as an outstanding teacher

Provide for children’s education

Spend a sabbatical in Europe

Remain in good health

Develop a happy marriage

This is a reasonable but certainly not all-inclusive list. Your goals may be different, of

course, because only you can develop that list.

A lifetime is, one would hope, a long time. Action plans are easier to develop for shorter-

term goals, so a two- or three-year list of goals such as the following may be useful.

Remain in good health

Publish five papers in refereed journals

Be promoted to associate professor

Take a Caribbean cruise

Even shorter term lists such as semester lists are useful. Achieving just one or two major

goals in a semester requires an unusual level of persistent effort. Lakein (1973) and Covey

(1989) have much more information and examples on setting goals. In order for this chapter

to be useful you need to write down your own goals (and later activities and priorities). Either

start now or do the homework when you are finished with the chapter.

Once various goals have been listed, it is time to set priorities. This involves juggling the

order of the goals until you find an order which satisfies you now. Don’t try to set priorities

for all time. Goals are made to be changed. A reasonable choice for a number-one priority

is to maintain good health since it makes achieving the other goals much easier.

Lists of goals have the advantage of keeping you focused on the big picture. However, they

don’t tell what you need to do. For this you need a list of activities which will help you achieve

your goals. For example, the following list will probably help someone achieve the goal of

good health:

2.1. GOAL SETTING

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

Stop smoking

Lose ten pounds

Jog or swim three times per week

Control stress and learn relaxation techniques (see Section 2.7.)

Have a physical examination

Activity lists can be developed for each of the goals. In some cases a certain amount of

ingenuity may be required to develop a list of appropriate activities. When the desired goal

requires a decision by others, such as being promoted, it is helpful to determine what the

requirements are for achieving this goal. Unfortunately, these requirements are often moving

targets, and it is impossible to get a firm commitment on what is required. For instance, the

criteria for promotion usually do not list the number of papers required. However, by asking

several full professors you should be able to get an approximate idea of the number and type

of publications required. This gives you information for your activity lists which can be used

in planning the right activity for reaching your goal.

Once you have worked out goals and activities, you need to set priorities for the activities.

Not everything can be done at once. The professor desiring promotion may give that goal a

higher priority than taking a long vacation. The long vacation can be seen as a reward for

accomplishing the first goal. Professors usually must work on several goals at once. If research

is a major priority, the most hours may be put into this activity, but other activities also must

be worked on. Maintaining good health requires a steady commitment. At the same time,

courses must be well taught. Committee meetings must be attended, and so forth.

Meeting goals is a day-by-day commitment. An ABC system can be used to set priorities

(Lakein, 1973). List the important items to do in the near future as A’s. Include work items

which have to be done such as writing a series of lectures or a proposal. Also include activities

which will help you achieve your lifetime goals and which you chose to work on this week.

Note that writing a proposal eventually helps you achieve the goal of being recognized as a

technical expert. It is also important to include on the A list large, long-term projects such as

writing a book. A mix of things that you have to do and things that you want to do makes work

more pleasurable. The A jobs should be worked on during periods of peak efficiency. Putting

an item on the A list does not mean that you will finish it today or this week or even this year.

Instead, think of it as a commitment to spend a minimum of five minutes on the activity. The

purpose of this is to break down overwhelming tasks into little pieces to prevent procrastina-

tion. The five minutes may grow into several hours of effort once you get started.

The A items can be listed in order of priority, A1, A2, and so forth. Lakein (1973) suggests

this ordering, but we’ve never found it to be necessary. B items are either less important or less

urgent. If there is time, you can work on them this week. If not, the B’s and perhaps some of

the A’s will wait for next week. C items are even less important and are held in reserve.

Sometimes these items take care of themselves and there is no need to work on them. Priorities

2.2. PRIORITIES AND TO-DO LISTS

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

change. A paper due August 15th may be a C in June, a B in July, an A in August, and an A1

on August 14th. Personally, I prefer to make the rough draft an A in June, the final draft an

A in July, and finish everything two weeks ahead of time.

It is useful to realize that importance and urgency are not necessarily equivalent. Keeping

up with the literature in your speciality is important, but it is rarely urgent. Priorities help you

to be sure that these important but not urgent things are done. There are urgent but less

important chores such as committee work, writing thank-you notes, and preparing expense

reports which must be done. Do these all at one time when your energy is running low and

you need a break from important activities. In setting up priorities it is useful to think about

critical paths for large projects. Think about what needs to be done in what sequence so that

the whole project can be completed quickly. This is illustrated in Fig. 2-1 for an experimental

research project. It is important to do the preliminary design quickly so that equipment can be

ordered. New graduate students often do not realize that it may take from one month to more

than a year for equipment to arrive. If ordered early, the equipment may be available when

the experimenter is ready for it.

The tools for ensuring that high-priority items are worked on are to-do lists and desk

calendars. A to-do list delineates the activities that you want to work on within a given time

period. Good choices are daily, weekly, and semester to-do lists. A semester to-do list, which

is the least detailed, includes only major projects such as papers, proposals, and books. This

list is glanced at when weekly lists are prepared. A weekly to-do list includes the activities you

want to do that week. Many of the activities may be assigned duties. These assigned duties are

indirectly related to your lifetime goals since doing them well will help you keep your job and

perhaps be promoted. Include some discretionary activities related to your high-priority goals.

Also include nonwork activities which are important to reaching your goals, such as

swimming three times a week.

Begin the week by listing the highest priority activities. Put these on daily to-do lists on

a desk calendar or appointment book. If you don’t get to an activity on Monday, work on it on

Tuesday. On Friday, check to see what A’s haven’t been worked on. Either work on them then,

or move them to next week’s list. You may find that you no longer want to bother listing B or

C items since you’ll likely always have more A items than you can finish. You also may want

to omit routine meetings and class meetings. Routine meetings can be put on a desk calendar

or appointment book and taken care of as they occur. Phone calls and letters can also be

recorded on the desk calendar. One suggestion is to arrange your schedule so that you have

no meetings on Tuesday mornings and Friday afternoons. This gives you a chance to work on

items on the to-do list early in the week, and a chance to clean up at the end of the week.

Idea

Library

Preliminary

Overall Design

Order

Equipment

Detail

Design

Apparatus

Construction

Build

System

Experiment

Equipment

Arrives

Write

Paper

FIGURE 2-1 CRITICAL PATH FOR EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH PROJECT

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

One problem with priorities and to-do lists is that you may become too work-oriented and

forget to stop and “smell the roses.” If this continues, you will start to burn out. Lakein (1973)

suggests writing “smell the roses” on the to-do list. Loosening up on the rigidity of the list may

also work. Consider most items on the list as a guide and don’t worry if you don’t work on

a particular task. Try to be productive without being rigid about following a schedule. When

you become saturated with one project, switch to something else. This is often a good time

to initiate people contact or to do nonurgent but important chores.

Once we have set goals and developed activity lists to help us reach those goals, we are

ready to consider the details of how we do our work. These work habits have a major effect

on how efficiently we satisfy our goals and thus are the subject of many books on time

management and efficiency (e.g., Covey, 1989; Lakein,1973; Mackenzie, 1972).

Visiting. Since much of a professor’s time is spent interacting with various people, your

work habits involving people are important. You need to determine when and where you work

most efficiently by yourself and with others. Some professors prefer to have blocks of time in

the morning to work alone, while others prefer the afternoon. For some an hour at a time is

sufficient, while for others much longer periods are desirable. Some professors find interrup-

tions very disturbing, while others enjoy them. When you work with others, do you prefer a

formal schedule or an informal drop-in policy? These individual preferences are something

that only you can determine. A useful way of looking at these individual preferences is with

the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) which is discussed in Chapter 13.

Once you have discovered the most efficient way to work, arrange your schedule and

develop methods to control interruptions and visitors. Listed office hours are very useful. If

a student comes in at another time when you are busy, say, “I only have a couple of minutes

now, but I’d be happy to spend more time with you during my office hours.” This approach

is most acceptable to the student if you have office hours four or five days a week and you have

the reputation of being in your office for your office hours. A second method to control

interruptions is to say no. It is easier to say no if you have a good reason such as preparing a

class in one hour (share this reason with the student), and if you can offer the student an

alternate time. If access to your office is controlled by a secretary, he or she can say no to

interrupters.

Another method for controlling interruptions is to hide. A second office or an office at home

can be a good place to do work which requires solitude. For some reason, most students do not

become upset if they can’t find a professor, although they may become very upset if they find

the professor and he or she does not have time to talk. Controlling the length of visits is also

important. Students and colleagues often want to chat. They may not be busy and may not

2.3. WORK HABITS

2.3.1. Interactions with People

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

realize that you are. When the visit has lasted long enough, stop it. Stand up. Say, “It’s been

nice talking to you, but I have to get back to work.” Escort your visitor to the door. This can

be done politely but firmly.

Secretaries. Unless you have had industrial experience, you probably have never

worked extensively with a secretary and have never been in charge of a teaching assistant (TA).

Thus working with these people is your first chance to be a manager. The situation is further

complicated since you are undoubtedly not the only boss and are probably one of the less

important bosses from the viewpoint of your secretary and your TA. How can you best use their

capabilities to help both of you do your jobs better?

Peters and Waterman (1982), in their best selling book In Search of Excellence, note that

outstanding companies obtain productivity through people. A productive professor treats

secretaries and TAs with respect. Realize that they have other things to do besides your jobs.

Plan ahead and help them plan ahead. Develop a “win/win” atmosphere where both you and

the secretary or TA can work efficiently (Covey, 1989). Give your secretary class assignments

a day or two before they have to be handed out, not fifteen minutes before class starts. Tell

your secretary clearly when they are due. Build in sufficient time so that you can proofread

the papers before they are copied. Ask your secretary to proofread the material before it is

given to you. Work with your secretary so that he or she understands what you want. For

instance, Greek letters may be a mystery to your typist. Explain what they are and point them

out on a template.

Try to make your secretary a partner with you even though he or she also works for five other

professors. Ask if one time is better for getting a project done than another. Give a warning

when there is a big project such as a proposal coming up. If something is not needed quickly,

tell your secretary when it is due. (It hardly seems fair to let something sit on your desks for

months and then demand that the secretary finish it immediately.) If you consistently give

materials on time, then when there really is a big rush, your secretary will reward your fairness

with an all-out effort. When someone has really gone out of the way to help you with a project,

reward him or her appropriately. Praise never goes out of style. Finally, remember that

“please” and “thank-you” are magic words.

Some universities do not provide secretarial assistance to professors because of budgetary

constraints. This is a very short-sighted view which squanders the much more valuable

professorial resource.

Teaching Assistants. Teaching assistants can be extremely helpful to professors, par-

ticularly in large classes. However, new teaching assistants often have no experience in

grading and they need to be trained. Your goal is to make the teaching assistant a partner in

teaching the course. Discuss the following with the TA before the semester starts.

1 Your expectations. TAs have a paid job and should be expected to earn their money.

Usually their duties start before the semester starts and continue until grades are due. The TA

may not realize that he or she has contracted for this time.

2 Attendance and note taking at your lectures. Otherwise, the TA will be very rusty in

grading and helping students.

3 Proctoring tests and recording grades.

4 Office hours. Help the TA set required office hours at times that are convenient to both

the students and the TA. Expect the TA to be available during office hours but protect him or

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

her from excessive demands from students at other times.

5 Grading. Explain in detail how you want grading done. Remember this is probably a

learning experience for the TA also. For the first few assignments grade a few problems to

serve as examples. Check over the TA’s grading and give feedback so that he or she can

improve as a grader. Expect a reasonable turnaround on grading, but tell the TA in advance

when a heavy grading assignment will be coming. If students ask for regrades, work with the

grader. Listen to the TA’s reasons for assigning grades. Try to balance consistency in grading

with fairness.

6 Student interaction. If laboratory or recitation sections are involved, encourage the TA

to prepare ahead of time and to learn the names of students.

7 Efficiency. Arrange the TAs workload so that it can be done in the amount of time the

person is being paid for.

8 Communication. Students who cannot communicate in English should not be used in

positions where they will have extensive contact with students.

9 Personal behavior. For foreign student TAs you may need to explain clearly that U.S.

standards of behavior towards women are different from those in many other countries.

Explain these standards and note that they will be enforced.

10 Training program. If one is available, encourage or insist that your TA enrolls. If one

is not available, consider starting one (Righter, 1987).

Other Support Personnel. There are always other personnel in the department who can

be helpful to you or who can cause you problems. They include janitors, shop personnel,

laboratory instructors, instrumentation specialists, storeroom clerks, business office person-

nel, computer systems people, and so forth. If you treat them and their work with respect, then

they will be helpful. In some departments they have significant student contact, and they may

know the students better than do most of the professors. If this is the case, they can be very

helpful if you have any problems with particular students.

Whiting (1987) makes the point that a professor must be honorable and honest in all

dealings with secretaries, TAs, and other support staff. Thus, do not ask them to do personal

favors or anything illegal or unethical. Respect their privacy and what little personal space

they have. Ask permission before you borrow any equipment or use any of their equipment

such as personal computers. Finally, be sure that your TAs and research assistants also treat

the support staff appropriately.

A computer can be an excellent time saver if it is used for activities that require a great deal

of time. Professors often spend a large fraction of their time writing. Composing a draft on

a word processor or typewriter is much faster than writing it by hand if you can touch-type.

Prepare the first draft of all manuscripts on a computer. Make a hard copy and write corrections

and additions on it. Then ask your secretary to make the corrections. This procedure will take

significantly less time than hand writing the first draft, and it results in a better final manuscript

2.3.2. Using a Computer

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

since revisions are easier to do with a word processor. Your secretary will also find this

procedure faster and less work than typing from a handwritten manuscript.

Obviously, efficient use of a word processor requires that you touch-type. The advantages

of typing the rough draft of manuscripts are so great that it will pay you to spend the time

needed to learn to touch-type and to learn to use a word processor. In addition, all students

interested in engineering should be strongly encouraged to learn to touch-type (now called key

boarding). Even if you know how to touch-type and how to use a word processor, composing

on a computer will seem awkward at first. Use an extensive outline as a guide while composing

on a computer. Most people can write both quicker and better if they write the first draft as

quickly as possible and then spend a significant amount of time revising (Elbow, 1986).

Computer graphics used to be a time sink since the programs were difficult to use, and

unless you used a program often you had to relearn it every time. If this is the only software

available to you, it would probably be more efficient to have someone else prepare figures.

Computer graphics on a user-friendly computer such as an Apple Macintosh is much easier

to learn and to remember. In this form computer graphics has become a time saver. However,

if someone else is available to do the graphics it would probably be more efficient to give them

a rough sketch to be drawn on a computer.

Spreadsheets are starting to be used to a significant extent in engineering education. They

are easier to use than programming from scratch and thus tend to be more efficient. Regular

use of a spreadsheet will enable the professor to become quite proficient with it, and the

spreadsheet will be a time saver. If the spreadsheet is used only on rare occasions, then it is

likely to be a time sink instead of a time saver. Students should also be taught to use

spreadsheets (see Chapter 8).

In many areas a computer can be a time waster and not a time saver. Programming is a very

time-consuming process. Writing programs for classes or developing computer-aided instruc-

tion is unlikely to save time because programs have to be polished before being given to

students. The use of unpolished programs in a class often results in breakdowns (always at

inconvenient times) which the professor must try to fix. It is certainly more efficient to use

programs that someone else has written and debugged. If you must write your own programs,

write fewer programs and spend more time on them so that they work even when abused by

students. Setting up files on a computer is a second area where the computer can become a

time waster. The problem with files is that they can become an end unto themselves, and they

are seldom used for a productive purpose. The files, a C-priority, become more important than

the A-priority jobs which the files should support. A third trap which is common for students

but not professors involves computer games. Games are fun for relaxation, but don’t fool

yourself by thinking they are educational. There are many other examples of nonproductive

uses of a computer which any computer hacker can list.

Covey (1989), Lakein (1973), Mackenzie (1972) and Roberts (1989) suggest a variety of

methods for improving the use of time. One of the most important is to avoid perfectionism.

Manuscripts can be revised forever, and the reader will never think they are perfect. At some

2.3.3. Miscellaneous Efficiency Methods

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

point you have to let go and put out a less than perfect, but not sloppy, manuscript. This same

reasoning is applicable to other work such as lectures.

A second very important principle is to reward yourself and take breaks. Most people

become very inefficient if they try to work all the time. You might recommend to your graduate

students that they take at least one day a week off and do no work on that day. This will pay

off in terms of long-term efficiency, and overall work production will actually increase despite

working fewer hours. Most people also need vacations (even assistant professors). Over a

five- or six-year period an assistant professor will probably enjoy life more and get more done

if he or she takes at least one week of vacation every year instead of working all the time.

One important efficiency method is to use the same work several times: a process called

piggy backing. The most obvious application of this is teaching the same course several times.

Then the work spent in setting up the course is reused when you teach it the second and third

times. Another related application of piggy backing is teaching courses in your research area.

Then time spent on research will help you present a more up-to-date course, and time spent

on the course will help you better understand your research area. Another example is to

prepare a literature review. This work can be published, serve as the literature review of a

proposal, be presented as a paper, or serve as the basis for several lectures.

Change your work environment or your task when you get bogged down. Carrying work

to the library, college union, or local hangout can provide just the change you need. Switching

tasks can also provide a needed break. If proofreading has you down, try reading a technical

journal for half an hour.

Another suggestion is to use odd moments to do useful work. Can you do useful work while

you commute to work? (Note that relaxation may be the most useful thing to do.) Plan work

for trips (see Section 2.4). Take a book or papers to grade to the doctor’s office. Figure out

what works for you for those ten- or fifteen-minute periods which are not long enough for a

“serious” project.

Mail can be handled more efficiently. The general rule is to minimize the number of times

you handle it. There is no law which says that you must open junk mail. If you do open a piece

of mail, try to complete your response immediately. If this is not possible, at least be sure that

you do something to move it forward each time you pick it up. Very often a phone call or a Fax

will be the most efficient way to take care of mail. You can help your correspondents be more

efficient by putting your telephone number, your Fax number, and your computer address on

your correspondence.

Carry a small notebook or pocket calendar at all times. Then you can write down

appointments and transfer them to your desk calendar later. This helps you to avoid missing

meetings. The notebook can also be used to jot down ideas, record references, list names of

people you meet, and so forth.

Travel can consume so much time that a separate section on travel efficiency seems to be

called for. It can be exhilarating and broadening, but also exhausting. Many of the effects of

2.4. TRAVEL

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

travel are shown in Fig. 2-2. The interest and energy generated is very high when you seldom

travel (say, once or twice a semester). As you travel more often, the interest in each trip

decreases. The first trip to Europe is very exciting; the fifth trip in the same year is a lot less

so. Every trip involves a certain amount of hassle in developing plans, buying tickets,

arranging for classes while you are gone, and so forth. In addition, when you return you have

to catch up on the work you missed while you were gone. These hassles and the work you have

to make up lead to a tiredness factor. Cumulatively, tiredness increases as you make more and

more trips. The combination of interest and energy generated by the trip and energy drained

by the trip is the efficiency curve shown in Figure 2-2. This curve goes through a maximum

at a certain number of trips per semester. An additional factor is the effect of your travels on

your spouse or significant other. (Even some pets don’t like to be left alone.) However, a

spouse who travels with you may be more positive about traveling.

There are no numbers on Fig. 2-2 since the values depend upon individual circumstances.

If you’re not feeling well, one trip may be too many. If your home life is unhappy, getting away

may energize you, and the more trips a semester the better. Also, extroverts tend to like

traveling more than introverts do, probably because the hassles are not as draining for them.

The point of Fig. 2-2 is that there is probably an optimum amount of travel for you.

Efficiency

Tiredness or

Hassle Factor

Spouse's

Tolerance

Interest in Trip

Number of Trips/Semester

FIGURE 2-2 EFFECTS OF TRAVEL

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

From the point of view of your career and teaching, travel can be either over- or underdone.

Not traveling may lead to stagnation, parochialism, and a lack of name recognition for your

research. There are several dangers in traveling too much. Certain responsibilities such as

office hours, committee meetings, and academic advising really cannot be made up. Profes-

sors who are gone too much risk the danger that their classroom effectiveness may decline (see

Section 2.5). The important question to ask is, does this travel help me reach my long-term

goals? Sometimes travel may help you reach some goals, such as seeing the world, but hinder

your reaching other goals such as writing a book. It will probably take one day to catch up for

each day you are gone. If you are gone a week, it will take a week to catch up, and that will

be two weeks where you do only routine and urgent tasks and don’t get a chance to work on

important goals. If you decide that you are traveling too much, then learn how to say no to the

less important trips. It helps to develop a standard letter for declining invitations.

Once you know that you are going to travel there are some tricks to increasing your

efficiency. First, a good travel agent is very important. Not all travel agencies and not all agents

within a given agency are equal. Shop around until you find one who will work with you, and

then stay with her or him. If you work with a large agency, be sure to get the name of the agent

so that you can always contact the same person. Currently, planning ahead, getting your tickets

early, and being flexible as to the dates you travel can save money. Registration fees at

conferences are lower if you register early.

Use the time spent on airplanes to get some work done. A long flight may represent the

longest period of uninterrupted time that you’ll have in months. Bring a combination of

writing projects and reading, such as a book or some articles to review. If possible, also bring

some light technical reading. When the flight is at night after a busy day, you may decide that

a review of the day and relaxation are more important goals than doing more work.

Courses can be organized so that they are efficient for the student, the professor, and the

TA. First, develop the goals and objectives for the course. Coverage should be reasonable.

Then decide upon the basic course organization. The lecture method is most commonly used

since it is widely believed to be the most efficient use of a professor’s time. This may be true

the first time a course is taught, but other methods can be equally efficient the second and

subsequent times the course is taught. The other methods may also be more efficient for

students since they may learn and remember more material. Develop a tentative course

schedule before the semester starts, and hand it out to the students and the TA at the first class

session. This allows them to plan for tests and projects. Calling it a “tentative” course schedule

gives you flexibility you may need if it becomes necessary to adjust the schedule.

Homework and tests can be developed in efficient or inefficient ways. Solving problems

before they are used practically eliminates using problems which either cannot be solved or

are too easy. As a rule of thumb, a professor should be able to do the test in one-quarter of the

time the students will take. Occasionally using a homework problem or lecture example on

a test not only saves time but also emphasizes the importance of doing homework and paying

2.5. TEACHING EFFICIENCY

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

attention during the lecture (Christenson, 1991). Ask TAs to solve some of the homework

problems, but check their solutions. On tests give the TA a solution plus a grading scheme.

Requiring written requests for regrades drastically reduces the number of arguments you have

to confront.

Preparing for a lecture immediately before the period it will be given ensures that you are

fresh. When presenting a lecture given previously, allow yourself one-half to three-quarters

of an hour to revise and prepare for the lecture. For totally new lectures or major revisions plan

Course Effectiveness

Professor Time

Course Effectiveness

FIGURE 2-3 EFFECTS OF PROFESSOR'S TIME AND EFFORT ON COURSE EFFECTIVENESS.

A. New professors or new courses. B. Experienced professor with established material.

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

on preparing a fifty-minute lecture in two hours or less. This prevents Parkinson’s law (work

expands to fill the time available) from controlling your time. Of course, if you don’t

understand the material, much more time may be required. Some time can be saved in lecture

preparation by using examples from other textbooks (Christenson, 1991). This is preferable

to just repeating an example from the assigned textbook. Most new faculty members

drastically overprepare and spend much more time than we have suggested here (Boice, 1991).

How much time needs to be spent on a course before it deteriorates? The answer to this

depends upon your skill and experience as a teacher and upon your knowledge of the content.

Obviously, for new professors and for professors teaching a subject for the first time, more

time and effort are required to do a good job. This is illustrated schematically in Figure 2-3a.

Our observations indicate this is generally an S-shaped curve similar to a breakthrough curve.

Effectiveness increases rather slowly at first and then speeds up as more time is put into the

course. As more and more time is spent on the course, effectiveness approaches an asymptotic

limit and may actually decrease slightly. As the professor gains experience in teaching and

becomes more familiar with the material, the curve sharpens and moves upward and to the left

(i.e., to higher effectiveness with less effort).

The hypothetical curve for an experienced professor is shown in Figure 2-3b. Our

experience is that there is a very broad range of professorial effort where course effectiveness

is quite satisfactory. However, at critical point C there is a discontinuous drop in course

effectiveness and the course drops below acceptable levels. This drop occurs because

teaching, unlike research, is always a “what have you done for me lately” activity. All the

rapport and good feeling developed one semester has to be rebuilt the next semester. A

professor with a good reputation will have an easier time doing this than a professor with a bad

reputation. However, if the “good” professor does not put in enough time or is gone too often,

the course effectiveness will crash. Experienced professors can hover in the flat plateau above

point C and adjust their efforts if they feel the class is slipping. This is somewhat dangerous,

particularly if the class is slipping because of too much travel. Note in Fig. 2-3b that

experienced professors are more likely to have a maximum, point M, beyond which extra effort

actually decreases class effectiveness.

In general, students also appear to follow the curves in Fig.2-3. Fig. 2-3a refers to students

who are not experienced learners in a particular area, and Figure 2-3b refers to students who

are experienced in a given area.

An excellent, efficient research program will follow many of the same basic principles as

a well-run company. The following principles are adapted from Peters and Waterman (1982).

1 Be action-oriented. This is Covey’s (1989) first habit of effective people.

2 Pay attention to the customer. For research the customer is the company, foundation, or

government agency supporting the research.

3 Within broad guidelines, give graduate students control and responsibility. Do not spell

out the nitty-gritty details.

2.6. RESEARCH EFFICIENCY

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

4 Show respect for each student. One way to do this is to listen more and talk less.

5 Be hands on and driven by values. Visit the graduate student’s laboratory or office.

Continually set the basic value of the research group (e.g., “innovation” or “careful experimen-

tation”).

6 Stick to the “knitting.” Stay fairly close to your area of expertise but don’t continually

repeat the same research. Before starting a new project ask, “Do I have the skills, time and

energy to do a good job?”

7 Develop an intense atmosphere with the expectation of regular contributions from every

group member.

Supervision of graduate students should aim for a happy medium between too little and too

much. Regularly scheduled meetings can prevent excessive procrastination. Occasional visits

to the laboratory give the professor a chance to provide intermittent reinforcement. Students

work hardest when they feel commitment to a project. This can be attained by having the

student develop and work on his or her own ideas. Another method is to ask the student if he

or she wants to present a paper at a meeting. A student who makes the commitment to do this

will work very hard to complete the paper. Since research efficiency is usually measured on

the basis of the number and quality of the papers published, it is important to complete the work

and publish the papers.

It is easiest to get results and write publications when you work on new ideas instead of

following the well-beaten research track. Thus, time spent on generating new research ideas

usually pays off. Many articles and books have been written on creativity and problem solving

(Adams, 1978; de Bono, 1973; Wankat, 1982) (see Chapter 5 also). Application of these

creativity methods can lead to more efficient research.

A useful method to help you determine semi-quantitatively if a particular project is worth

doing is a cost-benefit analysis. Cost-benefit analyses can be done for projects other than

research, but they are easy to illustrate for projects such as proposals where monetary value

is involved. The method is easy to illustrate with an example comparing two proposals. The

benefit-to-cost ratio in dollars per hour for writing a proposal can be estimated from

(Benefit/cost)($/hour) =

(dollars received) (funding probability) / (hours of writing) (1)

where the hours required to write the proposal is approximately

Hours of writing = k x number of pages (2)

The value of the proportionality factor k depends on your speed. The probability of funding

is harder to estimate, particularly initially when you have no experience. Some idea of this

value can be determined by talking to experienced professors or by talking to the agency. It

is desirable to maximize the benefit-to-cost ratio in Equation (1).

Consider two sources of funds: one offering a small amount of money but having a high

probability of success, and another offering significantly more money but having a lower

probability of success. The following approximate comparison can be done.

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

Source A $10,000, requiring a ten-page proposal, and having an 80 percent chance of

funding:

Benefit/cost = $10,000 x 0.8 = 800

10 k k

Source B $150,000 (for 3 years), requiring a twenty-page proposal, and having a twenty-

five percent chance of funding

Benefit/cost ($/hour) = $150,000 x 0.25 = 1875

20 k k

On the basis of the cost-benefit ratio alone, source B looks more advantageous. However,

there may be other reasons for trying source A first:

1 Need to quickly show success in obtaining funding.

2 Grant is small but prestigious.

3 Grant is for a proof of concept and could easily lead to much more money later.

It may be possible to send very similar proposals to both organizations, but this is ethical

only if you inform the agencies of your intention.

A final comment on writing papers. A large fraction of the citations in the literature have

some mistake. Therefore, always check your references.

Professors and students often feel a great deal of stress. Modest stress may increase your

efficiency and not be harmful to your health. But after some point stress can decrease your

efficiency and become harmful. When this occurs is obviously an individual matter. Some

people can thrive in an environment which is very stressful for others. An extreme example

of this is the response of soldiers to combat. Some soldiers find combat exhilarating, others

find it stressful, and some find it so stressful that they break down. In this section three

approaches to handling stress are discussed: change of environment, change of perception,

and relaxation methods.

Changing the environment may not be easy, but it is a very effective way to reduce stress.

Sometimes all that is needed to change the environment is the realization that there are

alternatives. For example, some professors find lecturing to be very stressful. These

professors can use other teaching methods once they realize there are other methods. A

professor who finds the noise from a student lounge to be annoying can ask to be assigned

another office. A professor may find that part of his or her lifestyle is increasing stress, and

this stress can be reduced by changing lifestyles. Even excessive coffee drinking may increase

stress. People with certain medical conditions may find that some weather patterns cause them

physical stress. Alleviation of this problem may require moving to another university in

another section of the country. Some people find all aspects of a professor’s life stressful. Their

only solution may be to find a job in industry or in a government laboratory. Often a stressful part

2.7. HANDLING STRESS

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

of the environment can be changed only by a major move, and other aspects of the position make

such a move undesirable. In cases such as this it is important to learn to live with the stress.

Another way to deal with stress is to change your perception. You do not change the actual

incidents but instead change how you feel and react to them. Everyone has a surprisingly large

degree of control over how they feel and react to situations and conditions. Some professors

feel that they have to be perfect and thus become very upset if a class does not go well or a

research paper is harshly criticized. Being upset over these “failures” is not a problem. The

problem lies in being so upset that the person is unable to function. Individuals with a need to

be perfect will be happier and more efficient if they learn to accept some imperfection in their

lives (see Appendix 2A).

A similar problem arises with professors who feel responsible for the actions of others. For

example, most professors do not enjoy flunking students, but some professors find doing so

to be extremely stressful. They feel that the F is their responsibility instead of the student’s.

It is much less stressful and fairer to assign this responsibility to the student where it belongs.

Alleviating the problem of assigning yourself too much responsibility is possible by the same

methods which work for overperfection.

Another related problem is the catastrophe syndrome, that is, believing that a catastrophe will

occur whether something happens or does not happen. The something can be rejection of a paper,

low teaching ratings, denial of tenure, or whatever the professor wants to name. Admittedly,

none of these are pleasant, but they are catastrophes only if they are perceived that way.

There are many psychological methods which can be used to overcome perception

problems which increase stress. Many of these methods require the help of a counselor or

psychologist. There are some methods such as rational emotive therapy (RET) which can be

learned and applied to oneself (Ellis and Harper, 1961, 1975; Ellis, 1973, 1988). Essentially,

RET postulates that we think irrational, unhealthy thoughts and it is these thoughts that make

us feel bad. The solution proposed by RET is to rationally attack the irrational thoughts and

change our thinking patterns. The RET approach is briefly outlined in Appendix 2A.

The perception of stress can also be reduced by desensitization procedures (Humphrey,

1988). Desensitization involves repeated exposure to the stress-causing stimulus, but in a

relatively supporting and nonthreatening environment. In a clinical setting the exposure is

usually obtained by imagining the stress-causing event. In classical applications of desensi-

tization the stimulus is first present at a very low level, and then gradually the level is increased.

This may sound complicated, but it is not uncommon for professors or department heads to

apply a similar procedure. For example, a new professor may first teach a graduate class with

ten students, then an elective class with thirty students, and finally a required sophomore

elective with 150 students. Unless he or she suffers from a more deeply rooted problem, this

individual can become desensitized to the stress of presenting a lecture to a large audience. A

professor who gives many quizzes in class is in effect desensitizing students who have

problems with test anxiety. This method is most effective if the first quizzes are worth a

smaller proportion of the course grade than later quizzes, or if a practice test is given.

Relaxation techniques are useful for reducing excessive stress while it is occurring

(Humphrey, 1988; Jacobson, 1962; Whitman et al., 1986). There are many methods which are

useful in helping one to relax. Physical activity such as jogging, tennis, swimming, or walking

is a good way to get away from the pressures of being a professor or a student. Regular weekend

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

activities, particularly those which get you outside and involve some physical activity, are

useful to keep stress from building up. It is important to get away and not carry work with

you. Professors at least have the advantage that they do not regularly carry paging devices with

them. When professors start to carry beepers, stress levels and burnout will increase [see

Baldwin (1985) for a discussion of the effects of modern technology on stress].

There are other relaxation methods which are useful on a daily basis. Although less popular

now, transcendental meditation (TM) or repeating a mantra works for many people (Humphrey,

1988; Benson, 1974). A westernized version of TM is given by Benson (1974). Various

breathing exercises are also useful to help someone who is very stressed relax. These can be as

simple as taking a deep breath, holding it for ten seconds, and then slowly letting it out. This

simple exercise is useful to hold in reserve in case a student becomes extremely anxious during

an examination. Various stretching exercises and methods to relax one set of muscles at a time

are also useful and easy to learn. Humphrey (1988) presents a variety of simple exercises which

can be used to reduce stress.

Excessive stress can also be very detrimental to students. It is helpful to be able to recognize

this and help the student to cope with the stress. The procedures for doing this are similiar to

those for coping with your own stress. These procedures are discussed in detail by Whitman

et al. (1986).

Efforts at efficiency can be overdone, and many things cannot be done extremely

efficiently. Most activities which require personal contact with other people have some built-

in inefficiencies. Examples include:

Starting a class period

Tutoring

Advising students

Mentoring graduate students

Building consensus (e.g., within a department for a curriculum revision)

Marriage

Raising children

If you try to do these activities in a very efficient manner, then others may feel rushed and

devalued. The net result is a rapid transaction which may minimize your time, but it is not

efficient since what needs to get done doesn’t get done. A classic horror story which may be

true involves a professor who set a three-minute egg timer whenever a student came in to ask

a question. After a short period most students stopped coming in, and the professor saved

himself time, but he did not help students learn. Professors can limit interruptions by

scheduling these personal contacts at specified times of the day. This will help overall

efficiency even though the individual interactions are inefficient.

2.8. LIMITATIONS

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

Innovation and creativity in research and teaching tend to be messy and not particularly

efficient processes. (It is hard to sit down and say, “In the next ten minutes I will have a brilliant

idea.”) The paradox here is that being innovative and creative can drastically increase your

overall efficiency even though the processes themselves are inefficient. Once a professor has

a great idea for research, actually conducting the research may be relatively quick and easy.

In addition, the research may have considerable impact. To a lesser extent, the same is true

of creative ideas in teaching. Students enjoy a bit of change and creativity in their classes.

The planning of an entire career does not appear to be an efficient process despite many

books and courses on career planning. Many biographies and autobiographies tell of famous

people who go through a period of wandering about before they seize upon their life’s work.

There may be false starts and failures or successes until they settle down into their great work.

It is useful to separate tactics from strategy. Efficiency is almost always a good idea in day-

by-day tactical concerns. An example is preparing for a class. If you want to break new ground

or be able to respond to new areas such as developing a new research program or course on

superconductivity, it is probably not possible to have an extremely efficient long-range or

strategic plan.

Relaxation is necessary to be efficient over long periods; however, relaxation itself almost

appears to be the opposite of efficiency. As noted in Section 2.7, we can learn to relax better

or more efficiently. During the period of relaxation, it appears that nothing useful is occurring,

yet useful things must be occurring. The paradox that we must learn to live with is that only

by allowing for inefficiencies can we truly be efficient as professors and as human beings.

One of the common problems in designing a course or a textbook is that there is no order

that really works. There is always some part of the subject which should be discussed before

covering the current topic, but not everything can be last. In addition, for motivational

purposes it is useful to present a practical part of the course early so that students know why

they are studying the theory. Not all aspects of this chapter will be completely clear until other

chapters have been covered, and some won’t be clear until after you have had experience as

a professor. We decided to put this chapter early to help professors think about being efficient

when designing courses. In addition, putting an important chapter early in the course ensures

that sufficient time will be devoted to it. This illustrates a second problem in course design:

The most interesting and most useful material such as efficiency and creative design is often

left until last so that all prerequisite material can be covered first. When this is done, the

interesting material is crowded into the end of the semester when there is never enough time

and everyone is tired.

Teaching efficiency in class is a challenge. The concepts are simple and often just common

sense. The hard part is applying the principles. Perhaps the best approach would be to not

lecture but require students to apply one or two principles to their lives. Then three or four

weeks later require an informal oral report on the results. We have found that groups of

experienced professors are much more attentive and receptive to a lecture on efficiency than

graduate students.

2.9. CHAPTER COMMENTS

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Set goals and develop activities to meet those goals.

• Prioritize the activities and use to-do lists.

• Improve your work habits with respect to people interactions, computer use, and other

activities.

• Analyze your travel patterns and improve your time use during travel.

• Explain how time spent preparing to teach affects course effectiveness, and use methods

to improve your teaching efficiency.

• Improve your research efficiency and apply approximate cost-benefit analyses.

• Use methods to control stress.

• Discuss situations when a strict application of efficiency principles may not be the most

efficient in a global sense.

1 Develop your lifetime goals as of now.

2 Develop your goals for the next three or five years, whichever time frame appears more

appropriate.

3 Develop activities which will help you attain your lifetime goals.

4 Develop your activities to help you attain your goals for Problem 2.

5 Assume one of your goals is to become a good teacher

a Define the term “good teacher.”

b Develop your activities to reach this goal.

c How will you know when you have reached this goal?

6 Develop a semester to-do list. Be sure to include some of your activities to reach your goals

on this list.

7 Analyze your use of computers. What could you do more efficiently? Develop a plan to

increase your computer efficiency.

8 Explain why a professor’s effectiveness in teaching a class or a student’s effectiveness in

taking a class will crash if some minimum amount of time is not put into the course.

9 Learn one relaxation method and practice it every week.

Adams, J. L., Conceptual Blockbusting, Norton, New York, 1978.

Baldwin, B. A., It’s All for Your Head: Lifestyle Management Strategies for Busy People, Direction

Dynamics, Wilmington, NC, 1985.

2.10. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

Benson, H., The Relaxation Response, William Morrow, New York, 1974.

Boice, R., “New faculty as teachers,” J. Higher Ed., 62, 150 (March/April 1991).

Christenson, R., “Time management for the new engineering educator,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE Washington, DC, 216, 1991.

Covey, S. R., The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1989.

de Bono, A., Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step, Harper and Row, New York, 1973.

Elbow, P., Embracing Contraries. Explorations in Learning and Teaching, Oxford University Press,

New York, 1986.

Ellis, A., Humanistic Psychotherapy, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973.

Ellis, A., How to Stubbornly Refuse to Make Yourself Miserable about Anything!, Carol Communica-

tions, New York, 1988.

Ellis, A. and Harper, R.A., A Guide to Rational Living, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1961.

Ellis, A. and Harper, R.A., A New Guide to Rational Living, Wilshire Book Company, North Hollywood,

CA, 1975. (This and the original edition are classics in the self-help literature.)

Humphrey, J. H., Teaching Children to Relax, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1988. (There are

many useful methods for adults in this excellent book.)

Jacobson, E., You Must Relax, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1962.

Lakein, A., How to Get Control of Your Time and Your Life, Signet Books, New York, 1973.

Mackenzie, R. A., The Time Trap: How to Get More Done in Less Time, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1972.

Peters, T. J. and Waterman, R. H., Jr., In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run

Companies, Harper and Row, New York, 1982.

Righter, R., “Training for Teaching Assistants,” Eng. Ed., 77 (10), 135 (Nov. 1987).

Roberts, M., “8 ways to rethink your workstyle,” Psychol. Today, 42 (March 1989).

Wankat, P.C., “How to overcome energy barriers in problem-solving,” Chem. Eng., 89 (21), 121 (1982).

Wankat, P. C., “Efficiency for Professors,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Annual Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, Washington, DC, 207, 1987.

Whiting, P. H., “Getting Started: A Potpourri of Suggestions for the New Engineering Educator,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 874, 1987.

Whitman, N. A., Spendlove, D. C., and Clark, C. H., Increasing Students’ Learning: A Faculty Guide to

Reducing Stress Among Students, Association for the Study of Higher Education, Washington, DC, 1986.

The rational-emotive therapy (RET) approach will be briefly outlined here. RET postulates

an ABC method of viewing human reactions. The activating experience A is the outside

stimulus that the person reacts to (e.g., bad reviews of a research paper or the acceptance of

a paper). Step B consists of the internal beliefs which lead the person to interpret what has

happened. These beliefs can be rational or irrational. For example, a rational belief is that a

rejection is unfortunate since more work will be required, but that the rejection is not a

catastrophe. An example of an irrational belief is that a rejection is a catastrophe which must

not happen. Eventually, the person experiences an emotional consequence C which he or she

thinks is caused directly by activating experience A. An example of an emotional consequence

C is anger and depression. Thinking that A caused C is irrational. This must be irrational since

another person will react to the same A in a very different way and experience a completely

different C. The emotional consequence C is caused by the beliefs B which the person has. If

APPENDIX 2A. THE RATIONAL-EMOTIVE THERAPY APPROACH

CHAPTER 2: EFFICIENCY

these beliefs are rational, then C will be reasonable (e.g., if the belief is that bad reviews are

unfortunate since they will require additional work, then C will be a mild displeasure). If the

beliefs are irrational, then C can be an extreme reaction.

Most people have irrational beliefs about something. Examples of irrational beliefs which

people subconsciously carry around in their heads are:

1 It is horrible to be rejected.

2 I have no control over my feelings.

3 I must be liked by everyone.

4 All my lectures must be perfect.

5 It is catastropic if something I do is not perfect or is criticized.

6 All snakes are dangerous and bad.

The amount of disruption these beliefs cause in the person’s life depends upon the belief and

how strong it is.

The RET approach is a method for combatting the dysfunctional aspects of emotional

consequences caused by irrational beliefs. The method involves rigorously analyzing your

thoughts to determine the irrational beliefs and to replace them with rational beliefs. For

example, suppose you just received a letter from a funding agency rejecting a proposal which

you thought was very good. Your first reaction is to become angry and you know that you will

be depressed and angry for several days. With the RET approach you first stop and listen to what

you are saying to yourself.

Ask, “Why am I angry?” Then listen to your own response which might be, “Because I was

turned down.” Now the RET approach pushes deeper. Ask yourself, “But why does being turned

down make you angry?” Here the response might be, “Because I’m not supposed to be turned

down.” A further push could be, “Why aren’t you supposed to be turned down?” “Because I

should be perfect.” “And what else?” “Well, everyone should always approve of my work.”

The beliefs that one is supposed to be perfect and have everyone approve of one’s work are

clearly irrational. These and probably other irrational beliefs are causing the anger and

depression. RET postulates that the appropriate place to intervene is in the irrational belief

system. Continuing our example, you could respond to yourself, “Perfect! No one is perfect. That

just is not rational. It’s also not rational to expect everyone to like your work even if that work

is very good.” Now you need to substitute a rational belief for the irrational one. For example,

“A rational approach is that it is nice and certainly preferable if your work is good and is approved

by everyone. However, it is not a catastrophe if you occassionally do some work which is not

up to your high standards or if someone does not like your work. It is unfortunate that the proposal

was not funded since you will have additional work to do to resubmit it, but it is not worth

becoming angry and depressed over for days.”

This approach may sound simplistic or too good to be true. The method does work but requires

considerable work and practice. The irrational beliefs have been there for a long time and are

usually difficult to eradicate. However, if these beliefs are attacked logically every time they

appear, they become weaker. In addition, as one practices RET on oneself, one becomes much

more adept at spotting irrational beliefs and at fighting them. Readers interested in this method

should read one of the books by Ellis (Ellis and Harper, 1961, 1975; Ellis, 1973, 1988).

DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

CHAPTER 3

You’ve started your first position as an assistant professor and have been assigned your first

class with real students.

• What do you do?

• What teaching method do you use?

• What level do you aim for?

• How do you structure the class?

• How do you pick a textbook?

• What do you ask on tests?

• How do you know how much you can cover in a semester?

• How many tests and how much homework do you require?

• How do you grade?

• How do you behave toward the students?

• How much time will this take you?

• Why didn’t someone tell you how to do this?

This chapter provides an overview of what a professor does in designing and teaching a

course, and it raises a number of questions about the process. The remainder of this book will

be spent finding some answers to these questions.

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

3.1. TYPES OF COURSES

Engineering professors teach a variety of courses. Since course design is often different for

different types of courses, it is useful to categorize them.

Required undergraduate courses which are prerequisites for other required courses tend to

have the most structured content. It’s likely that a curriculum committee will select the content

and even the textbook. Professors who teach succeeding courses care about how well the

introductory or prerequisite course is taught and the extent of the coverage. If the XYZ

transform is not taught and they expect it to be taught, they will let you know about the

omission. So it’s a good idea to ask other professors what they expect from a course. In

teaching these courses you’ll likely have less freedom in coverage. Balancing this, particu-

larly for new professors, it is highly likely that past syllabi, homework, tests, and a

recommended textbook will be available. Past instructors will be available for some assistance

if they are asked, but you’ll probably have to ask since few faculty will volunteer teaching help

unless asked. Often, these classes may be rather large, and student abilities will vary widely.

Required undergraduate courses which are not prerequisites for other courses are similar

but have a few differences. The course content is probably a bit less rigid, and other professors

have less of a vested interest in what is taught. These are often senior courses, which means

that very weak students will not have made it this far. However, graduating seniors are

notoriously difficult to motivate. Past syllabi and a textbook are probably available, but there

will be less pressure to follow them closely.

Required or core graduate-level courses have all graduate students in them, and class size

varies from small to medium. A syllabus probably exists, but the professor usually has some

freedom in rearranging it. Invariably, the amount of material to be covered is staggering, and

textbooks may or may not be available. The research professors in the department are often

very interested in the content and how well the students learn the material. These courses often

give the professor a good opportunity to get to know and impress new graduate students before

they pick research topics. Thus, in some departments these courses may be considered

“plums.”

Undergraduate electives and dual-level undergraduate-graduate electives are usually

regularly offered courses with a sample syllabus, textbook, and tests available. Professors who

have taught the course in the past are probably available for advice. Since electives are not

prerequisites for other courses, the professor can usually change the syllabus and textbook, and

these courses have a comfortable combination of guidance and freedom. Class size is usually

small to medium, and students tend to be interested since they have selected the course.

Overall, these courses offer a new assistant professor a good beginning to an academic career.

Graduate-level electives and seminars are the most open in coverage of content. These

courses may be very specialized, and other professors in the department often pay little

attention to what is covered as long as their graduate students don’t complain too loudly. The

freedom involved in selecting course content is very liberating but also somewhat daunting

since well-developed syllabi, homework and test examples, and a textbook probably are not

available. The classes are usually small, and the students are likely to be both intelligent and

interested. The teaching of graduate electives in one’s research area is an effective way to

integrate teaching and research. However, faculty often compete to offer these courses, and

new professors may not be given the opportunity immediately.

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Design classes, particularly capstone design classes for undergraduates, tend to be

somewhat different from other classes. Economics may be a required part of the course. The

course may be taught with case studies and often is loosely structured. The workload is often

high because of grading demands and the need to develop new case studies. Design classes

are also sometimes associated with laboratories, which can further increase the large

workload. Professors with industrial experience are often assigned to these classes. Chapter

9 deals with design classes in more detail.

The laboratory course usually differs markedly from all the other types of courses which

are often referred to as “lecture courses” (see Chapter 9). It may be attached to another course

and may or may not be administered separately. It also tends to be tightly structured since the

experiments or projects are limited by the available equipment. Unfortunately, the equipment

is often old and may not work well. Experimental write-ups are available, but always need

modification. For safety reasons, the section size is usually controlled. And, for various

reasons, new professors commonly find themselves assigned to a laboratory course. It is easier

to step into a lab course without much preparation, and since teaching lab courses tends to be

an unpopular assignment, the department head may also staff the lab with new professors since

they are more likely to accept the assignment gracefully. Although the course is a required one,

the material covered is usually not a critical prerequisite for follow-up courses. Teaching

involves a great deal of informal contact with students and extensive grading of laboratory

reports; little if any lecturing is done. Some schools have adapted the lab course and added

a communication component by adding a credit hour and a lecture on writing and speaking.

The often extensive report writing in the course makes it a natural place for teaching such

skills, one advantage being the focus of the report on technical material which adds relevance

to the student’s job.

Several tasks normally need to be completed before the course starts (exceptions occur

when students are heavily involved in planning the course). Some may be done for the

professor if the course is well-established, but with new courses all these tasks need to be at

least partially completed before classes start.

Clearly, it is helpful to understand your students. Are they sophomores, juniors, or graduate

students? What prerequisite courses have they had? What are they capable of doing? Are they

mostly full-time or part-time students? Are they majoring in your field? Have they made a

definite commitment to be an X-type engineer, or are they still searching for a major? How

mature are they? In general, is it likely to be a good or poor class? The more you know about

the students, the better you will be able to plan the course and select the appropriate level for

the material. Student characteristics are discussed in detail in Chapters 13 and 14.

3.2. BEFORE THE COURSE STARTS

3.2.1. Knowing the audience

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

What should the students know and be able to do at the end of the semester? This question

includes both coverage of the content and the ability to do something with the content. Goals

are relatively broad, while objectives tend to be quite specific. For example, your goal may be

that students understand the control of systems, whereas an objective may be that they know

how to use the Laplace transform in the analysis of linear control problems. The goals and

objectives must satisfy what is expected for any subsequent courses. The development of goals

and objectives for a course is important since it controls the coverage and, to a lesser extent,

the teaching method. The most important part of a class is the content covered because it makes

no sense to do a wonderful job teaching unimportant material. A part of the goals and

objectives for the course is the choice of the level at which to present the material. New

professors, particularly those fresh out of graduate school, are notorious for setting the level

too high and being too theoretical. The choice of an appropriate level for a class is actually

a complicated question (see Chapters 14 and 15). Appropriate goals and objectives for a

course may be somewhat subtle; for example, if one departmental goal is to produce graduates

who are good communicators, then writing and speaking have to be incorporated into the

engineering courses in the department. Goals and objectives are discussed fully in Chapter 4.

Existing courses may not have explicitly stated goals and objectives.

Once you know what you want to accomplish, you can choose a teaching method that is

congruent with your style and with the students’ learning styles. The teaching method should

also satisfy certain learning principles so that the method will be effective. Learning styles and

learning principles are the subjects of Chapters 13 and 15. Lecturing and various modifica-

tions of lecturing are by far the most common teaching methods and in most universities will

be acceptable to the other professors in the department. Lecturing is also one of the easiest

methods to use the first time you teach a course, partly because everyone is familiar with the

method. Unfortunately, lecturing is not the best method for some of the goals of engineering

education. If one goal of the course is to have students become proficient in working in

engineering teams, then lectures need to be supplemented with group work. No matter which

teaching method is chosen, you need to check the classroom ahead of time to be sure that

appropriate equipment such as a blackboard or an overhead projector will be available.

Teaching methods are discussed in Chapters 6 through10.

3.2.2. Choosing Course Goals and Objectives

3.2.3. Picking a Teaching Method

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The quality of the textbook will have a major effect on the quality of the course and on what

can be conveniently covered. Unfortunately, the textbook may have to be selected months

ahead of time because of bookstore requirements. For new professors who arrive a week

before the semester starts, the book has probably been chosen by someone else. For required

undergraduate courses a committee may select the book. If you do not like the textbook, you

can work at changing it for subsequent semesters, but do not tell the students that it is a poor

book. Textbook selection is discussed in Chapter 4.

An outline of the entire course in advance is helpful but not essential. If time is short, outline

at least the first month so that you and the students know where you are going. The course

outline should list topics for each day. This requires that you estimate the rate at which you

can cover topics. New faculty find this to be very difficult. It is useful to build in one or more

open periods, or periods which can be skipped before major tests. Tests, quizzes, and student

presentation days should be noted. This requires that you decide on the number of tests and

quizzes initially. Every school has breaks, student trips to conventions, major extracurricular

activities such as homecoming, and student professional activities such as the Engineering-in-

Training examination. Do you want to adjust your schedule for these events? Also, now is

the time to look at your calendar and adjust the class schedule if you will be out of town for

one or two classes. In a required undergraduate course the existing course outline will

probably be adapted.

You can be sure that on the first day of class the students will ask how the course will be

graded. Yes, our schools put too much emphasis on grading. Yes, it would be better if the

students were there mainly to learn. No, you cannot ignore the students’ desire to know how

they will be evaluated. They want to know how much quizzes, tests, a final, homework,

computer problems, and projects will count. Will there be extra credit? Will you follow a 90-

80-70-60 scale or will you use a curve? Are you an easy or a tough grader? Are you fair? And

so on. In our experience most students are satisfied if given the major outline of the grading

method. Grading is discussed in Chapter 11.

3.2.4. Choosing a textbook

3.2.5. Preparing a Tentative Course Outline

3.2.6. Deciding on a Grading Scheme

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

3.2.7. Arrange To Have Appropriate Material Available

3.2.8. Preparing for the First Class

3.2.9. Developing Your Attitude or Personal Interaction Style

3.3. THE FIRST CLASS

Appropriate material includes the textbook and supplementary books, handouts, and

solutions to homework and tests. Copies of these materials should be available to students in

a library or learning resource center. Be sure the bookstore has enough copies of the textbook.

Preparation for the first class is discussed in detail in section 3.3.

What is your attitude toward teaching and toward students? It helps to be enthusiastic and

to believe that teaching is an important and even noble activity. How much personal warmth

and caring will you show to the students? What, if any, is your responsibility for helping

students grow? Is it important to you to be loved, or is respect sufficient? Do you believe all

students can learn, or is removing students who cannot learn part of your job? Great teachers

are marked by a deep commitment to their students. Your attitudes and style will have a major

effect on your rapport with students. Once this and the other tasks are taken care of, you are

ready to start. It is usually desirable to have these chores done before class starts, but

fortunately some of them can be partially delayed until after the semester starts.

It is traditional to start the first class with “housekeeping chores.” There are other ways to

start a class and these will be discussed at the end of this section. Housekeeping chores are

routine and nondemanding. They allow students to get settled in, but this is not an exciting way

to start a class. Use the blackboard to write down information or pass out a paper with the

information on it or do both. Then latecomers (and there are always latecomers on the first

day of class) can get the information without interrupting the class. Give the students all the

information about the course structure that you can. The following items probably should be

included:

1 Course name and number. You will be surprised by the number of students who come

to the wrong classroom. Also list the hours and the class location, particularly if two locations

are used.

2 Professor’s name, office location, office phone number, and office hours. The way

you present your name is important. If you write it as Professor Jones, the students will call

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

you Professor Jones. If you write Carol or John, they will call you Carol or John. You need

to select your office hours before the class starts. Try to choose office hours which will be

available to most students. If you welcome phone calls at home, give your home phone

number. If you don’t want to be called at home, don’t give your home phone number. If

computer mail is to be used, give your e-mail address.

3 TA names, office hours, and office location. Introduce the TAs if they are present.

4 Prerequisites. Discuss how important these prerequisites are. Will you accept an F or

a D or an incomplete in a prerequisite course? (Check your school’s policy on this ahead of

time.)

5 Textbook. Discuss any other supplementary material that the students should buy or that

is available in the library. Pass out a reading list if you use one.

6 Tentative course outline. Discuss the course outline and note the dates of tests and due

dates of major projects. The earlier you give this information to the students, the fewer

problems you will have with conflicts.

7 Teaching method and expectations of the students. If 99 percent of the students’

courses have been lectures and you will lecture, this can be very brief. If your course will be

different, added discussion will be valuable.

8 Grading scheme. If you don’t discuss the grading scheme, the students will ask about

it. Be prepared for a question on extra credit.

9 Seating arrangements and names. Begin to learn names. If there is to be a seating chart,

describe how it will be set up. Start learning student names unless there will be a large turnover

the first week. Note that seating is not discussed at the beginning of the period since not everyone

will be on time. If it is important to you that the students know that you care about them as

individuals, then you must learn their names fairly quickly. Some teachers memorize the seating

chart, others use photographs of students, some call the roll the first few weeks, and some ask

questions using the class list. If discussion or group work will be important, you may want to

use some method which introduces students to each other. Various types of “name games” can

be used to do this. Students can introduce themselves or others. Many students will appreciate

a copy of the class roster.

10 General discipline policies. Always enter the class with a positive attitude toward your

students. However, since it’s likely that one or two of them may pose problems, briefly discuss

the rules the class must live by. What is the policy about cheating, being late, being absent, and

reading a newspaper or sleeping in class? What will your policy on makeups be? Be sure that

your policies do not conflict with university and school policies.

11 Student questions about course structure and policies. If there are no immediate

questions, erase the board to give the students time to formulate questions.

The housekeeping chores are complete at this point. Some professors dismiss the students

at this point, but this may be a mistake. Instead, start in on the course. Send the message that

you mean business. The students will not be ready to start business, but they are never ready

until you get them started. What should you do with the remaining fifteen to thirty minutes?

Use it for lecture, discussion, or whatever teaching method you intend to use in class. What

content should be covered? One possibility is to give an overview of the entire course and to

explain the importance of the material. A second possibility is to review a previous course

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

which is an important prerequisite for the course. A third possibility is to start the first lesson.

Regardless of the content, it should be presented with enthusiasm and a sense of excitement

so that the students will know that you consider the material to be important. Leave enough

time for a short summary.

Finally, give the first homework assignment. Homework on the first day! Yes, at the very

least the students should start reading. You know that they will not be very busy with

homework the first week, and you want them to take your course at least as seriously as the

competition. Pass out a sheet with the homework assignment on it. There will be fewer

misunderstandings about what is due when. This completes the first class. Tell the students

you will see them on Wednesday (or whenever) and signal them that class has ended. A clear

signal that the class is over, such as picking up your books or saying goodbye, will be useful

throughout the semester.

If you don’t like housekeeping, there are other ways to start the first class. The first class

period can be used to develop a course outline with the students’ input. This may be appropriate

in some elective courses. A test on prerequisite material can be given, but this will be unpopular

and probably won’t be extremely valid since no one has reviewed for it. The students can be

given a problem which they will be able to solve at the end of the course, and they can be asked

to work on it in teams. This works if the importance of the problem is clear. The students can

be required to write and turn in a paragraph on why they are taking the course. This is usually

meaningful only in electives. It does give you a writing sample and makes the students think.

Your creativity can guide you to other possibilities (see problem 6).

Your attitude toward teaching is very important. If you are enthusiastic and look forward

to the class, then the students will tend to do the same. If you have the attitude that it is your

job to help student’s learn and earn a good grade, then you’ve taken a big step toward building

rapport.

The second class is surprisingly important since many students consider it the first “real”

class of the semester. The first and second classes set the tone for the remainder of the semester.

Thus, it is very important for you to be well prepared for it. “Winging it” is always a mistake,

but can be a disaster if done while you are still setting the course tone and student expectations.

Enter the class with a sense of excitement and be enthusiastic. It should be obvious that you

should avoid scheduling trips the first week of the term so that you can meet with your classes.

Start the class slowly but on time. Classes should always be started slowly so that students

can switch gears and start thinking about this class. For starting this and other classes you

might:

• Collect homework.

• Practice the names of students.

• Review the previous class.

3.4. THE SECOND CLASS

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

• Add a bit of humor if you can do so naturally.

• Show a cartoon related to the day’s subject on the overhead projector. A little

entertainment before the class gets started will not detract from the seriousness of your

message.

• Make announcements from student organizations.

• Answer student questions from previous classes, reading, or homework.

• Mention a current event which relates to the class. Examples are a strike at a plant, the sale

of sensitive computer parts to unfriendly countries, a new automotive design, an explosion and

fire at a chemical plant, and a nuclear protest. Be sure to explicitly relate the event to the class.

A slow start is important, but these activities should last only a few minutes. Don’t allow

the students to lead you off on extensive tangents. During the remainder of the class cover the

content listed in the course outline using the teaching method of your choice. It is very

important in this class section to work hard at getting the students to be active since you are

setting the tone for the rest of the semester (see Chapter 15 for a discussion of why students

should be active). Toward the end of the period set aside time for student questions. Then

summarize what has been covered in class. Pass out the homework and reading assignments

or remind the class of the assignments. Remind students of your office hours and invite them

to stop in and see you. Ask anyone who missed the first class period to see you after class.

Dismiss the class slightly before or at the bell.

In general, it is useful for you to leave the classroom very slowly. This gives students time

to ask you questions. Many of these questions will be questions that could have been asked

during class. Answer them this time, but encourage students to ask similar questions in class

next time. Most classes need a good deal of encouragement to ask questions. Some student

questions pertain only to a particular student and should be handled privately.

With the semester under way, classes develop a routine which is punctuated by tests and

large projects. You prepare for class, develop homework assignments and tests, present

lectures or use another teaching method, grade or arrange for grading of homework and tests,

have office hours, and deal with any problems which may arise. Then at the end of the semester

you assign course grades, post them on the wall, and run off to a meeting or vacation. This

appears straightforward, but conceals many issues.

If you are lecturing, you will need to prepare each lecture before class. The way you go

about this often requires a little experimentation before you obtain a feel for how to proceed.

Do you need to write everything out, or are just a few notes sufficient? Can you accurately

reproduce equations without notes? Are your presentations clearer when you use an overhead

projector or a blackboard? How much material can you comfortably cover in a class period?

What is a good balance between theory and examples? Students always want more examples.

How closely should the lectures follow the textbook? Students will complain if you follow the

3.5. THE REST OF THE SEMESTER

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

textbook too closely or if the lecture has little connection to the textbook. What material is

important and should be emphasized? Every textbook (including this one) has both trivial

material and material which is becoming obsolete. It is your job to weed this material out.

To keep students actively involved with the material, have them take notes, ask and answer

questions, discuss the material, work in groups, write short summaries of the lecture, solve

problems at the board or at their desks, hunt for “mistakes” made by the professor, and so forth.

Active learners learn better. Encourage questions by allowing time for them, acknowledging

the student by name, repeating the question so that everyone can hear it, and then answering

it as appropriate. If the question will be covered later in the lecture, you can tell the student

to wait a few minutes.

How should homework assignments be distributed throughout the semester? How long

should problems be and how many problems should there be in each assignment? Should

homework problems be done solo or should you encourage group effort? Do all problems have

to be turned in and graded? Should a particular format be required? How do you or a TA grade

a large number of homework problems? There is no one set of correct answers for these

questions; however, if you want your students to spread their efforts throughout the semester,

you must spread homework and quizzes throughout the semester. Students generally consider

quizzes and tests the most important part of a course. Many questions can be asked about the

form and method of testing, but the most important questions are on content. What material

do you test on? There should be a correspondence between course objectives and the tests.

Testing for memory is easier than testing for problem-solving skills but probably is much less

important. If you want students to be able to solve problems, testing must include problem

solving.

The methods used in testing must also be examined. How many quizzes and tests should

you give? How much should they be worth? How many problems should be on each quiz or

test? Is it acceptable to use multiple-choice questions? Students appreciate help sessions

before tests. Should you have them? If so, who should lead them, and when and where? Do

you want to give partial credit? If so, how do you decide how much credit to give? Tests should

be graded rapidly and as fairly as possible. In an ideal class graded tests are returned during

the next class period, and the professor goes over the correct solutions then. Students do

prepare for tests, and students do become anxious before and during exams. Unfortunately,

many students stop work on an area once the test is over. How do you get students to learn from

their mistakes on tests? You will get requests for regrades, so it would be wise to develop a

regrade policy ahead of time. Do you want to give a final? Finals provoke a great deal of

anxiety, but they also force students to review the entire semester and to some extent integrate

the material they have learned.

How do you establish and maintain rapport with students? Studies of effective teachers

show that the best teachers have a good rapport with their students even in large classes (e.g.,

Lowman, 1985). Students prefer professors who are enthusiastic, are accessible and care about

them as individuals. Perhaps most importantly, students want an instructor who is fair. Your

challenge is to establish rapport while maintaining some professional distance so that

evaluations of the students are fair. The goal is to develop a cooperative atmosphere where

you and the students work together to maximize learning.

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Office hours give students the chance to clarify questions and to get additional help when

they need it. It is helpful if both the TA and the professor have office hours. Some students want

to talk to the professor solely, while others are scared to death of the professor. Office hours

are useful since they give you feedback on what the students are not understanding and on what

problems they cannot do. Keep your office hours. A problem is how to get students to come

in for office hours. Continual encouragement and an open and friendly demeanor help. Since

students forget, you need to remind them of your office hours and of the TA’s office hours.

Students will start to use office hours just before the first test or big project. What is the best

way to help them? How can you avoid spoonfeeding them and challenge them to extend

themselves and do better than they think they can? What do you do with a student who is trying

but is absolutely, totally lost? Should the TA be trained in helping students? Tutoring and

advising are discussed in Chapter 10.

Suppose that as the semester continues you slowly fall behind and material that should have

been covered on Monday isn’t covered until Friday. It is important to know why this happens

so that the next time it won’t. Write yourself notes on a copy of the course outline. For example,

if you do not plan to spend a large part of the period after the test going over the test, you may

lose half a period. The note to yourself will remind you to allow time for this. Now you know

what to do the next time, but what do you do now to cover all the material? If you haven’t

built an extra period into your course outline, there may be little that you can do other than skip

some material. Look at the rest of the semester and decide what to delete. What if you get to

the end of the syllabus and the semester is not over? Don’t worry; this very seldom happens.

Throughout the semester you may have to deal with discipline problems. Student problems

can range from the mildly annoying to the downright dangerous. The most common problems

involve chronically late or absent students and passively disruptive students. If lateness

bothers you, talk to chronically late students privately. They may have a legitimate reason for

being late. However, in all cases start the class on time and do not backtrack for late comers.

There is a reasonably strong positive correlation between attendance in class and grades.

Chronically absent students will pull down the class average. One possible solution to this

problem is to compute the class average and the grade distribution excluding chronically

absent students. Then give these students the grade they have earned based on this grade

distribution. Then the course grades will not be affected by those who are chronically absent.

These students are also most likely to turn in homework and projects late and to be late for or

miss a test. Have a policy ready in advance so that you can say, “My policy is to ....” Passively

disruptive students include those who talk, sleep, read a newspaper, or wear headphones in

class. Remember that the lack of a policy or ignoring these disruptions is also a policy. These

problems are discussed in Chapter 12.

As the semester nears the end, you will want to know how well you have done from the

students’ viewpoint. Ask. Many universities have very elaborate arrangements for evaluating

teaching, and some department heads require faculty to have their courses evaluated. If a

mechanism does not exist, you can still ask the students for comments on the strengths and

weaknesses of the course. The many factors which affect students’ evaluation of teaching are

discussed in Chapter 16.

At the end of the semester the professor has the privilege and responsibility of assigning

grades. How do you do this? If you have given the students a detailed breakdown of grades,

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

you will need to follow that procedure; however, few students will complain if the scale is

made easier. If you have been vague about the assignment of grades, make the decision now.

Several schemes for assigning grades are discussed in Chapter 11.

Throughout the first year new professors will have many questions about teaching. Talk

to other professors—many of them. Since there is no single method of good teaching, you will

get varied and occasionally contradictory responses. Sort through these responses and adopt

those that fit you. Once you find a kindred spirit, talk to her or him about teaching. If you feel

comfortable taking the risk, invite another professor into your classroom. Exploring teaching

issues with other professors will help you to learn to teach better and more efficiently, and it

will help you maintain your sanity during a very busy first year.

This outline of what a professor does to design and teach a course shows that new professors

are very busy their first few semesters. These are also the semesters when you want to start

your research program. What really needs to be done? How do you get everything done? The

first question is discussed in Chapter 17, while the second is essentially the topic of Chapter 2.

Most new faculty members feel unprepared to teach (usually a realistic appraisal of the

situation) and are emotionally drained by the experience. For most new professors, learning

to teach is on-the-job training (OJT) which is strongly motivating but is not the best way to

learn. New faculty often overprepare and spend sixteen to twenty hours per week preparing

for one course, and as much as thirty-five hours per week (Turner and Boice, 1989). This is

much more time than experienced faculty spend; it can be reduced by learning how to teach

before teaching the first class. Invariably, new faculty members would like more advice about

teaching and handling problem students (Boice, 1991).

Turner and Boice (1989) report on three major problems for new faculty. In order of

importance they are:

1 “Adapting to the appropriate pace and level of difficulty for the students.”

New professors have forgotten what it is like to learn the material for the first time, and they

invariably go too fast and are too theoretical. The lower the level of the students, the more

likely this is to occur.

2 “Feeling professionally overspecialized, while not having a well-rounded knowledge of

their own discipline.”

New faculty members often teach undergraduate courses which have little in common with

their Ph.D. research. As undergraduates themselves once, they may have learned the material,

but by now are rusty. In addition, a typical new engineering professor may have little or no

industrial experience and is not sure what the students will use in an industrial career.

3 “Having trouble establishing an appropriate professional demeanor in their relationships

with students.”

New professors are asked to make the transition from student to faculty essentially

overnight and often are not much older than their students. It is difficult to determine how to

3.6. THE NEW FACULTY MEMBER EXPERIENCE

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

act to help students learn and yet maintain enough distance to be objective in grading. New

faculty members must develop a professional demeanor which will allow them to effectively

teach and grade both students they like and those they dislike. It takes time to learn the proper

distance between oneself and students.

An additional problem of many new faculty members is a fear of not knowing all the

answers. It is OK to tell students that you don’t know the answer to a question but that you

will find out. It is also OK, and actually helps to build rapport, to admit mistakes to the class.

They also are likely to feel that there are not enough hours to get everything done (Boice,

1991). In addition to teaching they have to start a research program, write proposals, finish

papers from their thesis, learn the rules of a new university, and adjust to a new city. There

is also a psychological adjustment in becoming a professor instead of being a student. It is very

useful to have a mentor who knows many of the unwritten rules. Mentoring works best when

the procedure is formalized (Sands et al., 1991). Some universities use team teaching of

courses to help new faculty. Formal development programs have also been shown to work if

new professors will use them (Boice, 1991).

The most common method of designing a course and a curriculum in engineering education

is to put all the fundamentals first. Once these have been covered, the course or curriculum can

proceed to the practical and interesting real-life problems. This approach appears rational but

ignores motivation. Most people learn best when they know why they need to learn something.

Thus,considering some practical, real-life problems early can help such students significantly.

This is one reason why cooperative education works well. This chapter follows this analysis

and discusses a real problem before the reader has all the information required to solve it

completely.

Although this chapter purposely raises more questions than it answers, clearly spelling out

what needs to be done for a class should be helpful to the new professor, and we wanted to

provide a chapter that would be immediately useful. One potential problem with enumerating

tasks is that they assume a greater importance than attitudes. It is often the teacher’s attitude

of excitement, enthusiasm, and caring for the student which catches hold of students and fires

them up for future work in the discipline. You may be able to do an adequate job as a teacher

by just going through the motions, but for excellence you must do more.

Since many professors never ask themselves many of the questions asked in this chapter,

one can obviously teach without understanding the process. Instead, the professor mimics

former professors. Although strongly discouraged in research, mimicry or plagiarism is

encouraged in teaching. Perhaps this observation helps explain why many schools value

research more than teaching in their promotion policies.

All books are somewhat idiosyncratic, and this one is no exception. If you want to read

alternate approaches to preparing for your first course, try McKeachie (1986) or Dekker and

Froyd (1986).

3.7. CHAPTER COMMENTS

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• List the salient features of different types of engineering courses.

• Enumerate the activities which need to be completed before starting a course.

• Discuss how a course is started.

• Explain the importance of the second class period and discuss appropriate activities.

• List the other important activities which occur during the semester. Explain the

importance of each of these activities.

• For the preceding items discuss some of the important questions which the professor

should consider when designing a course.

• Discuss some of the psychological aspects of becoming a new professor.

1 Look through the undergraduate and graduate courses offered in your department. Classify

each course. Is the classification system adequate or are there some courses which really do

not fit? (Hint: There probably are). If there are, develop new classification categories for

the courses which do not fit.

2 What are some sources of information to help you estimate how much material can be

covered in one semester?

3 Discuss additional reasons why it is a good idea to learn the names of students.

4 Class size is an important consideration in how you teach a course. List some of the things

which are affected by class size.

5 Should you use a seating chart? It seems like a high school practice, but it is almost necessary

for large classes if you want to take attendance or learn names. Discuss this issue. Think

of alternatives.

6 Brainstorm alternative ways to start the first class. List at least five additional ways.

7 How do you decide what to cover in a course which has never been taught at your school?

Brainstorm at least five methods for developing ideas.

8 Do you think it is a bad idea to tell the class that the textbook is a poor book? Explain your

answer.

9 What are some of the dangers in teaching a student whom you instinctively like or dislike?

3.8. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING YOUR FIRST CLASS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

REFERENCES

Boice, R., “New faculty as teachers,” J. Higher Educ., 62, 150 (March/April 1991).

Dekker, D. L. and J. E. Froyd, “A Problem-Solving Framework for Course Development,” Proceedings

IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference, ASEE, New York, 63, 1986.

Lowman, J., Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips. A Guidebook for the Beginning College Teacher, 8th ed., D.C. Heath,

Lexington, MA, 1986. (The classic book on teaching for new professors.)

Sands, R. G., Parson, L. A. and Crane, J., “Faculty Mentoring Faculty in a Public University,” J. Higher

Educ., 62, 174 (March/April 1991).

Turner, J. L. and R. Boice, “Experiences of New Faculty,” J. Staff Program Organ. Develop.,

51(Summer 1989).

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

What content should be covered in a course? This is obviously a critical question for

required courses which are prerequisites for other courses. The answer also depends upon

departmental values. In this chapter we will discuss setting goals and objectives for a course,

taxonomies of knowledge, the interaction between teaching styles and objectives, develop-

ment of the content of a course, and finally textbooks.

Goals are the broad final result that one hopes to attain during a course. Usually they are

stated in broad, general terms. For example, in a thermodynamics course one’s goals might

be that students should be able to:

• Solve problems using the first law.

• Solve problems requiring use of the second law.

• Understand the limitations of thermodynamics.

• Appreciate the power and beauty of thermodynamics.

Note that content comes first. Engineering education is centered on content, and goals and

objectives should focus on content (Plants, 1972). General goals such as these are nonspecific

and thus are often fairly easy to agree upon. However, goals are not specific enough to be

useful in an operational sense except as an overall guide.

4.1. COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER

COURSES:

OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Goals provide an overall guide for what a course is supposed to do. They are helpful to the

department in designing the curriculum, to the professor in delineating the boundaries of the

class, and to students (particularly intuitive and global learners) in seeing where the class is

going. For example, if the department can agree that classical thermodynamics is the goal of

the course, then the professor knows that he or she is not expected to cover statistical

thermodynamics or irreversible thermodynamics. Professors teaching follow-up courses will

know that students who have taken the classical thermodynamics course will not have a

background in these subjects. Clearly, this also implies a certain amount of communication

and collegiality which does not exist in all departments. Students can look at the curriculum

and tell where the course fits. Of course, many students will not bother to do this, but the goals

are helpful for those students who do.

Goals can be considered to be global objectives. More specific objectives are useful to

guide both the professor and the student in exactly what students will learn, feel, and be able

to do after each section of the course is completed. One such popular type of objective is the

behavioral objective (Hanna and Cashin, 1987; Mager, 1962; Kibler et al., 1970; Stice, 1976).

A behavioral objective states explicitly:

1 What the student is to do (i.e., the behavior).

2 The conditions under which the behavior is to be displayed.

3 The level of achievement expected.

Writing a few behavioral objectives for a class forces the professor to think about

observable behavior, conditions, and level of performance. However, we do not know any

engineering professors who write out complete behavioral objectives for all their classes. Here

is an example of a possible, though cumbersome, behavioral objective for a thermodynamics

course:

The student will be able to write down on a piece of paper the analysis to determine the new

Rankine cycle performance when the maximum cycle temperature and pressure are changed.

This will be done in a timed fifteen-minute in-class quiz, and the student is expected to obtain

the correct answer within 1 percent.

Professors who use objectives invariably use a shortened version. In this form the previous

objective becomes:

Analyze the effect of maximum cycle temperature and pressure on the performance of a

Rankine cycle.

This form is easier to write, focuses on content, and is more likely to be read by students.

Hanna and Cashin (1987) discuss the different types of educational objectives, noting that

behavioral objectives are usually written in the form of the minimal essential objective, and

that these objectives focus on relatively low-level skills since such skills are easiest to measure.

For the higher-level skills which practicing engineers need, behavioral indicators of achieve-

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ment without minimum standards are more appropriate. For these objectives, student

behaviors are illustrations only. Minimum standards are not given since students are encour-

aged to do the best they can. Conditions for performance are explicitly stated, but this may be

done for an entire set of objectives and may be considered to be understood. A set of content-

oriented related examples for a thermodynamics course is given in Table 4-1.

Objectives aid the instructor since they clarify the important content to be covered in

readings, lectures, homework, and tests. If material is not important enough to have an

objective, then it should be omitted. When developing tests, the professor can look at the list

of objectives and check that the most important are included in the test questions. This

procedure is discussed further in Chapter 11.

Objectives should be shared with students so that they know what material to study and

what material they will be tested on (DeBrunner, 1991). Students should also be explicitly told

if other skills, such as those involving a computer or communication, will be required in the

course. And they should know if they are expected to become broadly educated in the field

and be able to do more than just solve problems. Examples of both these areas are included

in the set of thermodynamics objectives. These objectives are written at several different

levels. It is important to ensure that the course objectives and hence readings, lectures,

homework, and tests cover the range of levels desired. The appropriate levels and types of

objectives are included in taxonomies.

1. The student can write the first and second laws.

2. The student can describe the first and second laws in his or her own language.

(That is, describe these laws to the student's grandmother.)

3. The student can solve simple single-answer problems using the first law.

4. The student can solve problems requiring both the first and second laws either

sequentially or simultaneously.

5. Given the characteristics of a standard compressor, the student can

develop schemes to compress a large amount of gas to a high pressure where

both the amount of gas and the required pressure increase are larger than a single

compressor can handle.

6. The student can use the second law to determine fallacies in power cycles.

The student can describe the fallacies clearly and logically both in memos and in

oral debate.

7. The student understands the limits of his or her knowledge and knows when

classical thermodynamics is not the appropriate analysis tool.

8. The student can evaluate his or her own solutions and those of others

to find and correct errors.

9. The student can search appropriate data bases and the literature to find

required thermodynamic data, and if the data are not available the student can

select appropriate procedures and predict the values of the data.

10. Since one of the goals of this course is to help students become broadly educated,

the student can appreciate the beauty of classical thermodynamics and can

briefly outline the history of the field.

TABLE 4-1 EXAMPLES OF THERMODYNAMICS OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Taxonomies of educational objectives were created by two very significant committee

efforts in the 1950s and early 1960s. The taxonomy in the cognitive domain (Bloom et al.,

1956), which includes knowledge, intellectual abilities and intellectual skills, has been widely

adopted, whereas the taxonomy in the affective domain (Krathwohl et al., 1964), which

includes interest, attitudes, and values, has had less influence. A third domain is the

psychomotor, manipulative, or motor skills area. This area appears to be continuously

decreasing in importance in engineering education, although the success of graduate students

doing experimental research often depends on this domain. A problem-solving taxonomy has

also been developed by engineering educators. These taxonomies are discussed in the

following four sections.

Since the cognitive domain is involved with thinking, knowledge, and the application of

knowledge, it is the domain of most interest to engineering educators. Bloom et al. (1956)

divided the domain into six major levels and each level into further subdivisions. The six major

divisions appear to be sufficient for the purposes of engineering education.

1 Knowledge. Knowledge consists of facts, conventions, definitions, jargon, technical

terms, classifications, categories, and criteria. It also consists of the ability to recall method-

ology and procedures, abstractions, principles, and theories in the field. Knowledge is

necessary but not sufficient for solving problems. Examples of knowledge that might be

required include knowing the values of e and

, knowing the sign conventions for heat and

work in an energy balance, knowing the definition of irreversible work, knowing what a quark

is, being able to list the six areas of the taxonomy of educational objectives, defining the

scientific method, and recalling the Navier-Stokes or Maxwell equations. The potential

danger in the knowledge level is that it is very easy to generate test questions, particularly

multiple-choice questions, at this level. The ability to answer these questions correlates with

a student’s memorization skills but not with his or her problem-solving skills. In some areas

of science such as biology, students are expected to memorize a large body of knowledge, but

this is unusual in engineering. The first objective in Table 4-1 is an example of a knowledge

objective.

2 Comprehension. Comprehension is the ability to understand or grasp the meaning of

material, but not necessarily to solve problems or relate it to other material. An individual who

comprehends something can paraphrase it in his or her own words. The information can be

interpreted, as in the interpretation of experimental data, or trends and tendencies can be

extended or extrapolated. Comprehension is a higher-order skill than knowledge, but knowl-

edge is required for comprehension. Testing for comprehension includes essay questions, the

interpretation of paragraphs or data (this can be done with multiple-choice) or oral exams. The

second objective in Table 4-1 is an example of an objective at the comprehension level.

4.2. TAXONOMIES OR DOMAINS OF KNOWLEDGE

4.2.1. Cognitive Domain

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

3 Application. Application is the use of abstract ideas in particular concrete situations.

Many straightforward engineering homework problems with a single solution and a single part

fit into this level. Application in engineering usually requires remembering and applying

technical ideas, principles, and theories. Examples include determining the pressure for an

ideal gas, determining the cost of a particular type of equipment, determining the flow in a

simple pipe, determining the deviation of a beam to a load, and determining the voltage drop

in a simple circuit. Objective 3 in Table 4-1 is an example.

4 Analysis. In engineering, analysis usually consists of breaking down a complex problem

into parts. Each part can then be further broken down or be solved by application of

engineering principles. The connections and interactions between the different parts can be

determined. Objective 4 in Table 4-1 is an example of an analysis objective since it requires

breaking a more complex problem into parts and then determining the relationship between

the parts. Many engineering problems fall into the analysis level because very complicated

engineering systems must be analyzed.

5 Synthesis. Synthesis involves taking many pieces and putting them together to make

a new whole. A major part of engineering design involves synthesis. One problem for the

professor in teaching synthesis is that there is no longer a single correct answer. Many students,

particularly at the lower levels in Perry’s scheme of intellectual development (see Chapter 14),

find synthesis difficult because the process is open-ended and there is no single answer.

Synthesis should be incorporated into every course and not be delayed until the “capstone”

senior design course. Objective 5 in Table 4-1 is an example of a synthesis problem for a

thermodynamics course.

6 Evaluation. Evaluation is a judgment about a solution, process, design, report, material,

and so forth. The judgment can be based on internal criteria. Is the solution logically correct?

Is the solution free of mathematical errors? Is the report grammatically correct and easy to

understand? Is the computer program documented properly? Objectives 6 and 8 in Table 4-

1 are examples of objectives at the evaluation level which use internal criteria. Objective 7 is

also an evaluation example based on internal evidence but is easier to attain if external sources

are also utilized. In this case the external sources would be some knowledge of statistical

thermodynamics and irreversible thermodynamics. In many engineering problems the evalu-

ation requires external criteria such as an analysis of both economics and environmental

impact. Objective 9 in Table 4-1 requests evaluation using external criteria, and it also requests

analysis.

Bloom’s taxonomy is a hierarchy. Knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis

are all required before one can properly do synthesis. It can be argued that in engineering,

synthesis is a higher-order activity than evaluation, since evaluation is needed to determine

which of many answers is optimum. Without getting into this argument, note that students

need practice and feedback on all levels of the taxonomy to become proficient. The major use

of the taxonomy for professors is to ensure that objectives, lectures, homework, and tests

include examples and problems at all levels. Stice (1976) noted that when he classified the test

questions in one of his classes he was horrified to find that almost all of them were in the three

lowest levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. Since students tend to learn what they are tested for, most

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

of the students were not developing higher-level cognitive skills in this class. If the teaching

style, homework, and test questions are suitably adjusted, students can be taught content at all

levels of the taxonomy.

The affective domain is concerned with behaviors and objectives which are emotional and

deal with feelings. It includes likes and dislikes, attitudes, value systems, and beliefs.

Development of a taxonomy for the affective domain proceeded in a parallel but slower

fashion than for the cognitive domain. There was overlap on the two development committees,

and the logic in developing the taxonomies was similar. However, the taxonomy in the

affective domain was much more difficult to develop because there is much less agreement

on the hierarchical structure. Krathwohl et al. (1964) used the process of internalization to

describe the hierarchical structure of learning and growth in the affective field. Internalization

is similar to socialization and refers to the inner growth as an individual adopts attitudes,

principles, and codes to guide his or her value judgments. The affective domain taxonomy has

had considerably less influence in education than the cognitive domain taxonomy. This is

particularly true in engineering education, perhaps because of the large number of thinking

types in engineering (see Chapter 13). The five levels of the affective domain are briefly

outlined below (Kibler et al., 1970; Krathwohl et al., 1964).

1 Receiving and attending. Is the individual aware of a particular phenomenon or

stimulus? Is he or she willing to receive the information or does he or she automatically reject

it? Does the individual choose to pay attention to a particular stimulus? Information above the

individual’s level of intellectual development may not be attended to because it cannot be

understood.

2 Responding. The individual is willing to respond to the information. This occurs first

as passive compliance when someone else initiates the behavior. Then the individual becomes

willing to and desires to respond on his or her own initiative. Finally, the response leads to

personal satisfaction which will motivate the individual to make additional responses.

3 Valuing. The individual decides that an object, phenomenon, or behavior has inherent

worth. The individual first accepts the value, then prefers the value, and finally becomes

committed to the value as a principle to guide behavior.

4 Organization. The individual needs to organize values into a system, determine how

they interrelate, and establish a pecking order of values.

5 Characterization by a value. The individual’s behavior becomes congruent with his or

her value structure, and the individual acts in a way that allows others to see his or her

underlying values. Many modes of common speech point to people who are characterized by

their values: “She is a caring person.” “He always puts students first.” “He is very up-front.”

4.2.2. Affective Domain

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The affective domain has not been heavily studied or discussed in engineering education,

yet engineering professors do have value goals for their students. They want them to be honest,

hard-working, ethical individuals who study engineering because of an intrinsic desire for

knowledge. Perhaps there would be a little more movement toward these goals if professors

explicitly stated some of their expectations and objectives in this domain. One example is the

use of an honor code. A second example is objective 10 in Table 4-1.

The psychomotor domain includes motor skills, eye-hand coordination, fine and major

muscle movements, speech, and so forth. The importance of this domain in engineering

education has been continually decreasing as shop courses have been removed, calculators

have replaced slide rules, and digital meters have replaced analog meters. Psychomotor skills

are still useful in engineering education, particularly for graduate students doing experimental

research. Examples include reading an oscilloscope, glassblowing, welding, turning a valve

in the correct direction, soldering, titration, typing and keyboarding numbers on a calculator,

gestures while speaking, and proper speech.

The taxonomy in the psychomotor domain includes (Kibler et al., 1970):

1 Gross body movements.

2 Finely coordinated body movements.

3 Nonverbal communication behaviors.

4 Speech behaviors.

Finely coordinated body movements include typing and keyboarding. Because of the

importance of computers and calculators in the practice of engineering, these psychomotor

skills have become much more important than in the past. We feel strongly that all engineers

should learn these skills.

Nonverbal communication skills are very important to actors. Salespeople probably need

to study these skills also. If an engineer is interested in technical sales, some development of

these skills may be helpful. For other engineers, including engineering professors, nonverbal

communication needs to be congruent with the spoken message. Individuals can be successful

engineers with speech handicaps. However, the ability to talk clearly and distinctly and to

project one’s voice is a distinct aid to communication. In addition, communication can be

enhanced by coordinating facial expressions, body movement, gestures, and verbal messages

(see Chapter 14). Professors who desire to become outstanding lecturers need to develop their

skills in speech behaviors (see Chapter 6).

4.2.3. Psychomotor Domain

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

4.2.4. Problem-Solving Taxonomy

A taxonomy for problem solving was developed by Plants et al. (1980). This taxonomy was

published in the engineering education literature and has not been as widely distributed or

adopted as the other taxonomies. Because of the importance of problem solving in

engineering education, this taxonomy can be useful. Applications of the problem-solving

taxonomy to engineering education are discussed in Chapter 5, by Plants (1986, 1989), and by

Sears and Dean (1983). The five levels of the taxonomy are briefly discussed below.

1 Routines. Routines are operations or algorithms which can be done without making any

decisions. Many mathematical operations such as solution of a quadratic equation, evaluation

of an integral, analysis of variance, and long division are routines. In Bloom’s taxonomy these

would be considered application-level problems. Students consider these “plug-and-chug”

problems.

2 Diagnosis. Diagnosis is selection of the correct routine or the correct way to use a routine.

For example, many formulas can be used to determine the stress on a beam, and diagnosis is

selection of the correct procedure. For complex integrations, integration by parts can be done

in several different ways. Selecting the appropriate way to do the integration by parts involves

diagnosis. This level obviously overlaps with the application and analysis levels in Bloom’s

taxonomy.

3 Strategy. Strategy is the choice of routines and the order in which to apply them when

a variety of routines can be used correctly to solve problems. Strategy is part of the analysis

and evaluation levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. The strategy of problem solving and how to teach

it are the major topics of Chapter 5.

4 Interpretation. Interpretation is real-world problem solving. It involves reducing a

real-world problem to one which can be solved. This may involve assumptions and

interpretations to obtain data in a useful form. Interpretation is also concerned with use of the

problem solution in the real world.

5 Generation. Generation is the development of routines which are new to the user. This

may involve merely stringing together known routines into a new pattern. It may also involve

creativity in that the new routine is not obvious from the known information. Creativity is also

a topic of Chapter 5.

Once the content and objectives have been chosen, appropriate teaching methods can be

selected. To meet any of the objectives (including the affective objectives), students must have

a chance to practice and receive feedback. If you want them to meet certain objectives, share

these objectives with them and test for these objectives. Students will work to learn the stated

4.3. THE INTERACTION OF TEACHING STYLES AND OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

objectives in the course. If the objectives are not stated and are unclear, they will work to learn

what they think the objectives are. This is much more of a hit-and-miss proposition than stating

clear objectives.

The importance of clear objectives is highlighted by research on teaching styles and student

learning (Taveggia and Hedley, 1972). Student learning of subject matter content as measured

by course content examinations is essentially the same regardless of the teaching style as long

as the students are given clear, definite objectives and a list of materials for attaining the

objectives. Note that this applies to the knowledge, comprehension, application, and perhaps

analysis levels, but not to synthesis, evaluation or problem solving.

Most of the time in engineering classes is spent trying to teach cognitive content objectives.

Knowledge-level objectives and content are the easiest to teach and test for. Knowledge-level

material can be learned from well-written articles, books, and class notes. If the objectives are

clear, students will memorize the material. For example, if a student reading this book is told

to learn the six levels of the cognitive domain, he or she will memorize them. Lecture can also

be used for transmission of knowledge-level material, but it is less effective than written

material except for clarifying questions. Comprehension is a higher level than knowledge, and

more student activity can be useful. Written material is useful, particularly if the student

paraphrases the material or develops his or her own hierarchical structure. To be effective,

lectures need to have reasonable amounts of discussion and/or questions so that students

actively process the material. Discussion and groups can also be helpful for comprehension,

as can homework and problem solving.

Applications in engineering usually means problem solving. It is useful to show some

solutions in class, but there is the danger that the solutions shown may be too neat and sterile

since the professor has removed all the false starts and mistakes (see Chapter 5). Watching

someone else solve problems does not make a student a good problem solver: The student must

solve problems. A good starting point is homework with prompt feedback and with the

requirement that incorrect problems be reworked. Group problem solving both in and out of

class is a good teaching method since the interactions help many students. Tutoring and

teaching are also excellent methods for mastering application objectives since tutoring and

teaching require one to structure the knowledge. Analysis objectives usually involve more

complex problems and can be taught by the same methods used for application.

To learn to do synthesis one must do synthesis. This can be started in the freshman year

in computer programming courses. Once students have mastered application and analysis,

they can synthesize a large program by combining already created parts and new parts. Group

work can again be valuable since it helps motivate students and increases retention (Hewitt,

1991). Synthesis in upper-division classes often involves developing a new design, whether

it is an integrated circuit, a chemical plant, a nuclear reactor, or a bridge. Creativity can be

encouraged by providing computer tools which will do the routine calculations. The PMI

approach (see Section 5.6.3) which finds pluses, minuses, and interesting aspects of the

proposed solution is useful in encouraging students to be creative in synthesis.

Evaluation is not something that only the professor should do. Students need to practice this

skill since they will be expected to be able to evaluate as practicing engineers. The professor

can demonstrate the skill in class, have the students practice evaluation, and provide feedback

on their evaluations. One way to do this is to show an incorrect solution on an overhead

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

transparency. After giving the students a few minutes to study the solution, the professor can

grade the solution while it is on the overhead. The students can then be given several solutions

to evaluate as homework. At least one of these solutions should be correct since part of

evaluation involves recognizing correct solutions. The students’ papers are then turned in and

graded. A slight twist to this is to return student homework or tests with no marks and tell the

student to evaluate and correct the paper before turning it in for a grade.

Engineering professors can help students master objectives in the affective domain by

sharing the explicit objectives with them in a positive fashion. For example, an instructor

might say, “Since you all expect to become practicing engineers, I expect you to demonstrate

professional behavior and ethical standards in this class.” This is preferable to saying, “If I

catch any of you cheating I am going to prosecute you and force you out of engineering.”

Short (and be sure they are short) “war stories” during lectures can be helpful in helping

students socialize and internalize the engineering discipline (this socialization is usually a

major unstated affective objective). Engineering experience through co-op, internships, and

summer jobs is an excellent way to socialize engineering students if the experience is positive.

Enjoyment of the class is one of our affective objectives. A professor who is pleasant, greets

students by name, and is both fair and reasonable to them is likely to have students who enjoy

the class.

Psychomotor objectives require practice of the skills. Most of these can be done in

laboratory, but the professor needs to be aware that students may need instruction in some

simple manual manipulations. Groups are effective since one member of the group often

already possesses the psychomotor skills. Few engineering professors are trained to work with

students who have major deficits in the psychomotor area. Since psychomotor problems,

particularly in speech, can cause both students and practicing engineers major difficulties,

engineering professors should know what resources are available for help.

The content of each course in the curriculum is the topic of many faculty discussions. We

do not intend to discuss disciplinary details since that is not the purpose of this book. Instead,

we will briefly explore some pedagogical details. In required courses the content must make

the course fit into the curriculum.

Although there is never complete unanimity, most engineering departments generally

agree on the content a student must have before completing his or her degree. This content

must appear somewhere in the curriculum. In addition, required courses often serve as

prerequisites for other courses, and the appropriate prerequisite material must be covered. The

only way to ensure that the expected content is covered is to communicate with other faculty.

Find out what is needed for other courses. Discuss in detail what material the students have

had in prerequisite courses and find out what they are capable of doing after they have passed

the prerequisite courses. (Obviously, what a student can do is not necessarily the same as what

the professor covered.) Discuss the outline with other faculty who have taught the course in

the past or who might want to teach it in the future. Before making major course revisions or

4.4. DEVELOPING THE CONTENT OF THE COURSE

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

before changing the textbook be sure that critical material is not deleted. Talk to engineers in

industry to determine what they use and do not use. Update the content you use so that it is

in computer-accessible form. This will avoid discouraging students from using computers.

Once the major content for the course has been outlined, look at the hierarchy of objectives

you wish to cover. The time required for each topic depends on the depth of your coverage and

on the objectives, in addition to the beginning knowledge of the students. A well-thought-out

textbook will have done this, but you may disagree with some of the author’s decisions. Plan

the level of presentations considering the students’ maturity (see Chapter 14). Then you can

plan the major objectives for each lecture.

We suggest that the bulk of the course be developed for the sensing types (see Chapter 13)

and serial learners in the class. Following a logical development makes it much easier for these

students to learn the material, and this sequence does not hamper the intuitive types and the

global learners. Sensing types will appreciate examples and concrete applications. At the

beginning and/or end of each class include the global picture for intuitive types and global

learners. Intersperse theory with applications to keep both the intuitive and sensing types

interested. Include both visual and kinesthetic material. Conscious use of a learning cycle will

increase student learning. This arrangement will ensure that every student has part of the

course catered to his or her strengths, but that the student will also be encouraged to strengthen

his or her weaknesses.

Textbooks are commonly used in undergraduate engineering education in the United

States. Selection of a textbook is important since it can add or subtract from the course quality

and because many engineers keep their textbooks and use them as a primary reference for

many years. Useful discussions on textbook selection are included in Eble (1988), Johnson

(1988), and Plants et al. (1973).

The advantages of a well-written textbook are that it provides content at the appropriate

level in a well-structured form with consistent nomenclature and includes appropriate learning

aids such as example problems, objectives, figures, tables, and homework problems at a

variety of levels of difficulty. The disadvantages are that a textbook usually provides only one

viewpoint, may not include the content you want, may be out of date, and may not be the ideal

format for helping students learn to learn on their own.

In beginning courses students often want and need the structure that a good textbook

provides. Since basic knowledge is not changing rapidly, textbooks at this level do not become

4.5. TEXTBOOKS

4.5.1. Should a Textbook Be Used?

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

obsolete rapidly; and because of the numerous pressures to standardize lower division courses

[e.g., transferring of credits, ABET requirements (see Section 4.6), “standard” textbooks, and

movement of faculty between schools], textbooks which closely match the requirements of

these courses are usually available. If an appropriate textbook is not available, then a publish-

on-demand textbook can be considered (see Section 4.5.3). The result is that textbooks are

usually used for required undergraduate courses, particularly lower-division courses.

The situation is often different for undergraduate elective courses and all courses at the

graduate level. A book for a specialized course may not exist. Books for courses at the

frontiers of knowledge can rapidly become obsolete. Since the market for these books is

smaller than for required undergraduate courses, there will be fewer books to choose from and

they will be more expensive. Seniors and graduate students need less structure and can better

cope with varying author styles and different nomenclatures. The original literature is not as

efficient a way to teach since it was not written for students, but it is a good vehicle to help

students learn how to learn on their own. The original literature can often provide a sense of

excitement which is missing from most textbooks. Thus, it may be appropriate to assign

readings from the original literature. Is the cost of the textbook reasonable? Many engineering

textbooks, particularly at advanced levels, are not reasonably priced, and this may be a reason

to use readings from the original literature. However, copyright law is in flux and professors

need to be cautious when making a number of copies of copyrighted material for a class.

Permission must be obtained from the copyright owners before making copies. A good source

of information on this issue is the National Association of College Stores (1991) brochure.

A good textbook can be a tremendous aid and save a great deal of time. By developing the

book for a course, the author has already done much of the organization and presentation of

content for you. But books do limit what you can do in a class. Students won’t mind if you

occasionally skip around in the textbook or require other readings. However, if this is done

extensively, they will become annoyed and wonder why you have made them buy an

expensive book and then never use it.

To some students textbooks develop an almost mystical importance. The book is treated

as if it contains The Truth. Perhaps this is a carry over from the monastic beginnings of

universities where students studied “sacred texts” (Palmer, 1983). Because of this devotion

of many students, textbook selection is important. An unnecessarily difficult textbook will

discourage, excessive errors can lead to a loss of faith, and an obsolete textbook serves students

poorly.

Intelligent choice of a textbook requires a significant amount of effort. If nomenclature

and jargon are standard in your area, you can obtain a good feel for content coverage by looking

at the table of contents. The most recent copyright date can tell if recent advances might be

included, but not all authors of undergraduate textbooks are up-to-date with research. You’ll

have to delve into a few chapters to make sure the ideas are current. A convenient way of

comparing a number of books is to check a few key items that you will cover in your course.

4.5.2. Textbook Selection

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

You’ll also need to read some sections to see if the author’s writing style will be

understandable to your students. Although you can assume that most authors of engineering

textbooks understand the content, you cannot assume that they understand how students learn.

An inductive approach starting with specifics and leading to generalities is much more

appropriate in an introductory textbook than an deductive approach. For introductory courses,

books written in a concrete instead of an abstract style are also easier for most students to

understand. Sensing students particularly appreciate detailed examples. Explicitly listing

objectives is also helpful to tell students what they are expected to be able to do. The writing

should be at a level appropriate for the students, and new jargon should be carefully defined.

Figures and tables should be clearly labeled so that nothing needs to be assumed to understand

them. Relatively short sections are easier for most students since there is a sense of

accomplishment when each section is completed. Intuitive students may use the section

headings and subheadings to obtain an overview of the chapter contents, so it is important that

these give a true picture of the organization of the content. Homework problems should be

clear and unambigious. It is also helpful if the level of difficulty of the problems is indicated.

If possible, examine the solutions manual since it is often a good guide to how carefully the

homework problems have been crafted. The absence of a solutions manual may indicate that

the author did not spend much time on the homework problems. Books using a deductive

approach or written in an abstract style with few examples may be appropriate for advanced-

level classes where students are seeing the material for a second time.

A careful check of content versus your preferred course outline is necessary. Does the

sequence of material make sense? Skipping around in the book is often confusing to students.

If the book has light coverage of some topics, you may have to supplement it with course notes

and/or outside reading. If some topics are explained in insufficient detail, you may be able to

compensate in lecture. And if the book has extra material that the course will not cover, you

need to determine how easy it will be to skip sections. Some authors clearly state the

prerequisite chapters for each chapter so that users know which sections can be skipped. Other

authors provide supplemental sections of optional material. While looking at the content,

check for typographical errors and fundamental mistakes. Not all books are created equal with

respect to accuracy. Typographical errors, particularly in example problems, can be ex-

tremely confusing to students who have not yet learned how to evaluate the material for

correctness. Such errors may also undermine the book’s credibility with students.

Is there supplemental material which will help you teach the course? If you will be teaching

a course that is not your major interest, a solutions manual which correctly solves problems

will be helpful. If the course is in your area of primary interest, you may choose not to use

a solutions manual. Computer software bundled with the adoption of a textbook can be very

advantageous if the software is compatible with the school’s computer system. Some

engineering textbooks integrate software into the homework assignments and the teaching of

the content.

Will the book be useful to the students in later courses or as a reference after they graduate?

An excellent index is not necessary when a book is used as a textbook, but it is essential for

reference use. Proper referencing of appropriate source materials is also important for

reference use of the book. If students will keep the book for a long period, it needs to be printed

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

on good quality paper and be durably bound. A laboratory workbook which will probably be

discarded does not need this kind of quality.

Textbook adoptions should be considered to be tentative. After a semester’s use, the book

can be reevaluated. Ask the students for feedback on the book. Consider how well it worked

on a line-by-line and day-by-day basis. If the book does not work out or a better book becomes

available, you can switch.

The future of textbook publishing may well be publish-on-demand textbooks. McGraw-

Hill, Inc., has been the innovator in this area. A fairly large book is stored on a computer. The

user selects the chapters that he or she wants to use and the order in which they should appear.

The computer software automatically renumbers all chapters, figure and table numbers,

equation numbers, and so forth. The new book is printed out in the desired order, and the books

are bound and shipped to the school. The cost is proportional to the size of the book created.

With this technology, chapters from different books and even chapters written by the

professor can be included in the made-to-order book. The publisher takes care of obtaining

permissions and paying appropriate royalties to the authors. Since professors customize the

books, the actual number of pages each student purchases will be less and the cost will

probably be less. However, there is likely to be a smaller market in used books since

customized books change more often and are much less transferable from school to school.

Thus, the publisher would probably sell more new copies.

However, this is a new technology and not all the problems have been resolved. The

technology for ensuring that the nomenclatures of different chapters are compatible if the

chapters are from different sources has not been developed. Of course, there’s no guarantee

that a single author will be consistent in the use of nomenclature either. Methods of combining

chapters from books published by different companies have not been completely developed.

Acceptance by the professoriate is also not assured.

“There are bad texts—which someone else writes—good texts—which we write—and

perfect texts—which we plan to write some day” (Eble, 1988). Many young professors have

the goal of someday writing the classical textbook in their area of expertise. The motivation

to write a textbook in engineering often arises from dissatisfaction with the textbooks which

are available or the total unavailability of any textbook in a new field. Writing a textbook is

difficult but rewarding work. There is personal satisfaction from having done a difficult task

well, a good textbook can help an engineering professor become well known, and a successful

4.5.3. Publish-on-Demand Textbooks

4.5.4. Writing Textbooks

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

textbook can be financially rewarding. In addition, while writing the textbook, the professor is

likely to be vitally interested in the class and will probably do a good job of teaching the course.

The common wisdom is that engineering professors should wait to write a textbook until

they have tenure. Sykes (1991) quotes an unidentified professor: “Nobody seeking tenure can

possibly have the time to write a textbook!” The professor should have several years of

teaching experience, which will be helpful in writing the textbook, and should probably be an

expert (see Section 5.2). And, most importantly, because of the period of time required to

complete and publish a textbook, writing one is risky for an assistant professor.

Engineering professors are not trained in all the various aspects of writing textbooks, and

a certain amount of on-the-job training takes place. Fortunately, successful authors enjoy

writing about writing, and there are a variety of sources of advice both for writing on

engineering in particular (Beakley, 1988; Bird, 1983; Roden, 1987) and for writing books in

general (Levine, 1988; Krull, 1989; Mueller, 1978). The new author can also join the

Textbook Author’s Association (TAA, P.O. Box 535, Orange Springs, FL 32182-0535) and

benefit from the TAA Report. Joining TAA is particularly helpful for learning about contracts

and what publishers do but not for deciding upon appropriate content. A little knowledge (such

as that a 15 percent royalty on a publisher’s net receipts is common for college textbooks) is

very helpful when a contract is negotiated. Our advice to potential authors is simple. If writing

a book is the right thing to do, do it. Signs that it is the right thing to do include:

• You’ve taught the course for several years, and none of the available books is really

satisfactory.

• You know you can write a better book.

• You feel compelled to write a book.

• You have already written extensive handouts for the class to supplement the book you are

using.

• Students ask why you haven’t written a book since they are sure you can do a better job.

• You have sufficient energy and time so that the thought of another project does not make

you cringe.

Most engineering programs in the United States are accredited by the Accreditation Board

for Engineering and Technology (ABET). Accreditation is considered desirable since it

allows graduates to take the appropriate examinations to become a professional engineer,

makes the transfer of credits to other universities easier, makes it easier for graduates to get

admitted into graduate school, and serves as a stamp of approval on the quality of the program.

However, accreditation does put some constraints on undergraduate engineering programs.

These constraints have been the focus of considerable debate since many engineering

educators believe they stifle educational innovation.

4.6. ACCREDITATION CONSTRAINTS ON UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ABET’s policy is to accredit individual engineering or technology programs, not an entire

school. It is not unusual to have both accredited and unaccredited programs at the same

university. The unaccredited programs are not necessarily poorer; instead, they may represent

innovative programs that do not fit within ABET’s constraints.

The ABET criteria are delineated in an ABET publication (ABET, 1989) and summarized

in Table 4-2. These are minimum requirements, and individual engineering disciplines may

impose additional requirements. The mathematical studies must include differential and

integral calculus and differential equations. The basic sciences must include both general

chemistry and general physics and may include other sciences. The engineering sciences

include mechanics, thermodynamics, electrical circuits, materials science, transport phenom-

ena, and computer science (but not programming courses). Engineering design has proven to

be a controversial area and is discussed separately below. The humanities and social sciences

include anthropology, economics (but not engineering economics), fine arts (but not practice-

oriented courses), history, literature, political science, psychology, sociology, and foreign

languages (but not speaking courses in the student’s native language). The laboratory

experience should be appropriate to combine elements of theory and practice. Kersten (1989)

discusses the laboratory requirement in more detail. The computer-based experience should

be sufficient enough so that the student can demonstrate efficiency in application and use of

digital computers. Competency in written and oral communication is expected. The semester

credits listed in Table 4-2 are based on a total of 128 for graduation. The requirements are

adjusted if more or fewer hours are required for graduation, and the numbers are adjusted for

schools on a quarter system.

Engineering design has been the most controversial area of the ABET criteria. There is no

consensus on exactly what is and what is not design. Schools that see their mission as

producing candidates for graduate schools or broadly educated individuals tend to want to

decrease the design requirement, whereas schools producing graduates for industry want to

increase the design requirement. An additional problem is that many faculty do not have

industrial design experience and have difficulty teaching design.

The ABET (1989) document states that design produces a system, component, or process

for specific needs. The design process is often iterative and includes decision making normally

with economic and other constraints. Appropriate mathematics, science, and engineering

Mathematics past Trigonometry

Basic science

Engineering science

Engineering design

Humanities and social science

Laboratory experience

Computer-based experience

Written and oral communication

Other

* Credit hours not specified.

Base 128

TABLE 4-2 SUMMARY OF ABET CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION

OF ENGINEERING PROGRAMS

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

principles should be employed in the design process. The fundamental elements often include

setting objectives and criteria, synthesis, analysis, construction, testing, evaluation, and

communication of results. Student problems should include some of the following features:

creativity, open-ended problems, design methodology, formulation of problem statements,

alternate solutions, feasibility, and design of system details in addition to economics. Drafting

skill courses cannot be used to satisfy the design requirements. ABET states that normally at

least one course must be primarily design at the senior level and draw upon material from other

courses. This is often interpreted as the need for a “capstone” course, although ABET (1989)

does not use this wording. Proposed changes in the accreditation criteria for design are

discussed by Christian (1991). If approved, these changes will strengthen the requirement for

a “meaningful, major engineering design experience,” but the engineering science and design

categories will be combined. This latter provision might reduce the amount of design at some

schools, and the proposal is controversial.

Engineering courses do not need to be listed as entirely engineering science or engineering

design but can be split between the two. When a program is accredited, the choice of split may

have to be justified. Thus, a professor teaching an undergraduate course does not have

complete freedom of content, but must take care to follow the split between engineering

science and design that the department has designated.

The ABET accreditation procedure starts with a letter to the dean who responds that

reaccreditation is desired. The school then fills out very detailed questionnaires for each

program to be accredited. One volume of general information and a second volume with

detailed information on each accredited engineering program are prepared. Resumes for all

faculty members in the programs are included. An ABET team, which consists of the team

captain and one member for each program to be accredited, visits the school for three days.

The team members speak with faculty and students, study course notebooks prepared by the

faculty, investigate student transcripts, tour the facilities, and ask for any information they

consider to be pertinent. ABET examiners typically ask about class size, teaching loads, space

availability, course work, and the quality and morale of faculty and students. A weakest-link

theory is used to determine whether students have met the minimum ABET requirements.

That is, it must be impossible for a student to graduate without satisfying the ABET

requirements. Accreditation visits are considered extremely important, and considerable time

is spent preparing for them.

The accrediting team has several choices of outcome in their report. They can accredit the

program for a full six-year term or for an interim three-year period with a report to justify the

additional three years. Or, the accreditation can be for three years with both a report and an

additional visit required before the next three years will be accredited. For unsatisfactory

programs a show cause might be given. A show cause means that the school must show why

ABET should not remove accreditation. Finally, the visiting team may decide not to accredit

the program. Note that an accreditation report that gives less than complete accreditation is

often used to obtain needed additional resources from the university. In November 1992 the

ABET Board of Directors approved the proposed changes in design criteria. The engineering

science and engineering design critera in Table 4-2 are combined. The design experience must

be developed and integrated throughout the curriculum and there must be a "meaningful, major

engineering design experience."

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Writing objectives may be like many other things that are good for you but are not

particularly pleasant. Prepare them once for one course. The experience will sharpen your

teaching both in that course and in other courses, even if you do not formally write objectives

for other courses. Bloom’s taxonomy is extremely helpful in ensuring the proper distribution

of class time, student effort, and quiz questions. Carefully classifying objectives and test

questions as to the level on the taxonomy is also a very useful exercise to do for at least one

class. Then in later classes the level will usually be obvious.

The ABET requirements may not be high on your list of interesting reading. However, if

new faculty are unaware of the ABET requirements, it is unlikely that their courses will meet

the spirit of these criteria. This is particularly true of including design as some fraction of a

course. In addition, to be informed participants in the current debate on accreditation

requirements, faculty must understand the current requirements.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Write objectives at specified levels of both the cognitive and the affective taxonomies.

• Develop a teaching approach to satisfy a particular objective.

• Decide whether to use a textbook in a course and select an appropriate textbook.

• List and discuss the ABET requirements for accreditation of an undergraduate engineer-

ing program.

1 Pick a required undergraduate engineering course. Write six cognitive objectives for this

course with one at each level of Bloom’s taxonomy.

2 Write two objectives in the affective domain for the course selected in problem 1.

3 Pick an undergraduate laboratory course. Write two objectives in the psychomotor domain.

4 Objective 10 in Table 4-1 includes a cognitive and an affective domain objective. Classify

each of these.

5 For the course selected in problem 1 decide whether a textbook should be used. Explain your

answer.

6 The following statement can be debated. “ABET accreditation has strengthened engineering

education in the United States.”

a Take the affirmative side and discuss this statement.

b Take the negative side and discuss this statement.

4.7. CHAPTER COMMENTS

4.8. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ABET, Criteria for Accrediting Programs in Engineering in the United States, Accreditation Board for

Engineering and Technology, New York, 1989.

Beakley, G. C., “Publishing a textbook? A how-to-do-it kit of ideas,” Eng. Educ., 299 (Feb. 1988).

Bird, R. B., “Book writing and chemical engineering education: Rites, rewards and responsibilities,”

Chem. Eng. Educ., 17, 184 (Fall 1983).

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., and Krathwohl, D. R., Taxonomy of Educational

Objectives: The Classification of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, David

McKay, New York, 1956. (This book has many examples from a variety of areas.)

Christian, J. T., “Current ABET accreditation issues involving design,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC,1519 (1991).

DeBrunner, V., “Performance-based instruction in electrical engineering,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1589, 1991.

Eble, K. E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Hanna, G. S. and Cashin, W. E., “Matching instructional objectives, subject matter, tests, and score

interpretations,” Idea Paper No. 18, Center for Faculty Education and Development, Kansas State

University, Manhattan, KS, 1987.

Hewitt, G. F., “Chemical engineering in the British Isles: The academic sector,” Chem. Engr. Rsch. Des.,

69 (A1), 79 (Jan. 1991).

Johnson, G. R., Taking Teaching Seriously: A Faculty Handbook, Texas A&M University Center for

Teaching Excellence, College Station, TX , 1988.

Kersten, R. D., “ABET criteria for engineering laboratories,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1043, 1989.

Kibler, R. J., Barker, L. L., and Miles, D. T., Behavioral Objectives and Instruction, Allyn and Bacon,

Boston, 1970.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., and Masia, B., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification

of Educational Goals. Handbook II: The Affective Domain, David McKay, New York, 1964.

Krull, K., Twelve Keys to Writing Books That Sell, Writer’s Digest, Cincinnati, 1989.

Levine, M. L., Negotiating a Book Contract: A Guide for Authors, Agents and Lawyers, Moyer Bell,

New York, 1988.

Mager, R. F., Preparing Instructional Objectives, Fearon Publishers, Palo Alto, CA, 1962.

Mueller, L. W., How to Publish Your Own Book, Harlo Press, Detroit, 1978.

National Association of College Stores, Questions and Answers on Copyright for the Campus Commu-

nity, NACS, 1991. (For copies write to NACS, 500 East Lorain St., Oberlin, OH, 44074-1294.)

Palmer, P. J., To Know As We are Known: A Spirituality of Education, Harper, San Francisco, 1983.

Plants, H. L., “Content comes first,” Eng. Educ., 533 (March 1972).

Plants, H. L., “Basic problem-solving skills,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washing-

ton, DC, 210, 1986.

Plants, H. L., “Teaching models for teaching problem solving,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 983, 1989.

Plants, H. L., Dean, R. K., Sears, J. T., and Venable, W. S., “A taxonomy of problem-solving activities

and its implications for teaching,” In Lubkin, J. L. (Ed.), The Teaching of Elementary Problem

Solving in Engineering and Related Fields, ASEE, Washington, DC, 21-34, 1980.

Plants, H. L., Sears, J. T., and Venable, W. S., “Making tools work,” Eng. Educ., 410 (March 1973).

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 4: COURSES: OBJECTIVES AND TEXTBOOKS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Roden, M. S., “How to make more than $.25 per hour as a textbook author,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 52 1987.

Sears, J. T. and Dean, R. K., “Chemical engineering applications of a problem-solving taxonomy,”

AIChE Symp. Ser.,79(228), 1 (1983).

Stice, J. E., “A first step toward improved teaching,” Eng. Educ., 394 (Feb. 1976).

Sykes, T., “Textbooks as scholarships?” TAA Report 5(4), 5 (Oct. 1991).

Taveggia, T. C., and Hedley, R. A., “Teaching really matters, or does it?” Eng. Educ., 546 (March 1972).

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

CHAPTER 5

PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Engineering education focuses heavily on problem solving, but many professors teach

content and then expect students to solve problems automatically without being shown the

process involved. Our position is that an explicit discussion of problem-solving methods and

problem-solving hints should be included in every engineering class. A problem-solving

taxonomy was briefly discussed in Section 4.2.4.

Most engineering schools are very good at teaching routines, and most engineering students

become very proficient at them. And since diagnosis is required for many problems,

particularly in upper-division courses, most students become reasonably proficient at it also.

Students in general are not proficient at strategy, interpretation, and generation. These three

areas of the problem-solving taxonomy will be discussed throughout this chapter.

In this chapter we will first briefly discuss some of the basic ideas about problem solving

and compare the differences between novices and experts. Then a strategy for problem solving

which works well for well-understood problems will be presented, and methods (heuristics)

for getting unstuck will be discussed. The teaching of problem solving will be covered with

a number of hints that can be used in class. Finally, creativity will be discussed.

Extensive studies have shown that problem solving is a complicated process. The concept

map shown in Figure 5-1 gives some idea of the interactions and complexities involved (this

figure is modified from the one in Chorneyko et al., 1979). An entire book would be required

to explain the information on this map fully. Readers who feel a need to understand parts of

this map which are not explained in this chapter are referred to the extensive list of references

at the end of the chapter.

5.1. PROBLEM SOLVING—AN OVERVIEW

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Cognitive psychologists are in general agreement that there are generalizable problem-

solving skills, but that problem solving is also very dependent upon the knowledge required

to solve the problem [see Chapter 14 and Kurfiss (1988) for a review]. Of the prerequisites

shown in Figure 5-1, knowledge and motivation are the most important.

Problem solving can be classified by the type of problem which must be solved. Three

different classification schemes are shown in Figure 5-1. A scheme based on the degree of

definition of the problem (Cox, 1987) is useful since it ties in closely with the strategy required.

Subproblem

Working backward

Contradiction

Subproblem

Known

Unknown

Diagram

system

Constraint

Criteria

Simplification

Generalization

Analysis

Definition

Atmosphere

Triggers

Decision making

Criteria

Methods

Previously

solved

Modified from

previously solved

Types

Well-defined givens and goals—

never seen before

Well defined givens—poorly defined goals

III-structured

Routines

Diagnosis

Strategy

Interpretation

Generation

Poorly defined givens—well defined goals

New Process

(design)

Cause and cure

(troubleshooting)

Why?

(understanding structure and function)

Hypothesis and discovery

(research)

Perception

Group

skills

Morale

Chairperson

Member

Communication

Motivation

Task

Memory

Budgetting

time

Knowledge

Experience

PROBLEM SOLVING

Collecting

data

Experiments

Lecture

Library

Evaluation

Memory

board

Structure

Internal

External

Others

3- or 7-step

Woods et al.

Mettes et al.

Polya

Kepner-Tregoe

Hints

(what, when)

Strategy

(how)

Learning

skills

Synthesis

Degree-

defined

The

unknown

Prerequisites

(what)

Generalize

Check

Do it

Plan

Explore

Define

Can do

Creativity

FIGURE 5-1 CONCEPT MAP OF PROBLEM SOLVING. Reprinted with permission of

CEE, 13

, 132, (1979).

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Relatively structured strategies are most useful for well-defined problems (Mettes et al.,

1981). Ill-structured and less well-defined problems need an approach which focuses on

determining what the problem and goals are (Kepner and Tregoe, 1965; Fogler, 1983).

Various multistep strategies are often appropriate for problems with intermediate degrees

of definition (see Section 5.3). The classification based on the unknown is discussed by

Chorneyko et al. (1979).

The various elements of problem solving in Figure 5-1 show how it interacts with other

cognitive activities. Analysis and synthesis are part of Bloom’s taxonomy while generaliza-

tion is a seldom taught part of the problem-solving taxonomy. Simplification is a procedure

that many experts use to get a rapid fix on the solution (see Section 5.2.). Creativity is an

extensively studied, but not really well understood, adjunct to problem solving. Creativity can

be enhanced in individuals with proper coaching (see section 5.6). Finally, decision making

is often a part of problem solving which connects it to the Myers-Briggs analysis (see Chapter

13) and is a major part of the Kepner and Tregoe (1965) approach.

Experts have about 50,000 “chunks” of specialized knowledge and patterns stored in their

brains in a readily accessible fashion (Simon, 1979). The expert has the knowledge linked in

some form and does not store disconnected facts. Exercises which require students to develop

trees or networks can help them form appropriate linkages (Staiger, 1984). Accumulation of

this linked knowledge requires about ten years. Since it is not feasible to accumulate this much

information in four or five years, producing experts is not a realistic goal for engineering

education. However, it is reasonable to mold proficient problem solvers who have the

potential to become experts after more seasoning in industry.

How do the novices who start college differ from experts? This has been the topic of many

studies (Dansereau, 1986; Fogler, 1983; Hankins, 1986; Larkin et al., 1980; Lochhead and

Whimbey, 1987; Mayer, 1992; Smith, 1986, 1987; Whimbey and Lochhead, 1982; Woods,

1980, 1983; Woods et al., 1979; Yokomoto and Ware, 1990). A number of observations on

how novice problem solvers differ from experts are listed in Table 5-1. Read through it briefly

before proceeding. The table is arranged in roughly the sequence in which one solves

problems.

The differences between novices and experts show some areas that engineering educators

can work on to improve the problem-solving ability of students. In the category of

prerequisites, students should be encouraged to learn the fundamentals and do deep

processing. Knowledge should be structured so that patterns, instead of single facts, can be

recalled. Motivation and confidence are important, so professors should encourage students

and serve as models of persistence in solving problems.

In working problems, students need to practice defining problems and drawing sketches.

The differences between a student’s sketch and that of an expert should be delineated, and the

student should be required to redraw the sketch. Students also need to practice paraphrasing

the problem statement and looking at different ways to interpret the problem. A distinct

5.2. NOVICE AND EXPERT PROBLEM SOLVERS

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

strategy should be used (see the next section). Students should also practice analyzing

problems to break the problem into parts, and they need to be encouraged to perform the

explore step. A chug-and-plug mentality should be discouraged, and students should be

encouraged to return to the fundamentals.

Once students know a strategy, they should be encouraged to monitor their progress.

Methods for getting unstuck should be taught (see Section 5.4). Then once the problem has

been completed, students should be required to check their results and evaluate them versus

internal and external criteria. After the problems have been graded, some mechanism for

ensuring that students learn from their mistakes is required. Throughout the process students

should be encouraged to be accurate and active. Specifics of methods for teaching problem

solving are discussed in more detail in Section 5.5.

Memory

Attitude

Categorize

Problem statement

Simple well-defined

problems

Strategy

Information

Parts (harder problems)

First step done

(harder problems)

Sketching

Characteristic

Small pieces

Few items

Try once and then give up

Anxious

Superficial details

Difficulty redescribing

Slow and inaccurate

Jump to conclusion

Slow

Work backward

Trial and error

Don't know what is relevant

Cannot draw inferences

from incomplete data

Do NOT analyze into parts

Try to calculate

(Do It step)

Often not done

“Chunks” or pattern

~ 50,000 items

Can-do if persist

Confident

Fundamentals

Many techniques to redescribe

Fast and accurate

Take time defining tentative problem

May redefine several times

~ 4 times faster

Work forwards with known procedures

Use a strategy

Recognize relevant information

Can draw inferences

Analyze parts

Proceed in steps

Look for patterns

Define and draw

Sketch

Explore

Considerable time

Abstract principles

Show motion

Novices Experts

TABLE 5-1 COMPARISON OF NOVICE AND EXPERT PROBLEM SOLVERS

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Limits

Equations

Solution procedures

Monitoring solution

progress

If stuck

Accuracy

Evaluation of result

Mistakes or failure

to solve problems

Actions

Decisions

Characteristic

Do not calculate

Memorize or look up detailed

equations for each circumstance

“Uncompiled”

Decide how to solve

after writing equation

Do not do

Guess

Quit

Not concerned

DO NOT Check

Do not do

Ignore it

Sit and think

Inactive

Quiet

Do NOT understand process

No clear criterion

May calculate to get quick fix

on solution

Use fundamental relations to derive

needed result

“Compiled” procedures

Equation and solution method are

single procedure

Keep track

Check off versus strategy

Use Heuristics

Persevere

Brainstorm

Very accurate

Check and recheck

Do from broad experience

Learn what should have done

Develop new problem solving

methods

Use paper and pencil

Very active

Sketch, write questions, flow paths.Subvocalize (talk to selves)

Understand decision process

Clear criterion

Novices Experts

TABLE 5-1(CONT) COMPARISON OF NOVICE AND EXPERT PROBLEM SOLVERS

5.3. PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES

Many experts have difficulty verbalizing the problem-solving strategy they are using since

the strategy has become automatic. When an expert does verbalize how he or she solves a

problem, it is clear that a distinct strategy has been used. Novices have a strategy also—it is

a trial-and-error strategy. It is not very effective and does not help the novice become a better

problem solver.

A distinct problem-solving strategy should be demonstrated and then required from students.

The exact strategy used is not important; what is important is that the strategy be used consistently

and that students be required to use it. Woods et al. (1979) suggest that the strategy have between

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

four and fifteen steps. If shorter than four steps the strategy is probably too short and not detailed

enough to be useful; if longer than fifteen steps it is too long to remember and use.

The strategy that we have used is based on the work of Don Woods and his coworkers at

McMaster University (Woods et al., 1975, 1977, 1979, 1984; Woods, 1977, 1983, 1987;

Leibold et al., 1976). Through the years their strategy has changed slightly. We have settled

on a strategy with six operational steps and a prestep which focuses on motivation:

0 I can.

1 Define.

2 Explore.

3 Plan.

4 Do it.

5 Check.

6 Generalize.

Step 0 is a motivation step. Since anxiety can be a major detriment to problem solving, it

is useful to work on the student’s self-confidence (Scarl, 1990; Richardson and Noble, 1983).

The professor may want to avoid being subtle when first working on this step. It is also useful

to teach students a few simple relaxation exercises (Richardson and Noble, 1983; also, see

Section 2.7 on handling stress).

Step 1, the define step, is often given very little attention by novices. They need to list the

knowns and the unknowns, draw a figure, and perhaps draw an abstract figure which shows

the fundamental relationships (remember that most people prefer visual learning). The figures

are critical since an incorrect figure almost guarantees an incorrect solution. The constraints

and the criteria for a solution should be clearly identified.

Step 2 is the explore step. This step was originally missing from the strategy but was added

when its importance to expert problem solvers became clear (Woods et al., 1979). This step

can also be called “Think about it,” or “Ponder.” During this step the expert asks questions and

explores all dimensions of the problem. Is it a routine problem? If so, the expert will solve the

problem quickly in a forward direction. If it is not routine, what parts are present? Which of

these parts are routine? What unavailable data are likely to be required? What basis is most

likely to be convenient? What are the alternative solution methods and which is likely to be

most convenient and accurate? What control envelope should be used? Does this problem

really need to be solved, or is it a smoke screen for a more important problem? Many experts

determine limiting solutions to see if a more detailed solution is really needed. Since novices

are often unaware of this step, they need encouragement to add it to their repertoire.

In the plan step, formal logic is used to set up the steps of the problem. For long problems

a flowchart of the steps may be useful. The appropriate equations can be written and solved

without numbers. This is extremely difficult for students in Piaget’s concrete operational

stage. This step is easier for global thinkers and intuitives, which means that serial thinkers and

sensing individuals need more practice.

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Do it, step 4, involves actually putting in values and calculating an answer. This is the step

which novices want to do first. Even fairly skilled problem solvers often want to combine steps

3 and 4 and not develop a solution in symbolic form. The separation of the plan and do it stages

makes for better problem solvers in the long run. Separating these stages makes it easier to

check the results and to generalize them since putting in new values is easier. Sensing students

tend to be better at doing the actual calculations.

Checking the results should be an automatic part of the problem-solving strategy.

Checking requires internal checks for errors in both mathematical manipulations and number

crunching, and it involves evaluation with external criteria. A very useful ploy of expert problem

solvers is to compare the answer to the limits determined in the explore step. The answer should

also be compared to “common sense.” This step requires evaluation and many students will not

be adept at it.

The last step, generalize, is almost never done by novices unless they are explicitly told to

do it. What has been learned about the content? How could the problem be solved much more

efficiently in the future? For example, was one term very small so that in the future it can be

safely ignored? Were trends linear so that in the future very few points need to be calculated?

If the problem was not solved correctly, what should have been done? Students need to be

strongly encouraged to study feedback and then resolve incorrect problems.

Note that problem solvers who use this strategy consistently will use all levels of both the

Bloom and the problem-solving taxonomies. However, students will rebel against using this

or any other structured approach to solving problems. The method is unfamiliar and will feel

awkward at first. Since many aspects of problem solving are automatic, making them

conscious is uncomfortable at first and may inhibit the student for a period. An analogy is the

self-taught golfer or tennis player who starts taking lessons. Thinking about the swing so that

it can be improved makes it difficult to swing effortlessly. However, in the long run the person

with training will become a better golfer or problem solver. (Note that an expert golfer will also

be an expert problem solver in this narrow domain.)

Many other problem-solving strategies can be used. Polya (1971) originated a four step

approach which is a predecessor of the approach shown here. Since Woods (1977) has

published an extensive review of problem-solving strategies, these older papers will not be

reviewed here. Scarl (1990) also describes a procedure very similar to that presented here, and

in addition he is very directive of what students should do when. Mettes et al. (1981) describe

a systematic flow sheet approach that is quite different from the method illustrated here. Their

structured approach was developed specifically for solving thermodynamics problems and

may not be generalizable. Smith (1986, 1987) discusses expert system models for problem

solving. Kepner and Tregoe (1965) developed procedures that are most applicable to

determining what the problem is (troubleshooting) and for decision making. Guided design

is a method for guiding groups of students through a structured problem-solving procedure

(Wales and Stager, 1977; Wales et al., 1986). This method will be discussed further in Chapter

9. In a book used to teach problem solving, Rubenstein (1975) discusses five models of

problem solving.

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

A problem-solving strategy is not much help if you just cannot get started on a problem

or are completely stuck. What do you do then? Novice problem solvers tend to give up or make

wild guesses, whereas experts persist, recycle back through the define step, and use heuristics.

The first step for a professor is to encourage students. Remember those high school football

slogans, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going,” and “Winners never quit, and

quitters never win,” and so forth? A short pep talk is not out of order, particularly for students

who have the prerequisites to be successful. Nothing makes a student more confident in her

or his ability to solve problems than successfully solving difficult problems.

The second step is to encourage the student to recycle in whatever problem-solving strategy

the class is using. Ask, “Have you reread the problem statement to be sure you are solving the

right problem?” “Have you rechecked your figures for accuracy?” “Have you thought about

whether your plan of attack still seems reasonable? Novices want to apply a strategy once

through, while experts apply a strategy in a series of loops. One advantage of having an explicit

strategy is that you can easily refer the student to a particular stage of the process, and both of

you will have a common language.

If recycling through the strategy does not work, suggest that the student identify his or her

difficulty with the problem (Woods, 1983). Where is the student stuck? What is the obstacle?

Where does the student want to be? Are there alternatives that can be used? Sometimes this

process will lead the student to a productive path.

If still stuck, it is now time for the problem solver to use heuristics. Heuristics are methods

which might, but are not guaranteed to, work. A large number of heuristic methods have been

suggested to aid a problem solver who is stuck (Adams, 1978; Cox, 1987; Koen, 1984, 1985;

Polya, 1971; Rubenstein and Firstenberg, 1987; Scarl, 1990; Smith, 1986, 1987; Starfield et

al., 1990; Wankat, 1982; Woods et al., 1979). A very large number of heuristics can be listed;

however, it probably does not matter which ones students are taught as long as they use them.

For any given obstacle many different heuristics will work, since what the heuristic does is to

get the problem solver thinking productively on a new path. (Students need to realize this

also—and it can be called another heuristic.) Readers interested in the use of heuristics for

problem-solving should consult the short book by Starfield et al. (1990).

The second and third suggestions in this section (recycle and find the obstacle) can be

considered either heuristics or parts of the problem-solving strategy. We will list a variety of

other heuristics. Select from these the ones that you will teach to the students, remembering

that they will need to practice using the heuristics and will need feedback. Particularly with

novices, it is preferable to keep the list short so that they can remember and use the heuristics.

1 Simplify the problem and solve limiting cases.

This is a procedure often used by experts. Another closely related heuristic involves solving

special cases.

2 Check to see that the problem is not under- or overspecified.

Problems that are under- or overspecified need interpretation before they can be solved.

5.4. GETTING STARTED OR GETTING UNSTUCK

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

3 Relate the problem to a similar problem which you know how to solve.

Solutions to similar problems can give a useful outline of how to solve the current problem.

A closely related technique uses analogies to give hints about the problem solution.

4 Generalize the problem.

Sometimes the problem is easier to understand and solve in a very general form.

5 Try substituting in numbers.

Sometimes the problem will be clearer with numbers inserted because it will appear more

concrete.

6 Try solving for ratios.

Often a problem can be solved for ratios, but not for individual numbers.

7 Get the facts and be sure there actually is a problem.

Another way to say this is, “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it.” This heuristic can be taught and

reinforced in the laboratory.

8 Change the representation of the problem.

If the first representation of the problem is too difficult, change it. This is often called

education or advertising.

9 Ask questions about the problem.

Specifications are often set arbitrarily but may make the problem extremely difficult to

solve. Question them. Does the purity really have to be so high? Do the tolerances really have

to be so tight?

10 Concentrate on the parts of the problem that can be solved.

Very often parts that seem unsolvable become solvable when other parts of the problem

have been solved. This is partly a confidence factor.

11 In groups, be a good listener and maintain group harmony.

Groups can be synergistic in solving problems, but only if people listen and there is some

group harmony.

12 Use a plus-minus-interesting (PMI) approach when presented with possible solutions

(deBono, 1985; Gleeson, 1980).

The plus helps the morale of the person suggesting the solution. Minuses are why the

solution is not yet complete. Interesting are the ideas that can be adapted.

13 Use a mixed scanning strategy (Rubenstein and Firstenberg, 1987).

A mixed scanning strategy alternates a broad look at the entire problem with in-depth looks

at small parts of the problem.

14 Alternate working forward and backward.

Although experts work forward on simple problems, they alternate working forward and

backward on difficult problems.

15 Take a break.

This is not quitting but is a break allowing you to do something else before returning to

the problem with a fresh view.

16 Ask what the hidden assumptions are or what you have forgotten to use.

Novice problem solvers often limit their solutions by assuming constraints which are not

part of the problem.

17 Apply a control strategy.

Experts keep track of where they are in solving a problem with a metacognitive control strategy.

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Schoenfield (1985) suggests that you ask yourself three questions: What are you doing? (Be exact

in the description.) Why are you doing it? How will it help you solve the problem?

18 Refocus on the fundamentals.

Sometimes asking what is fundamental will break the log jam.

19 Guess the solution and then check the answer.

Yes, guessing is a novice approach. However, sometimes when we are stuck, we have

strong hunches. If we guess the answer, it may be easy to prove whether it is correct or

incorrect. The differences between novice and expert behavior here are that the expert makes

her or his guess after working on the problem for a period and always checks the guess.

20 Ask for a little help.

Even experts ask for help. The key is to get only a little help and not to let the helper solve

the problem for you.

To close this section it may be useful to consider the six categories of blocks which Adams

(1978) has identified. Perceptual blocks are difficulties in seeing various aspects or

ramifications of the problem. Cultural blocks lead to inadvertent assumptions about the

solution method or the solution path. In particular, in engineering there is a cultural bias toward

convergent (logical) thinking and away from divergent (lateral or creative) thinking. Environ-

mental blocks are due to the problem solver’s surroundings, including people. For students

this means the professor and other students. A lack of acceptance of novel ideas can be a major

environmental block. Emotional blocks such as anxiety or fear of failure can make problem

solvers much less effective. Intellectual blocks can include a lack of knowledge or trying to

use inappropriate knowledge. The use of unannounced review questions on homework can

help overcome this block. Expressive blocks involve the use of inappropriate problem-solving

languages or inappropriate paths. For example, trying to solve a problem without an

appropriately drawn figure can be an expressive block. An additional heuristic is: Determine

the blocks which are preventing you from solving the problem.

Many excellent papers and books have been written on how to improve the problem-

solving abilities of students. In this section we have distilled many of these ideas. Readers

interested in more ideas and applications are referred to the literature (Goodson, 1981;

Greenfield, 1987; Kurfiss, 1988; Lochhead and Whimbey, 1987; Plants, 1986; Scarl, 1990;

Starfield et al., 1990; Stice, 1987; Wales and Stager, 1977; Wales et al., 1986; Whimbey and

Lochhead, 1982; Woods, 1983, 1987; Woods et al., 1975; Yokomoto, 1988). With a little

creativity you can adapt the ideas in this chapter and invent new methods to improve your

teaching of problem solving.

Lumsdaine and Lumsdaine (1991) and Rubenstein (1975) recommend a separate course in

problem solving. However, specific knowledge in the problem domain is essential for solving

problems. Thus, we suggest embedding problem solving into existing engineering courses.

5.5. TEACHING PROBLEM SOLVING

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Then, the problem solving and specific knowledge can reinforce each other. It is helpful if the

knowledge is organized by students in a hierarchical structure since this is what most expert

problem solvers do. Some information at the knowledge level of Bloom’s taxonomy is

essential, and professors should not hesitate to require memorization of certain crucial

numbers. Most problems in lower-level engineering classes require facility with algebraic

manipulations. Thus it is essential that students master algebra. Obviously, other mathemati-

cal skills are important, but algebra appears to be the lowest common denominator.

Problem solving should be taught throughout the student’s college career. This can often

be done in the form of little hints or suggestions of a heuristic to try while students are

struggling with problems. Ideally, the same strategy would be used in all science and

engineering classes and in textbooks. However, since most strategies are similar, students will

not be hopelessly confused if the strategy changes. Illustrate the strategy when solving

problems in class and in handouts. This includes solutions to homework and test problems.

Many students will learn to use a strategy on their own, but students most in need of help in

problem solving will not learn without help. Encourage and perhaps even force students to

use the strategy on homework and test problems.

Although no student can become an accomplished problem solver merely by watching a

professor solve examples, example problems are an important learning device, particularly

for sensing students. Unfortunately, most professors inadvertently foster the idea that problem

solving is a neat process and thereby do damage to the student’s confidence. Using a routine

to determine an answer is a neat process once the problem has been interpreted, a strategy

chosen, the problem diagnosed, and the routine selected. These other steps are messy but

represent the real heart of problem solving. Suppose that solving a problem took fifteen

minutes and resulted in two dead ends and a page of scrap paper. Your typical approach may

be to clean this up and show it to the students in five minutes with no mistakes and no dead

ends. What the students see is a process that they cannot duplicate. Then when they are unable

to solve problems in this way, they begin to doubt their abilities. Occasionally show a messy

solution. Solve a problem in front of the class that you have not seen before and verbalize as

you solve it. This can be done by having students select a problem from the textbook for you

to solve. Yes, this is scary since you may fail. However, it does demonstrate the process that

one goes through when solving novel problems, including step 0, the motivation or confi-

dence-bolstering step.

Students need to solve problems to learn how to solve problems. Unfortunately, rote

learning and drill will at most teach how to do routines which are necessary but not sufficient

to becoming a good problem solver. Students need to solve more challenging problems

requiring all levels of the problem-solving taxonomy. The good news is that all the professor

has to do with the better students is to challenge them with good problems and provide

feedback. The bad news is that this classical procedure does not work with the poorer students.

Yet, these poorer students have the potential to become excellent engineers. How can one

teach problem solving to make it accessible to them?

Particularly for beginning students, requiring a neat regular structure is useful. Tell

students to lay out the problem solution in the same format for all homework problems.

Require separate labeling of steps in the problem-solving strategy. Make students work down

one side of the paper in regular columns. Let, and in fact encourage, students to doodle, try

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

out ideas, and play with the problem on a separate piece of scrap paper. It is important to

encourage them to write things down since this external memory is often more effective than

trying to store ideas internally. (Paper is much cheaper than time.) Require a sketch even for

students who can solve the problem without a sketch. Students should define all symbols even

if they are the same ones as in the book. Before plugging in numbers, they should obtain an

algebraic solution in symbolic form. Until an individual student has proven that he or she can

skip algebraic steps, all algebraic steps should be shown. A separate equation line with all

numbers substituted into the equation should be shown before the student calculates the

answer. Obviously, students will resist this degree of regimentation. They will truthfully say

that they are now slower and poorer problem solvers. In the long run such a procedure will

produce better, neater, faster, more accurate problem solvers, and in the short run troubleshoot-

ing their solutions will be much easier. Since there is no reason why creative solutions cannot

be neat and understandable, this procedure will not deaden creativity as long as the professor

grades solutions with an open mind when the solutions are different.

Give a combination of application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation problems. Be sure

that the homework problems bracket the test problems in terms of difficulty, or students will

think you are unfair. Be sure that some problems require the simultaneous solution of

equations, or students will believe that all problems can be solved sequentially. Some

problems should be open-ended, and synthesis should be required. Often students who excel

in these problems are not the same students who excel in doing routines. Require students to

evaluate solutions.

Separately cover all steps of the problem-solving strategy. For example, for one problem

the students might do the define, explore, and plan steps only. Give multipart problems where

students first have to define and draw a sketch; then after the entire class has received feedback

and has that step correct, they would do the next step, and so on. Require students to completely

check their solutions by solving the problem with a completely different method. Then note

that the answer is still wrong if incorrect values for physical parameters are used. For another

problem a complete solution with all numbers checked and no errors should be required. If

accuracy is important for practicing engineers, then students must practice this level of

accuracy. For these few problems where accuracy is being stressed, return the problem to the

student for a corrected solution if there are any errors.

Try to cover all aspects of the problem-solving taxonomy. Give a few problems which are

carefully worded to be ambiguous so that students can practice interpretation. Require

students to find or estimate some of the physical constants they need (and be prepared for a

variety of solutions). Give them the assignment of making up a problem so that they have

practice in defining problems. Give them real cases where a clearly defined problem is not laid

out in front of them. These can include troubleshooting or debottlenecking problems.

Students can be made more aware of their problem-solving procedures by verbalizing what

they are doing while solving problems. This can be done conveniently in class with the

Whimbey-Lochhead pair method (Whimbey and Lochhead, 1982; Lochhead and Whimbey,

1987). The class is divided into pairs, and one member of each pair is designated the problem

solver. His or her job is to solve the problem and to say out loud everything he or she is thinking

while solving the problem. The other person in the pair is the recorder-encourager whose job

is to take notes on what the person is doing and to encourage the problem solver to keep

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

verbalizing. As the the encourager he or she can say things such as, “What are you thinking

now,” or “Tell me what you’re thinking.” As the the recorder he or she needs to try to

understand every step, diversion, and error made by the problem solver. When the reasons for

a step are unclear, the recorder asks what the problem solver is doing and why. The recorder

can point out algebraic or numerical errors, but he or she should not be specific as to where

the error is. The two cardinal rules for the recorder are to avoid solving the problem and to

not lead the solver toward a solution.

After explaining the roles to students, give the problem solver a short written problem

statement. Then, as students start to read this to themselves, remind them they have to read out

loud. Encourage them to verbalize their anxiety as they read a new problem and encourage

them to verbalize self-encouragement. Encourage the problem solver to use a pencil and paper

while solving the problem. During the remainder of the solution of the problem, visit various

pairs and reinforce the role of each student.

Once the problem has been completed, either correctly or incorrectly, the recorder and the

problem solver should discuss what the problem solver did while solving the problem. Remind

students that learning how one solves problems is the purpose of the exercise, not correctly

solving the problem. Students can then switch roles and solve a new problem.

To be effective, this procedure needs to be used several times during the semester. Note

that it can be used in quite large classes. It keeps students active and simultaneously teaches

both content (the problems chosen) and problem solving. This type of activity is a nice break

from excessive lecturing. Professors can also learn from the Whimbey-Lochhead pair method

and verbalize while they solve example problems.

Problem solving can also be taught with discovery methods of instruction (Canelos, 1988).

These approaches include simulation, case study, guided design, and discussion. In all these

methods students should work on real, or at least realistic, engineering problems. They should

help define the problem and then work at developing a solution. Then the professor should

push the students to evaluate their solution and look for a better one. When the process is

completed, the professor helps the students describe the problem-solving process so that they

discover the method. These methods are suitable for either individual or group work. Further

details of these methods are given in Chapters 7 through 9.

Student work in groups is particularly conducive to learning problem solving. Being in a

group of one’s peers can help reduce a student’s anxiety if it is clear that no one has all the

solutions. Extroverts and field-sensitive individuals will benefit from the group support. The

verbalization that occurs in a group is a good way to obtain internal feedback. Groups are

excellent for clarifying difficult-to-interpret problems since each group member will look at

the problem in a slightly different way. Brainstorming during the explore step is easily done

in groups. From the professor’s viewpoint it is more efficient to work with groups of three to

five students rather than individual students since the number of questions is reduced by a

factor of from three to five. Finally, when they graduate, the new engineers will be expected

to work in teams in industry. Providing practice in teamwork while they are students will help

their transition to industry.

Your goal while working with problem-solving groups or individuals is not to give students

what they want. Students want the solution. As a professor you want the students to find a

solution essentially on their own and to improve their problem-solving skills in the process.

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Encourage them to verbalize and refuse to let them quit prematurely. You can check to see

if the students’ knowledge base is correct and can help them see the hierarchical structure of

the knowledge. You can also focus their activities on problem-solving methods. For example,

if they are stuck, you can ask, “What heuristics have you tried?” and “What other heuristics

can you try?” If students are stuck on a clearly incorrect approach, show them why they are

incorrect but without showing them a correct approach. Guided design suggests that the entire

problem and responses be developed in advance so that students are automatically guided

through the steps of problem solving (Wales and Stager, 1977; Wales et al., 1986). (See

Section 9.1.) Although many professors do not have time for this much detail, it is helpful to

have a brief outline or script of how you want to proceed. This will help you to remember to

cover all important points.

Creativity is a novel and unexpected way of defining or solving a problem which leads the

observer to ask, “How did you think of that?” Creativity can be a part of problem solving, but

many successful solutions do not illustrate creativity. Creativity requires divergent thinking

and usually appears at the define or explore step in problem solving if it is present. Note that

creativity is only part of the entire problem-solving step. The creative idea must be proven to

be a valid solution by a logical analysis during the plan, do it, and check steps. The generalize

step can be used to further develop the creative idea and to look for other applications. The

importance of creativity in engineering is summarized by Florman (1987, p. 75): “Engineering

is an art as well as a science, and good engineering depends upon leaps of imagination as well

as painstaking care.”

Everyone is born with creative abilities. According to Hueter (1990) these abilities increase

in elementary school up to an age of about eight and then steadily decrease with further

schooling. At about eight years old children become very aware of the opinions of other

people. It becomes important for them to fit in and to use objects for “what they are supposed

to be used for.” The result is a decline of creativity that continues through college. If Hueter

is correct, then engineers are in a paradoxical situation. The very education which makes an

engineer more capable of solving difficult problems decreases the likelihood that he or she will

invent a creative solution. However, creativity can be enhanced in class with a positive attitude

and suitable exercises (Christenson, 1988).

The professor’s job is to nuture the creative abilities which everyone possesses and to stem

any decline in creativity . What can professors do to encourage the latent creativity of every

student? We will discuss three things that professors can do in engineering classes.

1 Tell students to be creative.

2 Teach students some creativity methods.

3 Accept the results of creative exercises.

5.6. CREATIVITY

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

People are more creative when they are told to be creative. More creative solutions are

generated when people are told to generate many possible solutions. There appears to be a bias,

particularly among college students, toward producing a single solution unless they are

explicitly told to produce multiple solutions. Thus, the first step professors can take is

surprisingly simple. Ask for many solutions. Examples of ways to do this are:

“Develop some creative solutions for this problem.”

“Give some different ways to interpret this problem statement.”

“List twenty (or fifty) possible solutions to this problem.”

Once a large number of possibilities have been generated, you can ask students to further

develop two or three of these ideas. For example, in a design class the assignment could be to

develop a folding cane. Students are asked to generate twenty different possibilities and then

to do detailed designs for two of these ideas. Note that when doing this you need to accept ideas

positively even if they probably would not work. The second part of this assignment asks

students to do the necessary work and logical analysis to make the creative idea work. A

second example which is applicable to any class is to require students to write homework or

test questions with answers (Felder, 1987). This is a useful problem-solving exercise, and it

becomes a useful creativity exercise also if students are told that grading will depend upon the

novelty of their questions. However, remember that this will be quite time-consuming for

students. A third exercise is to ask students to identify as many uses for a common object (e.g.,

a brick or a pencil) as possible (Christenson, 1988).

Knowledge is necessary to be creative. An interesting question is, What knowledge?

Prausnitz (1985) strongly makes the point that cross-fertilization of knowledge is required.

Students should take a variety of courses in many areas and not overspecialize. This should

include advanced-level courses in different disciplines. People who hunt or fish know that the

edges are by the far the most productive areas. The edges between disciplines are often the

most productive areas for creative ideas.

A variety of creativity techniques have been developed and can easily be adopted for use

in engineering classes. Brainstorming was invented by Osborn (1948, 1963) and has since

become so common that the term is now part of common usage. The technique is easy to use

in class. The professor tells the class to think up any possible solution to a specific problem

and say it out loud. One or two students who are selected as recorders write the ideas down.

The one cardinal rule is there can be no judgment of any of the ideas during the brainstorming

session. The professor acts as a facilitator to encourage students to generate more ideas and

5.6.1. Tell Students to be Creative

5.6.2. Creativity Techniques

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ensures that there is no criticism of ideas during this stage. Students are encouraged to build

on the ideas of others. After the session, the ideas are collected and a list of possible solutions

is generated. Then, in a separate session the ideas are criticized and possible workable

solutions based on one or a combination of several of the ideas are chosen. In a design class

different design teams can then be assigned to further develop these ideas. The principles of

brainstorming are easily distilled.

1 Develop a lot of ideas.

2 Build on the ideas of others.

3 Make no criticism during the development phase.

4 Evaluate the ideas afterward.

5 Further develop promising ideas.

These principles can be applied to other creative exercises. For example, individuals can

brainstorm by themselves. Groups can brainstorm in a conference telephone call or by

electronic mail. In all cases the idea generation and evaluation stages must be separated;

otherwise, the evaluation will inhibit idea generation.

Lateral thinking is an approach suggested by de Bono (1971, 1973, 1985). It involves

restructuring patterns, changing viewpoints, jumping around, deliberately trying to change

things, changing the problem statement, and avoiding logical (vertical thinking) analysis.

Lateral thinking, unlike logical analysis, does not have to be sequential, does not have to be

correct at each stage, does not have to use relevant information, and is not restricted to the

problem as posed. Since lateral thinking is used only in the define and explore stages, it is

completely checked by logical analysis in the later stages. Essentially, lateral thinking is more

an attitude than a method.

A few examples will help illustrate. The same amount of money can be collected in tolls

at less cost and with less disruption of traffic by closing half the toll booths. Stop for a minute

and think about how this could be done. If all the toll booths going onto an island are closed,

the toll can be doubled for cars leaving the island. This solves the problem.

A process called reversal can be illustrated with the following problem. The occupants of

a new office building complained that the elevators were too slow and that the wait for

elevators was too long. The straightforward logical solution was to speed up the elevators.

What was the reversed problem? Reversal suggested slowing down the people. Mirrors were

installed next to the elevators so that people could watch themselves (and others) while waiting

for the elevators. Complaints plummeted afterward.

Dieting is a problem for many people. The straightforward solution is to tell people to eat

less. A great deal of money has been spent on variations of this straightforward solution. What

is the reversal solution? Go ahead and think up some ideas—none of them are wrong. One

possible reversal solution is to tell people to eat as much of anything they want, whenever they

want but with one simple rule. When they eat, that is all they can do. No television, no

conversation, no thinking about problems, no radio, no music, no reading, and so forth. They

eat, and while they eat they think about what they are eating (Smith, 1975). One of the authors

(PCW) can attest that this wonder diet does work. It apparently works because the body gives

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

a signal that it is full. When people do nothing but eat, they are much less likely to ignore this

signal, and in addition, when on this diet there is little worry about going hungry later.

However, the diet is not necessarily simple since it requires changing habits, but it is a different

solution. Many of the heuristics, challenges to students and exercises discussed in the

remainder of this section can be considered part of lateral thinking.

Writing can be a very useful method to get students to think about thinking and to think

creatively in engineering (Hoerger and Bean, 1988; Elbow, 1986). Writing in a journal can

be a useful method for getting students to think creatively, whether as freewriting or as fast

exploratory writing where the student just writes without worrying about grammar or spelling.

For example, he or she might write a page about uses for a screwdriver. One can also have

students develop an idea map which can be considered a less sophisticated version of a concept

map (see Figure 5-1). A journal is also useful for improving the writing skills of students.

Challenging students with creative games, questions, and exercises is a good way to increase

their creativity (Felder, 1988). These do not have to be tied to engineering content. For example,

have them brainstorm 100 possible uses for a brick. Ask them the meaning of word games such

as what is “12safety34,” or what is “milonelion”? There are also many mathematical exercises

which require creativity to solve rapidly. For example, if there will be a single elimination tennis

tournament with 360 players, how many matches need to be held to determine the winner. This

can be done laboriously, but a rapid creative solution can be obtained. Since every player except

one must lose a match, there must be 359 matches (Gardner, 1978). There are several books

which specialize in this type of question and Gardner (1978) is a good source of both problems

and references for additional problems. Open-ended creative questions can be invented by the

instructor, and it is not necessary to have an answer. For example, Why do bridges freeze before

the road surface? How could this be prevented economically? or, What is a good economical

use for snow?

Heuristics were discussed extensively in Section 5.4, and many of them are useful for the

generation of creative ideas. A few of many possible new heuristics developed specifically for

creativity are listed below.

1 Have many ideas. The more ideas, the more likely that one will be good (Christenson,

1988).

2 Reverse the problem.

3 Build on a random stimulus (deBono, 1971). For example, pick a word at random from

the dictionary and see if it leads to any possible solutions.

4 Think of something funny about the problem. Make a pun out of the problem. Humor

and wit can often lead to original solutions.

5 Think of analogous solutions in nature to similar problems. This is a key part of the

synectics approach to creativity (Gordon, 1961).

6 Develop word lists of stimulus words, properties, or key concepts (Staiger, 1984).

7 Use checklists or keywords to trigger different ways of looking at a problem. For

example, the word creativity can be used (Sadowski, 1987):

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

C - combine

R - reverse

E - expand

A - alter

T - tinier

I - instead of

V - viewpoint change

I - in another sequence

T - to other uses

Y - yes! yes! (affirm new ideas)

Most engineers tend to be heavily left-brain-oriented. Their creativity can be enhanced by

having them learn how to shut off the left brain and use the right brain. Following the

pioneering work of Roger W. Sperry, it is now clear that the left hemisphere of the brain is

mainly involved in verbal analytical thinking. The right hemisphere mainly processes visual

and perceptual thinking, and its mode of processing involves intuition and leaps of insight.

Clearly, engineering education is heavily left-hemisphere oriented.

People can learn how to consciously shut off the left brain and use the right brain. The

subdominant right brain can be engaged by giving the whole brain a job which the left brain

will refuse to do (Edwards, 1989). One way to practice the shift from left to right brain is to

look at perceptual illusion drawings and consciously force yourself to see one part of the

illusion and then another. Examples of this type of drawing are the vase that becomes two faces

and the many drawings by M. C. Escher. A second exercise is to look at photographs of

familiar faces, but with the photographs upside down. This exercise requires a shift in pattern

recognition. A third exercise is to draw by using the right side of the brain without using words

to name parts. Edwards’ (1989) book has detailed exercises for learning how to do this. While

doing these exercises you may want to quietly reassure the left brain that you will return to it

shortly. In order to be able to shift at will to right-brain thinking, you must monitor the activity

so that you know when the shift has occurred. Remember that the purpose of teaching

engineering students how to shift to the right brain is to provide them with an alternative way

of looking at things since this may produce creative ideas for solutions. Once the ideas are

generated, the left brain takes over to prove or disprove the ideas. (A personal note: We find

that our most creative ideas often come when we are tired. Apparently being tired relaxes the

control of the left brain and the right brain has the chance to generate ideas. This can happen

only if the problem has been thoroughly thought about previously.)

How do you incorporate creativity successfully into a class? Flowers (1987) has some

useful suggestions based on his experience at MIT. One needs willing students, an enthusiastic

instructor, “good” problems, and appropriate feedback. Most students are willing to try

something new, and creativity is usually new. Instructors who voluntarily add creativity

exercises to their courses will usually be enthusiastic. But picking good problems can be

difficult: The instructor needs to know enough about the problem to know that it cries out for

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

a creative solution, but he or she does not want to know the solution. (Instructors who know

the solution have a very difficult time not teaching toward that solution.) Since pressure is real

in the engineering profession, a project needs deadlines. For motivational purposes it is

important to have successes. In the feedback, celebrate the successes which occur in the

details. Such things as a clever mechanism, a trick circuit, and a clever coupling of processes

need to be celebrated as creative accomplishments. It is these detailed ideas that most often

delineate commercial successes since the development of a Xerox machine or the first

introduction of a hand calculator occurs rarely. Flowers (1987) suggests individual exercises

before group exercises since group exercises introduce a whole new area of group dynamics.

A very important part of fostering creativity in students is to accept ideas and help students

build on ideas. This acceptance is an inherent part of brainstorming. In working with students

both on class projects and as a research advisor, a professor who accepts ideas will foster

creativity. But acceptance does not mean stopping the search for more ideas; instead, it means

ideas are not turned down.

There are many ways to accept ideas. One way is never to criticize an idea (Hueter, 1990).

Instead, suggest to the student that he or she work on it and report back to you on the result.

If the idea works, then all is fine and good. If the idea does not work, the student will learn

from the evaluation process. Your hope is that in the future he or she will test ideas a little more

carefully before talking to you. In either case the student will not be inhibited from generating

new ideas.

A second method is to consciously use the PMI approach (deBono, 1985; Gleeson, 1980).

First, note the plus (P) aspects of the idea. Then note the minuses (M) in the idea. Finally, note

the interesting (I) aspects that can be built on. Encourage the student to build on the idea to

retain the pluses while eliminating the minuses.

Building on ideas can be practiced in class. You can outline an interesting, creative idea

for the class. Then assign students homework building on this idea. A second approach is to

have small groups work on an idea and have each student in turn add to the idea. When this

is done, the rules of brainstorming (no criticism) apply.

A third approach is to watch for creative solutions in homework assignments and tests

(Felder, 1988). When one occurs, praise the student even if the final result is incorrect. Calling

the student into your office and discussing the solution is one way to praise the student and to

start building a relationship.

This chapter could easily be turned into a book or two. We have tried to keep the

information within the bounds of a chapter and at the same time to provide some concrete

5.6.3. Acceptance of Ideas

5.7. CHAPTER COMMENTS

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

examples of what a professor can do to foster the creativity of students as well as to help

improve their problem-solving skills. A large number of references are included for readers

who want more information. If each professor spent five to ten minutes in class about once

a week, we believe that students would become both better problem solvers and more creative

engineers—certainly two goals worth striving for.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Discuss and modify Figure 5-1 to fit your understanding of problem solving.

• Delineate the differences between novices and experts. Use these differences to outline

how to teach novices to be better problem solvers.

• Discuss the steps in a problem-solving strategy (one different from the one discussed here

can be used as a substitute) and use this strategy to help students solve problems.

• List and help students use some of the methods for getting unstuck.

• Develop a plan to incorporate both problem-solving and creativity exercises in an

engineering course.

• Explain the three steps which can foster creativity and use some of the techniques.

1 Develop several five- to ten-minute problem-solving exercises for an undergraduate

engineering course.

2 Develop several five- to ten-minute creativity exercises for an undergraduate engineering

course.

3 List thirty open-ended questions which are appropriate for a specific engineering course.

4 For a specific engineering class set up some example problems in the format of the

strategy you are using.

5 Write a script for a brainstorming session in an engineering class.

Adams, J. L., Conceptual Blockbusting, Norton, New York, 1978.

Canelos, J., “The psychology of problem solving. What the research tells us,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 2091, 1988.

Chorneyko, D. M., Christmas, R. J., Cosk, S., Dibbs, S. E., Hamielec, C. M., MacLeod, L. K., Moore,

R. F., Norman, S. L., Stoankovich, R. J., Tyne, S. C., Wong, L. K., and Woods, D. R., “What is

REFERENCES

5.8. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

problem solving?” Chem. Eng. Educ., 132 (Summer 1979).

Christensen, J. J., “Reflections on teaching creativity,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 22, 170 (Fall 1988).

Cox, V. G., “An application of cognitive science to understanding problem solving activity for well

structured problems: Cognition, algorithms, metacognition, and heuristics,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 664, 1987.

Dansereau, D. F., “Technical learning strategies,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, New York, 165, 1986.

de Bono, E., Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step, Harper and Row, New York, 1973.

de Bono, E., “The virtues of zigzag thinking,” Chem. Technol., 10 (Jan. 1971).

de Bono, E., DeBono’s Thinking Course, Facts on File, New York, 1985.

Edwards, B., Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, rev. ed., Jeremy P. Tarcher, Los Angeles, 1989.

Elbow, P., Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching, Oxford University Press,

New York, chap. 3, 1986.

Felder, R. M., “Creativity in engineering education,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 22, 120 (Summer 1988).

Felder, R. M., “On creating creative engineers,” Eng. Educ., 222 (Jan. 1987).

Florman, S. C., The Civilized Engineer, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1987.

Flowers, W.C., “On engineering students’ creativity and academics,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 227, 1987.

Fogler, H. S., “The design of a course in problem solving,” AIChE Symp. Ser., 79 (228), 40 (1983).

Gardner, M., aha! Insight, Scientific American, W. H. Freeman, New York, 1978.

Gleeson, A. M., “Think PMI,” Chem. Eng., 131 (Sept. 8, 1980).

Goodson, C. E., “An approach to the development of abstract thinking,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 187, 1981.

Gordon, W. J. J., Synectics, Harper and Row, New York, 1961.

Greenfield, L. B., “Teaching thinking through problem solving,” in Stice, J. E. (ed.), Developing Critical

Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities: New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-

Bass, San Francisco, 5, 1987.

Hankins, G., “Expert systems and the learning process,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 1972, 1986.

Hoerger, C. R. B. and Bean, J. C., “Design journals to improve thinking and writing skills in

engineering,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1242, 1988.

Hueter, J. M., “Innovation and creativity: A critical linkage,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1634, 1990.

Kepner, C. H. and Tregoe, B. B., The Rational Manager, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965.

Koen, B. V., Definition of the Engineering Method, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1985.

Koen, B. V., “Towards a definition of the engineering method,” Eng. Educ., 150 (Dec. 1984).

Kurfiss, J. G., Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and Possibilities, ASHE-ERIC Higher

Education Report No. 2, Washington, DC, Association for the Study of Higher Education, 1988.

Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P. and Simon, H. A., “Expert and Novice Performance in Solving

Physics Problems,” Science, 208, 1335 (June 20, 1980).

Leibold, B. G., Moreland, J. L. C., Ross, D. C., Butko, J. A., et al., “Problem-solving: A freshman

experience,” Eng. Educ., 172 (Nov. 1976).

Lochhead, J. and Whimbey, A., “Teaching analytical reasoning through thinking aloud pair problem

solving,” in Stice, J. E. (ed.), Developing Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities, New

Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 73, 1987.

Lumsdaine, E. and Lumsdaine, M., “Full implementation of a first-year course in creativity and problem

solving,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1572, 1991.

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Mayer, R. E., Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition, W. H. Freeman, New York, 1992.

Mettes, C. T. C. W., Pilot, A., Roossink, H. J., and Kramers-Pals, H., “Teaching and learning problem

solving in science: Part II: Learning problem solving in a thermodynamics course,” J. Chem. Educ.,

58 (1), 51 (Jan. 1981).

Osborn, A. F., Applied Imagination, 3rd ed., Scribner, New York, 1963.

Osborn, A. F., Your Creative Power, Scribner, New York, 1948.

Plants, H. L., “Basic problem-solving skills,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washing-

ton, DC, 210, 1986.

Polya, G., How to Solve It, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1971.

Prausnitz, J. M., “Towards encouraging creativity in students,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 22 (Winter 1985).

Richardson, S. A. and Noble, R. D., “Anxiety: Another aspect of problem solving,” AIChE Symp. Ser.,

79(228), 28 (1983).

Rubenstein, M., Patterns of Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1975.

Rubenstein, M. F. and Firstenberg, I. R., “Tools for thinking,” in Stice, J. E., (ed.), Developing Critical

Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-

Bass, San Francisco, 23, 1987.

Sadowski, M.A., “Thinking creatively,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference,

IEEE, New York, 332, 1987.

Scarl, D., How to Solve Problems. For Success in Freshman Physics, Engineering, and Beyond, 2nd ed.,

Dosoris Press, Glen Cove, NY, 1990.

Schoenfield, A., Mathematical Problem Solving, Academic Press, New York, 1985.

Simon, H. A., “Information processing models of cognition,” Ann. Rev. Psychol., 30, 363 (1979).

Smith, A., Powers of Mind, Random House, New York, 1975.

Smith, K. A., “Artificial intelligence and learning how to learn,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 177, 1986.

Smith, K.A., “Educational engineering: Heuristics for improving learning effectiveness and efficiency,”

Eng. Educ. , 274 (Feb. 1987).

Staiger, E. H., “Probing more of the mind,” Eng. Educ., 65 (April 1984).

Starfield, A. M., Smith, K. A., and Bleloch, A. L., How to Model It: Problem Solving for the Computer

Age, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1990.

Stice, J. E., “Learning how to think: Being earnest is important, but it’s not enough,” p. 93, in Stice, J.

E., (ed.), Developing Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities, New Directions for Teaching

and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, (1987).

Stice, J. E., “Further reflections: Useful Resources,” p. 101, in Stice, J. E., (ed.), Developing Critical

Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-

Bass, San Francisco, (1987).

Wales, C. E., Nardi, A. H., and Stager, R. A., Professional Decision-Making, Center for Guided Design,

West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 1986.

Wales, C. F. and Stager, R. A., Guided Design, Center for Guided Design, University of West Virginia,

Morgantown, WV, 1977.

Wankat, P. C., “How to overcome energy barriers in problem solving,” Chem. Eng. Educ.., 121 (Oct.

18, 1982).

Wankat, P. C., “Analysis of student mistakes, and improvement of problem solving on McCabe-Thiele

binary distillation tests,” AIChE Symp. Ser., 79, (228), 33 (1983).

Whimbey, A. and Lochhead, J., Problem Solving and Comprehension: A Short Course in Analytical

Reasoning, 3rd ed., Franklin Institute Press, Philadelphia, 1982.

Woods, D. R., “On teaching problem solving. Part II: The challenges,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 140 (Summer

CHAPTER 5: PROBLEM SOLVING AND CREATIVITY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1977).

Woods, D. R., Crowe, C. M., Hoffman, T. W., and Wright, J. D., “Major challenges to teaching problem-

solving skills,” Eng. Educ., 277 (Dec. 1979).

Woods, D. R., “Problem solving and chemical engineering,” AIChE Symp. Ser. 79 (228) 22 (1983).

Woods, D. R., “How might I teach problem solving?,” in Stice, J. E. (ed.), Developing Critical Thinking

and Problem-Solving Abilities, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 30, Jossey-Bass, San

Francisco, 55, 1987.

Woods, D. R., Crowe, C. M. Taylor, P. T., and Wood, P. E., “The MPS Program,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1984.

Woods, D. R., Wright, J. D., Hoffman, T. W., Swartman, R. K., and Doig, I. D., “Teaching problem

solving skills,” Eng. Educ., 238 (Dec. 1975).

Yokomoto, C. F., “Writing homework assignments to evoke intellectual processes,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 579, 1988.

Yokomoto, C. F. and Ware, R., “Facilitating student awareness of the complexity of expertise,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1962, 1990.

LECTURES

CHAPTER 6

The most common form of teaching in engineering classes in the United States is

undoubtedly lecturing, and for many professors lecturing is synonymous with teaching.

Lecturing can be an effective, efficient, and satisfying method for both professors and

students. Yet many lectures do not satisfy learning principles and are not conducive to student

learning. Despite common misuse of the lecture method, a perusal of Engineering Education,

of ASEE Prism, or of the ASEE annual conference program shows few articles or presentations

on lecturing.

One of the fundamental principles of engineering is to attack the critical problem which

can make the most difference. In engineering education, improving lecturing is arguably the

critical problem; and the first focus on improving engineering education at all schools should

be on improving lecturing.

We will first consider the advantages and disadvantages of lectures, and then methods for

improving content, organization, performance aspects, and interpersonal rapport in lectures.

Next, special lecture techniques and special problems for large classes will be explored.

Finally, the lecture will be looked at as one component of an entire course.

Lecturing is a two-sided coin. An aspect of lecturing which is advantageous for an excellent

lecturer can be a disadvantage for a poor lecturer. However, practically every disadvantage can

be overcome if the professor makes an effort to overcome the problems. The following

advantages and disadvantages are gleaned from our experience and from Alexander and Davis

(1977), Cashin (1985), Eble (1988), and Johnson (1988). Some of the advantages of lectures

include the following:

6.1. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF LECTURES

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Audience focus. The lecturer can be aware and responsive to a specific audience so that

each student feels that he or she is being talked to as an individual.

Versatile and flexible. There are many variants of lectures, and other teaching methods

can be included within the lecture format.

Easily updated. Unlike some other teaching methods, changing lectures is easy and

inexpensive. Material which is not otherwise available can easily be included in a lecture.

Low technology. Little can go wrong other than the lecturer becoming ill.

Acceptable and familiar. Some students like lecture because it is usually nonthreatening

and they can hide in the multitudes.

Can incorporate learning principles. Those learning principles which are not incorpo-

rated into the lecture itself can easily be included in the entire course package.

Live contact. Rapport and immediate feedback to the student are possible.

Professor-efficient. Preparation time can be kept within reasonable limits.

Time-efficient. Can be presented to a large number of students which is an efficient use

of the professor’s time.

Instructor control. Many professors prefer a teaching style which allows them to have

direct control rather than the semichaos which can occur in discussion or self-paced courses.

Anyone can lecture. All new professors have taken lecture classes, and they can copy the

procedures. The special knowledge required to lecture is low.

Potentially outstanding for motivation and for conveying information. A professor

can convey the interest and enthusiasm that he or she has in the topic. Information can be

presented and rearranged in a variety of ways to help students learn.

Lecturing can be exhilarating for the professor.

Student learning can be high. If clear objectives are given to students and good support

materials are available, research shows that student learning in a lecture course as measured

by a content examination is equal to that of other teaching methods (Taveggia and Hedley,

1972). This result refers to the knowledge, comprehension, and application levels of Bloom’s

taxonomy.

Although anyone can lecture after a fashion, becoming an outstanding lecturer is difficult.

If a professor does not know how to appropriately adjust lectures, then each of the advantages

listed previously can become disadvantages:

Audience ignored. Poor lecturers push on despite the pain and suffering which is obvious

to all but the lecturer.

Inappropriate lecture form may be used. Many professors are unfamiliar with the many

variants of lectures and try to force-fit one form onto all circumstances.

Stagnation. Although lectures are easy to change and up-date every semester, many

professors don’t bother. This is obviously a teacher problem and not the fault of the technique.

Murphy’s law. Although less technologically dependent than some other techniques,

things can go wrong during a lecture. For instance, the bulb in the overhead projector can burn

out or the microphone can malfunction—almost always at the most inopportune moment.

Passivity. Like stagnation of material, acceptability of the method may lead the professor

to ignore looking for ways to improve.

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Few learning principles may be satisfied. This is often the case in lectures with lots of

content and little professor-student interaction. The worst problem is usually the passivity of

students in lectures unless special efforts are made to keep them active.

Boredom. A “live” presentation where the professor is boring, speaks in a monotone,

makes no eye contact, pays no attention to the students, receives no student feedback, gives

no feedback to the students, and is impersonal is “dead.”

Inadequate preparation or overpreparation. Inexperienced professors often spend too

much time preparing for lectures, and experienced professors who no longer care may not

prepare. One of the problems of lecturing is that there is no mechanism which forces adequate

preparation.

False economy. The economic efficiency of large lectures is abused by many universities.

Student learning of higher-level cognitive functions would be significantly enhanced in

smaller classes with more interactions.

Lack of individualization. Since the instructor controls the pace, it will necessarily be too

fast for some students and too slow for others.

Anyone can lecture? Unfortunately, the apparent ease of lecturing hides the fact that

lecturing is one of the hardest teaching methods to truly master. In addition, what many

professors have seen and are cloning are inferior lecture classes.

When it’s bad, it’s really.... Although they can be outstanding, lectures can also be

absymally bad. In addition, although lecturing is a good teaching method for conveying

information, it is not as well suited for some higher-level cognitive tasks such as analysis,

synthesis, evaluation, and problem solving.

Extremely stressful. Lecturing can be an emotional trial for some professors. In extreme

cases these professors need to find alternate teaching methods which are less stressful for them.

Lack of supporting material. If clear objectives are not given to students and good

supporting material is not available, then student learning will be less than with an alternate

teaching method which provides these.

Probably more than any other teaching technique, lecturing is teacher-dependent. In short,

lectures represent the best and the worst of teaching.

What content should be included in the lecture and how should it be organized? The experts

(such as Davis and Alexander, 1977; Eble, 1988; Lowman, 1985; and McKeachie, 1986) are

in surprising agreement about both content and organization. The lecturer should never try to

cover everything in the lectures—a major mistake made by inexperienced professors.

Remember that students are supposed to spend two or three hours outside of class on

homework and readings for every hour in class. Leave a major responsibility to the students.

Thus, it is necessary to be selective.

6.2. CONTENT SELECTION AND ORGANIZATION

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

How does the professor decide what to select from the wealth of information and

procedures which could be presented? The following ideas can be used to guide the selection

of lecture material.

1 Cover key points and general themes. This serves to guide the students’ reading and helps

them build mental structures. These areas should be reflected in the course objectives and serve

to reinforce the importance of these objectives.

2 Lecture on items that students find to be very interesting. Since lecturing is part

performance, you might as well give yourself the advantage of choosing topics that students

find particularly interesting.

3 Pick especially difficult topics or those that are poorly explained in the textbook. Tell the

students that you will focus on these more difficult topics so that they will be able to do the

homework better.

4 Discuss important material not covered elsewhere. Particularly in graduate-level courses,

important new findings can be included in lectures long before they make it into the textbooks.

“The lecture is the newspaper or journal of teaching; it, more than any other teaching, must

be up-to-date” (McKeachie, 1986).

5 Include many examples. Students, particularly sensing students, love and need examples.

Examples should include problems with numerical solutions and a modest number of short

“war stories.”

6 Choose material at the appropriate levels of depth and simplicity. Unfortunately, this is

easier to say than to do when one has never taught the course before. Once you have taught

the course, you can reduce the lecture coverage in areas where most students do well on tests

and increase it in areas where students have difficulty.

Once the content has been chosen, you need to put some thought into the mode of

presentation. Remember that everyone can use auditory, kinesthetic, and visual modes, and

that the more modes employed, the more is retained. Unless special attention is paid to

including other modes, the vast majority of lecturing will be in the auditory mode (words

written on the blackboard are in the auditory mode). Yet most people prefer the visual mode.

In arranging the content, include pictures, drawings, graphs, slides, computer visuals, and so

forth. This may require some variation in the content and organization of the lecture.

What content areas can be left to readings and homework? Any content which experience

shows students have little trouble with can be left out of lectures. If the textbook does an

admirable job of covering particular areas, there is no reason to include this material in the

lecture. When fine detail is required to solve problems, it is appropriate to outline the general

procedure in the lecture, but leave the details to the textbook. Often, presenting a detailed

example is the best way to show students how to do these problems. Whenever material is left

out of a lecture, be sure that the students are explicitly told whether they are accountable for

it. Clearly written objectives are helpful to ensure that students learn what they are supposed

to learn.

A relatively simple organization is often best. Start with an attention-grabbing opener such

as a question, a problem, a unique statement of fact, or a paradox. Then provide the students

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

with advance organization: In other words, tell them what you are going to tell them. It is

helpful if this advance organization ties into the last lecture. The main body of the lecture

presents the content. In the main body you tell them the information. To finish the lecture,

summarize or tell them what you told them. It is helpful to briefly mention what will be covered

in the next lecture.

The bulk of the class period is spent on the main body of the lecture. One can organize the

main body in a linear, logical fashion. This type of organization is appreciated by the sensing

students in the audience and does not prevent the intuitive students from learning the material.

A nonlinear, intuitive approach can also be effective, especially for upper-division classes, but

is likely to confuse many students at lower levels. It may also be appropriate to present two

or three topics simultaneously and to contrast and compare them. For example, transport

phenomena can be presented in this form. Students need a hierarchical structure of knowledge,

but they learn material best when they do some of the organizing. The result of this is that “a

high degree of organization does not seem to contribute to student learning” (McKeachie,

1986). When students are seeing the material for the first time, use an inductive approach.

Start with specific, concrete examples that are fairly simple. Use analogies if you know that

the students understand the analogous theory. This can lead to much more rapid student

comprehension (Meador, 1991). Then lead slowly into general principles. For students who

have studied the material previously, a deductive approach can work well. Even in graduate

level classes an inductive approach is appropriate if the material is new

The main body should be organized in parts which are clearly delineated. For example, in

a lecture using an inductive approach, the first part could introduce the topic with a simple

example, the second part could consider a more complex example, and the third part could

discuss the general principles. Each part should be ten to fifteen minutes long, and certainly

no longer than twenty minutes. Between parts do something else such as ask questions or have

a discussion to give the students a short break and make them active. This is necessary because

most students have a twenty- to thirty-minute attention span.

In planning the lecture think about the way students learn. If the scientific learning cycle

(see Section 15.1) can be incorporated in some of your lectures, many students will benefit.

If you consider that your lecture is part of Kolb’s learning cycle (see Section 15.3), then the

appropriate activities for periods when you aren’t talking and appropriate homework activities

will be clear.

All lectures are performances. Poor performances lead to poor lectures regardless of the

content. Master performances can lead to outstanding lectures if the content and interpersonal

rapport are also masterful. The good news is that professors who are content with being

“competent” do not have to “perform.” Professors who want to become master teachers do

need to develop skills in the performance aspects of lecturing, which are discussed by Cashin

(1985), Davis and Alexander (1977), Eble (1988), Engin and Engin (1977), Lowman (1985),

6.3. PERFORMANCE

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

and McKeachie (1986), among others. Since,

Preparation + presentation = performance

we will discuss the preparation and presentation of lectures.

Actors and actresses start with a script and rehearse. Since a lecture is a play starring one

actor or actress, professors also need to prepare for the performance aspects in addition to

preparing the content. The main part of the script is the professor’s lecture notes. These notes

outline the content in a form that the professor finds useful for live presentation. The lecture

notes of good lecturers vary from three or four lines on a single index card to a completely

written-out speech of several pages. Experiment with different forms of lecture notes to find

what works for you. Lecture notes should include specific examples, visuals, and questions

to ask students.

One of the paradoxes of lecturing is that the teacher needs to be thoroughly prepared yet

appear spontaneous. Underpreparation can lead to fumbling which is obvious to the students.

Overpreparation can result in a rigidity that forces the professor to try to cover all topics in a

prearranged order despite numerous signs from the audience that the lecture is not going well.

Lectures need built-in flexibility so that the performer can adjust to the audience.

Just as playwrights put stage directions in their plays, professors need to include stage

directions in their lecture notes. These include announcements and reminders to pass out

handouts or to collect homework. Stage directions can also indicate pauses, where to ask

questions, and breaks in the lecture for student activities. Alternative paths to provide

flexibility can be included in the stage directions. Finally, stage directions can remind the

professor to make any last-minute announcements (e.g., “Remember that the project progress

report is due next period”) at the end of the period. Stage directions are one way that the

professor can help to ensure that the lecture is successful.

There is seldom enough time in a professor’s schedule for a complete dress rehearsal for

every lecture; however, there is time to do some rehearsing ahead of time. Obviously,

reviewing and updating lecture notes shortly before the lecture are part of the rehearsal. So is

a five-to ten-minute mental preparation immediately before the lecture. If the class is in

another building, this preparation can be done while walking over. Review the major points

and “psych” yourself up for the lecture. One sign of a professional is the ability to be

enthusiastic and interesting for the lecture hour even when the topic is not a particularly

interesting one.

Arrange to arrive early at the stage door (the classroom). This allows time to check out the

stage. Rearrange seats, clean the blackboard, check the bulb in the overhead projector, and get

ready for the class. If the room is too small, too hot, or too cold, complain to the proper

authorities. Eventually something may be done to improve classroom conditions. Teaching is

often a low-budget production, and the professor must also be the stagehand.

In show business there are always warm-up acts before the main act. Professors can help

warm up the audience also. One useful procedure is to write a brief outline of the class in one

6.3.1. Preparation for the Performance

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

6.3.2. Presentation Skills for Lectures

corner of the blackboard. This will help students start to think about the class and become

mentally prepared to focus on the material. The outline helps satisfy the learning principle of

guiding the learner (see Section 1.4). Surprisingly, a handwritten outline is more effective than

a typed outline distributed to the class, perhaps because students are more active in processing

the information (McKeachie, 1986). A second useful activity is to talk to students. Many

students will talk to the professor before or after class but would never dream of coming in for

office hours. The professor can be proactive and seek out students instead of waiting for them

to come to him or her. Just being in class early sends the message that you are interested in and

excited about the class. This interest and excitement can be contagious.

When a play starts, the house lights dim, the curtain opens, and the audience leans forward

attentively. A formal start to a class can focus the students’ attention. Professors who use an

overhead projector can dim the room lights and turn on the machine. This might be a useful

start even if the overhead is used only to start the class with one transparency. Another

possibility is to step out of the room to get a drink of water and then make a grand entrance

to start the lecture. Some professors start writing on the board a minute or so before the class

starts and then signal the class it is time to start by putting the chalk down and turning toward

the class. One professor we know takes off his suit coat when it is time to start (and puts it back

on to signal when the class is over).

This attention to small items such as how the class starts may seem like nitpicking,

but it is this attention to detail that can make the difference between a great and an average

performance. Also, not all the changes need to be made simultaneously. Institute a few changes

every semester and slowly become more comfortable with performing in class.

Many plays start with an attention-grabbing ploy, such as a murder or dead body.

Although killing one’s students is not considered good form, professors need to capture

attention quickly. Some methods that other professors use include:

1 Start with an appropriate comic strip on the overhead projector.

2 Start by saying, “I want to talk about next period’s test.”

3 Start with an appropriate newspaper headline such as, “Engineer gives million to

university to improve undergraduate teaching.”

4 Show a photograph of a disaster appropriate to the class. Examples include the collapse

of a bridge, a fire at a chemical plant, and a plane crash caused by the failure of a part.

If you occasionally change the type of grabber, the students will wonder what you will do

next and this increases their attention.

Once you have the students’ attention, you need to retain it while the lecture proceeds.

Variety is the key. Change the tone, pace, volume, pitch, inflection, and expressiveness of your

voice. A flat, unvarying monotone puts students to sleep, and sleeping students cannot be

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

learning. Variety is also needed in gestures and in the format of the lecture. Even some variety

in where you stand and how you interact with the students can be helpful.

A professor’s voice is indispensable in lecturing. Professors who want to improve their

speaking skills need to analyze their voices and then work on any problem areas (Lowman,

1985). Listen to excellent speakers such as television newscasters and try to develop a feel for

expressiveness, diction, and pace. Then, take the terrifying step of recording and analyzing

your speech. Since we hear our own speech in a very different way than we hear the speech

of others, no one likes to hear a tape recording of their voice. Listen for particular problem areas

such as repeated verbalizations, such as “uh” and “OK”, or a strident tone. Repeated words can

be reduced once we become aware of the problem. Strident tones can be eliminated by focusing

on breathing deeper. Improper articulation is a common problem which makes it difficult for

students from different sections of the country to understand a speaker. This problem may be

so much a part of the professor’s speech pattern that he or she does not notice it even when

listening to a tape. Thus it is useful to have someone point out these problems to you in a

friendly way. Articulation can be improved by practicing reading aloud (find a small child to

practice on).

Another common problem of college professors is failure to project their voices. A good

rule of thumb to remember is that you should be speaking to the row behind the last one in the

room. But projection is more than merely speaking louder—a practice which usually just

wears out the voice. True projection begins with proper diaphragmatic breathing which gives

a base for the sound, and then follows with full articulation of the sounds: crisp consonants

and full and liquid vowels. Like walking, speaking is too often taken for granted; but

improvement in speech, just as in posture, step, and stride, can do wonders for one’s personal

as well as professional health. Self-help is valuable, but guaranteed improvement is best

sought from a professional. If you are serious about improving your speaking voice, consult

a professional voice coach (any university with a speech, audiology, or theater department has

such an individual).

Beyond speaking the words, the manner in which the lecture is presented is also important.

Should you read it verbatim? Use three-by-five cards? Rely on your memory? It is very

difficult for people who are untrained to read a lecture effectively. And a lecture can be

significantly improved if it is presented spontaneously. As a professor, you have enough

command of your material so that notes or topical outlines will suffice to keep you on track.

Perhaps the only thing worse than reading a lecture to students is to read the textbook to them.

This is guaranteed to earn the professor poor student ratings.

Variety in mannerisms is just as important as variety in speech. Your gestures are also an

important aspect of how you communicate, but they must appear natural and not be either

wooden or flailing. Most importantly, they must be purposeful, such as those that indicate size,

shape, emphasis, and so on; nervous jabs that are out of synch with the message are

nonpurposeful and distract the audience. One very effective but underused gesture is to walk

into the audience. This gets the students’ attention, allows you to make contact with those in

the back of a large lecture hall, and provides variety to your lecture. Since the lecture is a

performance, you can preplan effective gestures like this. Also practice walking toward the

back of the classroom during a class when the lecture is dragging and something needs to be

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

done to liven it up. Once you have tried an activity a few times, you will have added something

new to your repertoire.

Even the barest stage has props. Professors have a table, podium, blackboard, and overhead

projector, plus whatever props they bring with them to the lecture. Props can also be used

purely for dramatic appeal. Some professors bring in a glass of water and then drink the water

while taking a break between two important topics. Props can also be objects brought in for

educational purposes. A valve, a circuit board, a new alloy, packing for a distillation column,

or different types of crushed rock can all be an informative part of the lecture. Classroom

demonstrations during lecture can provide a concrete learning experience and the chance for

discovery. The availability of new projection equipment has made it easier for all students to

observe demonstrations, and more sophisticated equipment increases student interest (Dareing

and Smith, 1991). Demonstrations do require setup time and a practice run before class. These

props have a greater impact beyond their educational value alone: They also provide variety

and a chance for both visual and kinesthetic learning.

The most important props in most classrooms are the blackboard and the overhead

projector. Though commonplace and easily taken for granted, both need to be used effectively.

Both tools can be used most effectively (1) as an external memory aid, (2) for emphasis, and

(3) for visuals. When the outline is written in one corner of the board or on a transparency, it

can be referred to during the lecture to show the students where they have been and where they

are going. Thus the blackboard or overhead retains the information and serves as memory. The

blackboard can also retain an item that you later want to compare and contrast with another

item. Whatever is written on the blackboard or overhead is emphasized, and most students will

attempt to copy the material. However, while doing this they may miss what you are saying,

so putting too much on the blackboard or overhead is counterproductive. If you have some

artistic skill, then the blackboard can serve for visual presentations. But even without such

skill, you can show graphs and simple schematic diagrams on the blackboard. For more

complex figures, transparencies can be made in advance, and students can be given copies of

the figures.

Neither the blackboard nor the overhead projector is the best way to present large quantities

of detailed information. Students may spend all their time trying to copy the material. In

addition to not listening to the lecture, they invariably make mistakes in copying equations or

complex diagrams. The situation is often aggravated when predrawn transparencies are shown

in rapid succession. If the content requires that you cover a large number of equations or

complex diagrams, hand out partially prepared lecture notes that contain the equations and

diagrams and have space for student lecture notes. This greatly reduces students’ errors in

transmission of information and allows you to lecture somewhat faster. An alternate solution

is to change the content selected for presentation. If the goal is to produce engineers who can

do abstract mathematical proofs, then the lectures, homework, and tests are rightly focused on

this activity. If the goal of the course is to have students become good problem solvers, then

it makes more sense to spend time solving problems during the lecture.

The biggest difficulty in using a blackboard is the loss of eye contact while writing on the

board. This is less of a problem with overhead projectors, but the lecturer must occasionally

glance at the screen to check the message the students are seeing. Blocking the view of the

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

students may also be a problem with both the blackboard and the overhead projector. In

addition, most professors lecture too fast when using overheads. One advantage of the

blackboard is that material can be left on some portion of the board so that students can go back

and copy something they have missed. Overhead projectors can also retain information if the

the classroom is equipped with two projectors and two screens. Once one transparency is

finished, it should be transferred to the back-up projector. We suggest that new professors try

both overhead projectors and blackboards. First, obtain student feedback on what can be done

to improve both procedures. Then, select one method to focus on and become an expert with

this technique.

Eble (1988) states that the skillful lecturers he observed, “were above all keenly aware of

and responsive to their audiences.” Remember that a lecture is a live performance. Watch and

read the audience. Are they generally engaged with the material or is their attention

wandering? If they are showing signs of boredom, what can you do to shift gears? If someone

is clearly confused, try asking if you can help (see Section 6.4.2). The audience provides

feedback by both their verbal and nonverbal behavior. On rare occasions the message you have

from the students is that everyone is focused on you and you have the class in the palm of your

hand. Enjoy the moment and try to remember what you did or what the magic content was so

that you can do it again.

When something starts to go wrong, the trick is to observe and respond to the problem

quickly. After many failures, we finally realized that continuing the lecture and perhaps talking

louder does not work. Perhaps you have overstayed the twenty- to thirty-minute attention span

of the students and it is time to go to a group activity or have a question-and-answer session.

Clearly shift gears and do something which forces the students to engage the material actively.

Consider doing one of the following:

• Ask for student questions.

• Switch to a socratic approach and ask the students questions.

• Ask the students to summarize the most important point in the lecture on a piece of paper.

• Give a short quiz (see Section 6.6.1).

• Do a group activity (see Chapter 7).

After about five minutes of this activity you will be able to switch back to lecturing with

a renewed student attention span.

Responding properly to signs of audience problems and preventing such problems before

they occur require timing. Timing is an art, but it can be learned. If you are good at telling jokes,

then you have a sense of timing which can be used in your lecturing. Essentially, having good

timing means knowing the appropriate time to do something. In a lecture it is sometimes

appropriate to stop when a student has a question, and it is sometimes appropriate to ask the

student to wait until you can come back to that student later. Sometimes the lecturer needs to

speed up, sometimes to slow down, and sometimes to pause. When a student becomes a bit

aggressive and hostile, sometimes it is appropriate to hash out the problem in class, and other

times it is better to do it privately. All of these instances are examples of timing. Good lecturers

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

and good actors develop a sense of timing with experience. It helps to pay attention to what

works and record what doesn’t work so that next time the timing can be improved.

Humor can also be part of the professor’s repertoire in working with the audience. Cultivate

your own sense of style. If you can successfully tell “canned jokes,” then use them to start the

class or break the routine. If you can’t tell a joke, don’t. Many professors successfully use

comic strips on transparencies to start a class; however, the strip should be appropriate and in

good taste. Some professors’ style of humor is spur of the moment and based on things that

happen in the class. Again, if you can do this successfully, it can help keep the attention of

the class. If you can’t, don’t. Finally, avoid overkill.

A final note about performance: Some people have a flair for being dramatic. A little drama

can help keep the class interested. There is an inherent drama and majesty in the ability of

theory to predict and occasionally to totally miss the behavior of the real world. Build up to

the conclusion and at times slip in an unexpected conclusion. A bit of challenge in the class

can be fun for the students, particularly if it is nonthreatening. Ask dramatic questions or make

dramatic statements. For example,

• What did X do that made him one of the most revered engineers of his era?

• Was the suicide of Professor Y justified?

• There is one pearl of wisdom in this class which will make you rich and famous if you

follow it. Your challenge is to find this pearl.

• In today’s class we will discuss the most misunderstood phenomena in electricity and

magnetism.

A sense of timing is needed to let the drama build. Do not answer your question or explain

the statement immediately. Let the students search and try to puzzle out the answer. Student

learning will be much deeper if they can determine the answer for themselves, even if they beat

your telling them by only a minute.

Answering and asking questions is an art in itself. Questions offer an opportunity to work

on the content and develop rapport. Students asking or answering questions are active and thus

are satisfying one of the learning principles discussed in Section 1.4. Questions also serve as

a break in the lecture and allow some students a chance to catch up in their note taking. Finally,

the instructor’s availability to answer questions is one of the factors that students implicitly

include in their overall ratings of instructors (see Section 16.3.2).

6.4. QUESTIONS

100

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

We strongly encourage students to ask questions in class. If many students are confused,

the professor can clarify the issues for them simultaneously. Thus, during the first class period

we make it clear that we want students to interrupt the lecture with questions. Some professors

prefer to control student questions and have students ask only at specified times. Pause fairly

frequently during the lecture and ask if there are any questions. Then, give the students time

to pose an intelligent question. The appropriate length of the pause requires a sense of timing.

When a student asks a question, accept it positively and then rephrase it so that the student

can be sure that you understand the question and so that the rest of the class can hear it.

Examples of positive reinforcement for asking questions include:

• Good question.

• That’s very insightful of you, Karen.

• Bob, you’re following me exactly because that’s my next topic.

• Good, I was waiting for someone to ask about that.

Restating the student question can be a challenge. When students are extremely confused,

they have difficulty even phrasing an intelligent question. Asking a question under these

circumstances is an act of bravery (which is one reason the student should receive a positive

response). Make your best guess as to what the question is, even to the point of asking the

student if that form is reasonably close to what he or she wants to know.

Various responses to the question are now possible. Since students usually prefer either a

brief direct answer or an involved direct answer, it’s best to give direct answers most of the

time. If the question opens up a new topic which will be covered in a few minutes, ask the

student to wait, and if not satisfied in a few minutes to ask again. When we use this technique

we try to remember to ask the student later if the question has now been answered. The student

can be referred to the book; however, this works best if the answer can be found in the book

during the lecture and the question is answered immediately. Otherwise, “Look it up in the

book,” comes across as a very negative reaction to a student’s question. The question can be

posed to the class to determine an answer. This works well in classes where discussion is

commonplace. If the question is quite involved or the student clearly does not understand your

answer, ask him or her to see you after class. This is often appropriate when the student wants

to see the complete solution to a problem and time is not available to do this. Another response

is to ask another question to try to lead the student to the correct response to the original

question. Unfortunately, this approach tends to inhibit student questioning since it puts the

student on the spot. Finally, if you do not know the answer, the safest response is, “I don’t

know, but I’ll find out.” This instructor honesty helps to increase rapport with the students.

6.4.1. Answering Student Questions

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

101

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Asking questions is a rather different skill than answering questions. There are several advantages

to asking questions during class (Hyman, 1982). Questions can provide as a break in the lecture which

helps to keep the students active. Questions also provide feedback to the professor and students about

what material is being understood. Questions provide the professor with an alternate way to emphasize

particular points, clarify difficult concepts, and review material. Rhetorical questions are often useful

for this purpose or for highlighting key questions. Questions can be used as examples of possible test

or homework questions. They can also be used to start a discussion or to encourage student questions

(“If you don’t have questions for me, then I’ll have some for you”). Questions can be used to help

maintain discipline or keep students awake. Some professors structure their entire teaching style

around questions and use a socratic style instead of lecturing.

If you often ask rhetorical questions, then some sort of signal is needed that the question is for the

students. For instance, “Now I have a few questions for you.” Even if you never use rhetorical

questions, it’s useful to let the class know that you are going to shift gears away from lecturing. “Let’s

take a break from the lecture and try some questions.”

Students and new professors often believe that the questions asked by the professor must be

spontaneous. A few are, but most are preplanned. Posing a good, clear question which requires some

thought to answer but is not beyond the ability of the students requires some time and effort to prepare.

Prepare ahead of time and write these questions in your lecture notes. If a good question arises

spontaneously, try it and record it in your notes after class.

What are the elements of a good question? It should be relatively short, clear, and unambiguous.

Only one question should be included; that is, do not run a string of questions together. If you want

to ask a string of related questions, then ask one at a time and get a response before proceeding.

Otherwise, you are likely to confuse the students (Hyman, 1982). The question can be at any level of

Bloom’s taxonomy, and if you want students to become proficient at all levels, then you must ask

questions at all levels. In some cases you may want to write an equation or draw a figure on the

blackboard or on a transparency to frame the question.

In engineering it is appropriate to ask questions which require a modest amount of algebraic

manipulation or numerical calculation. Tell the class to take out a piece of paper and a calculator. Then

write key elements of the question on the blackboard or use a preprepared overhead transparency.

Students can work individually or in groups. Questions can range from very simple single-answer

questions, such as unit conversions, to unusual situations where basic principles can be used to obtain

an answer to open-ended questions. Wales et al. (1988) give some examples.

Usually, it is best to ask the question of the class as a group and then pause. When a question is asked

of the class as a group, no one knows who will answer it and most students will try to develop an answer.

If you are using the question to help keep a student awake or to control a disruptive student, then you

might want to preface it with the student’s name. Even students who are close to falling asleep will

respond to hearing their name. After asking the question, pause. The pause is critical and for most

teachers is much too short. It takes time for students to formulate an answer.

6.4.2. Asking Students Questions

102

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

There are a variety of ways to field students’ responses to questions (Hyman, 1982). If the

student’s answer is correct, offer praise: “Excellent,” or “You’re absolutely right.” This gives

the student strong positive feedback and tells the rest of the class that the answer is correct. If

several students are straining to answer, you can call on several without responding to each

individual answer. Then respond in general to all of the responses. You can also build on a

student’s response. “You’re correct about the fluid flow. But let’s consider the mass transfer

in more detail....” The continued detail can consist of explanation by the professor or

additional questions.

What if the answer is wrong or partly wrong? For many professors the immediate reaction

is a “Yes, but....” type of response. Unfortunately, this sends a negative message to the student.

It is better to be more straightforward about those aspects which are wrong. Some possibilities

include:

• You’re right about aspect X but wrong about Y. Let’s explore Y in more detail.

• I think that you have misinterpreted my question. Let’s try it again. (Use this type of

response only when you really believe the student has misinterpreted the question.)

• No, I don’t think that you have the right idea on this.

• Explain how you developed that answer.

• How many students think this is correct? How many think this is incorrect? Why is it

correct or incorrect? (These responses should be used occasionally for both correct and

incorrect answers.)

Should you call on students who volunteer to answer, or should you call on all students at

some time during the class? There are advantages and disadvantages to both options.

Volunteers are likely to be more articulate and are more likely to have an answer. In addition,

calling only on volunteers makes the class safer for the students, since they know they won’t

be called on when they don’t volunteer. If you call on volunteers, spread out which of the

volunteers is called on. Call on a student who seldom volunteers, when he or she finally does

volunteer, to help him or her participate in the class. The disadvantages of calling only on

volunteers are that some students will never participate in the class and that students who

decide not to volunteer may not try to solve the problem independently.

Calling on students at random or with some prearranged rotation schedule keeps all the

students “at risk.” The professor can force more students to participate, but the anxiety level

in the class is likely to increase. In addition, the percentage of wrong answers or “I don’t know”

answers will increase. If class participation and the ability to answer questions and present

arguments in public are important in your class, then some type of strongly encouraged

participation is needed. One modification used in law schools is to allow students to put a slip

of paper with their name on it on the desk if they are not prepared to discuss that day’s class.

Some professors use a modified socratic approach in their lecturing. Short periods of

explanation of the material are interrupted by question periods. The professor calls on

particular students and makes sure that everyone is called on at least every other period or so.

This is most effective in medium or small classes (less than about fifty students). The professor

can develop better rapport with the students if each student is called by name. In addition,

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

103

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

professors who become adept at reading students’ nonverbal clues can choose to call on

students either when they are ready or when they are not ready to respond. This procedure does

help most of the students improve their ability to think and respond under pressure, which is

a useful ability for an engineer. Depending on the professor’s attitude and style, this approach

can be either moderately or very threatening to students.

There are gender differences in asking and answering questions (Tannen, 1990). Gener-

ally, men are more comfortable speaking in public, while women are more comfortable

speaking in private. Thus, the men in the class are more likely to ask and answer questions

regardless of how well they know the material. They are also more likely to be willing to

challenge the professor. Professors are then faced with a value question. Should they let

people keep the roles they have been socialized into or should they try to change them (the men,

the women, or both)?

Interpersonal rapport is the second dimension in the model of good teaching shown in Table

1-1. Although large lecture classes are not the ideal vehicle for building rapport, a professor

can do many things to increase rapport with his or her students.

We have already discussed the importance of coming to the lecture hall early. The few

minutes before class provide an excellent opportunity to make contact with students even if

you and the students have to wait in the hall while the previous class finishes. Greet students

by name. For example, “Hi Susan, how are you doing today?” or “John, did you get that

problem we were talking about yesterday?” Early in the semester when you don’t yet know

every student’s name, it is not impolite to walk up to a student and ask what her or his name

is. Many students will come up before or after class and ask if they can ask a question.

Responding in a friendly way using the student’s name sends the message that you are friendly

and you know who they are—”Yes Bob, what’s the problem?” (Note: In our examples we use

first names. Some professors are more comfortable and think it is more professional to be more

formal and use the student’s last name.)

Once the lecture starts there are a variety of ways to make contact with students. The most

obvious and direct way is by eye contact. In some cultures it is considered impolite to look a

person in the eyes when speaking, but in ours the opposite is true. Establishing eye contact with

students not only lets them know that you’re aware of their presence but also makes them feel

that you are speaking to them and not just at them, whether in lecturing or asking and answering

questions.

6.5.1. Student Contact Before, During, and After Lecture

6.5. BUILDING INTERPERSONAL RAPPORT IN LECTURES

104

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

If a student has come up with a thoughtful question or a clever solution to a problem, share

it with the class by naming the student: “Jennifer Watkins has come up with a very interesting

paradox that I thought everyone would be interested in.” This shows the student that you really

did pay attention and thought that her idea was important. If student presentations are part of

your class, you could also ask the student to present her paradox and the resolution to the class.

Recognizing student feelings during the lecture can help increase your rapport with

students. For example,

“I know several of you are angry about the test. You felt that you could have done much

better if you’d had more time. I agree that the test was a bit long. I’m working on getting more

time for the next test.

“This point must be confusing. Can all of you who are NOT confused please raise your

hand. Yes, I was right, many people are confused.” (Note that a large percentage of students

will not raise their hands regardless of the question. Thus, the professor can make most of the

class look like they are on one side of the question or the other by changing the phrasing of

the question.)

Part of the trick of developing personal rapport in class is presenting a part of yourself in

the lecture. We mean doing this in a professional way, not talking about personal problems.

Although it does not hurt for students to see you as a real person with a family and with real

problems, this realization should come from activities outside the classroom. In class, share

with the students your excitement and enthusiasm for the subject, “This is really great stuff.”

If you had difficulty learning a topic when you studied it for the first time, share this with the

students also. If you will miss a class because of a professional society meeting, share with the

class the importance of the meeting and what you expect to learn there.

Another prime time to talk to students is after the class is over. Stick around for a few

minutes and answer students’ questions in the classroom or in the hall. If a cluster of students

is waiting to talk to you, turn first to the student who rarely says anything in class. This is the

student who needs the most encouragement. If there are too many students waiting to talk to

you after class, consider shortening the lecture by five minutes to allow more time for informal

questions.

There are a number of ways that students can be become involved in a lecture class. One

method is to have a group of volunteers who meet regularly with the professor to provide

feedback (McKeachie, 1986). This is useful in very large lecture classes. The student

volunteers can be told to talk regularly to other students and obtain feedback. Then when the

feedback is presented to the professor, the volunteers quickly learn that they can be very blunt

since they are merely reporting what someone else told them. If the professor is willing to make

6.5.2. Other Methods of Increasing Rapport With Students

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

105

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

some adjustments, this procedure can help class rapport since the students can see that their

feedback makes a difference and that the professor cares. Obviously, the professor has the

opportunity to get to know the volunteers well. The entire class can also be asked to do a

formative evaluation early in the semester, and the professor can respond to these comments

(see Section 16.1.).

The professor can increase rapport by being sensitive to nuances in relationships with

students. Clearly, the professor has more power in this relationship, but by using egalitarian

language in making assignments, he or she can promote student independence (Lowman,

1985). For instance, instead of ordering students to do a homework assignment, the professor

might say, “Those of you who do problems 6, 7, and 9 will find that they will help you in

Friday’s quiz.” Sharing the course objectives with the students can also make assignments

seem rational. Thus, the professor might explain the reason for an assignment, “This reading

will help us reach our goal of being able to....”

When possible give the students some choice. Projects can be very effective, particularly

for upper-division students, because they give students a choice as to what they do (see Section

11.4). In elective classes students can also be given a choice, within limits, of what material

to cover (Wankat, 1981). If the examination date is not carved in stone, students can be allowed

to vote on the date. These options give them some control over their studies and increase the

likelihood that the professor can become a partner in learning.

Other special procedures can be used to help build rapport, particularly in large lecture

classes. These are discussed in Section 6.6. A variety of one-to-one contacts outside the

classroom will help build rapport (see Chapter 10). Other aspects of the entire course can fit

together so that rapport with students is enhanced (see Section 6.8).

One reason why professors continue to lecture hundreds of years after the invention of the

printing press is the flexibility of the lecture format. Lectures can be modified to include almost

all the learning principles. In this section we will briefly discuss three of the many possible

modifications.

Students need to pay attention, and they need feedback on what they have learned. Both of

these principles can be included in a lecture format by regularly giving a short postlecture quiz.

One way to do this is to give a quiz on technical content during the last ten minutes of class

(Peck, 1979). Since the quiz covers material that has just been presented in the lecture, open

book and open notes are preferable. Usually the quiz will consist of one short-answer problem

which can be solved in a few minutes. The extra time is necessary since students who have just

learned the material will be inefficient problem solvers. Of course these quizzes do not replace

the need for longer problems in homework assignments and for a few longer tests.

6.6. SPECIAL LECTURE METHODS

6.6.1. Postlecture Quiz

106

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

In large classes daily quiz grading can become a significant burden. This burden can be

reduced because less homework will need to be graded since the quiz provides the practice that

one homework problem would. As a result, one less homework problem can be assigned each

day. Also, if the professor is satisfied with awarding no partial credit, a multiple-choice

problem can be used. This greatly decreases the grading chore. When there are numerical

answers, a method for developing multiple-choice tests which eliminates many of the

drawbacks of multiple-choice tests is presented in Section 11.1.3. To start the next period the

professor can spend a minute or two going over the solution to the quiz problem and use this

as a springboard for discussion. The next lecture will then build on this base.

This type of approach has several advantages. Since the students know that they will be

tested at the end of the period, they will pay attention to the lecture and may even read the

textbook in advance. They will also ask questions during the lecture because they know they

cannot wait until they get home to puzzle out a confusing point. The students also practice

every class period, which requires them to be active, and then they receive feedback either

immediately or in the next class period. The professor also obtains feedback immediately and

knows if the students are learning the basic material. The very frequent quizzing reduces the

importance of each quiz and thus reduces test anxiety. Although the professor loses about ten

minutes each class period for presentation of new material, some of this is gained back since

less frequent hour examinations need to be given. The large number of quiz scores makes

grading at the end of the semester easier, and every student knows where he or she stands in

the class.

Obviously, this procedure can be varied significantly while retaining the advantages. Some

of the quizzes can be assigned as group efforts, or quizzes can be given every other period

instead of every period. A short derivation or essay problem can be given instead of a

numerical problem. And occasionally the quiz problem can be a review problem instead of a

new problem. If the students do very poorly on one quiz, the quiz can be repeated. An

alternative procedure called the “one-minute quiz” has been widely adopted in nontechnical

areas. In a one-minute quiz students are asked to write one sentence answering one question

or some variation of it: “What was the most important concept covered in lecture today?” This

can be open book and open notes and, if desired, open neighbor. A one-minute quiz actually

takes a few minutes. It has many of the advantages of a problem-solving quiz and can be used

as a replacement on days when you do not have time to prepare a quiz.

Guest lecturers can broaden the viewpoint of any course. If the world expert on a topic has

an office next door to you, perhaps you could invite him or her to present one lecture. Engineers

from industry can give an industrial flavor to presentations that most professors cannot

duplicate. Such lectures from an industrial perspective can be valuable in any engineering

class and not just in design courses. Many universities also have “old master” or “outstanding

6.6.2. Guest Lecturers

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

107

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

alumni” programs which invite interesting people back to the campus. These individuals are

delighted to talk to students, and students usually appreciate the break in the routine provided

by guest lecturers.

Ideally, a guest lecturer will integrate his or her presentation neatly into the course (Borns,

1989). For example, an engineer from industry could come in and talk about the design of heat

exchangers at the point where the students are ready to cover this material and will benefit from

the engineer’s expertise. If the guest’s lecture is to be integrated into the course this tightly,

the professor needs to be sure that it is clear what the students can do and what is to be covered.

Give the lecturer copies of the syllabus and reading assignments so that he or she can develop

a lecture at the appropriate level. If any special props, such as a microcomputer, will be needed,

be sure that everything is available and in working order.

Several years ago one of the students in class was the host to an old master. The student

asked if the old master (the CEO of a major chemical company) could talk to the class for one

period. Although this talk would not be integrated into the class lectures and course topics, we

agreed. It turned out to be a rewarding experience. The students were interested and asked

many intelligent questions. The old master enjoyed making his presentation and made several

interesting points about an engineer’s life in industry and about the importance of courses in

school. Although one period of content was “lost,” the students gained more than they lost.

Now we take advantage of special opportunities like this once a semester, even if the guest

lecturer does not talk about the course content.

Guest lecturers can be wonderful or horrible, and they need to be selected carefully. Find

someone who has the special expertise that you want; then check around to find out how good

a speaker the person is. Once you have found someone who does a good job, invite them back.

In general, the professor should be present when a guest lecturer speaks. This sends a

message to the students that the material is important; furthermore, the professor may learn

something. An exception occurs when the professor finds someone to substitute while he or

she is away on a trip. Substitute lecturers usually cover the normal course material. Be sure

to tell the substitute exactly where you stopped the period before, and afterward find out how

much he or she covered. Delineate for the substitute exactly what material should be covered.

The best substitute to use is a professor who teaches the same course in different semesters.

If you arrange to trade substitutions, the workload tends to even out, and no one feels taken

advantage of. Often the class TA is asked to present a lecture while the professor is out of town.

This can be a good experience for the TA, but not necessarily for the class. Be sure to sit down

with the TA ahead of time and go over the content you want covered in detail. If the TA

regularly attends the lecture, he or she will not be rusty. After you return, discuss the TA’s

lecture with the TA so that the lecture can be a learning experience for that person. Another

practice, once common, was to load all of the substitution work on the assistant professors in

the department regardless of their teaching areas. Since this was obviously somewhat unfair,

one hopes this practice is gone forever. Regardless of who does the guest lecturing, be sure

to thank them in writing for their efforts. If the students comment on how much they enjoyed

the lecture, be sure to mention that in your letter.

108

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The feedback lecture is a technique developed by Osterman at Oregon State University

(Osterman et al., 1985). In this approach students first receive a study guide that outlines how

they should prepare for each lecture. Then during the lecture they receive a lecture outline as

a further guide. The professor lectures for roughly twenty minutes. Small student groups then

discuss an important question and turn in a response sheet. The professor briefly discusses the

discussion question and then lectures for the last twenty minutes of the period. Homework

assignments provide further practice.

This procedure formalizes the use of many learning principles. Students receive clear

objectives in the study guide, and their learning is carefully guided by the study guide. The

lecture outlines help them organize the material. The group activity in the middle of the lecture

requires that students be active and makes the class more cooperative. Feedback occurs from

other students in the group discussions and from the professor both during the group activity

and after the response sheets are turned in. Some teaching of students by other students often

occurs during the group discussions. The discussion questions are chosen to be particularly

thought-provoking to pique the students’ interest.

Such a formalized procedure obviously requires a fair amount of advance preparation, so

it’s unlikely the professor will arrive in class unprepared for the lecture. This method also

motivates students to prepare for each class since they know that they will have to do

something in each class. Students are thus less likely to procrastinate. Obviously, components

of the feedback lecture and the postlecture quiz can be combined in a variety of ways.

Very large classes (more than 100 to 150 students) have some special characteristics which

make them different from small classes. The challenge for the professor is to make student

learning as close to equal to that in a small class as possible. Our discussion of handling large

classes leans heavily on the papers by Hickman (1987), Kabel (1983), and Middleton (1987),

and on Johnson’s (1988) book.

Large classes require more preparation, more structure, more formalized procedures and

more rules than small classes. In many ways good teaching is good teaching regardless of class

size, but unfortunately, large classes magnify any problem. Consider preparation. If several

hundred copies of a handout are to be distributed, the professor cannot wait until half an hour

before class to have the copies made. So more preplanning is required. Arrangements must

also be made to distribute the several hundred copies efficiently; thus, the professor must

assign the TAs and the secretary the responsibility of being in class to help with these duties.

The professor’s lecture preparation must also be thorough. In small classes professors quickly

develop rapport with the students, and the professor can come in less than fully prepared on

occasion. In large classes inadequate preparation is all too obvious and students are much less

forgiving.

6.6.3. The Feedback Lecture

6.7. HANDLING LARGE CLASSES

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

109

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Large classes need to be more structured. The syllabus needs to be detailed and available

on the first day of class. Examination dates must be listed. In effect, these dates become a

contract with the students and it becomes quite difficult to change them without causing some

students major problems. The textbook must be ordered early and needs to be more carefully

selected since many students will rely heavily on it. Course supplements may be necessary

and have to be prepared well in advance. The grading scheme needs to be formalized and set

forth at the beginning of the semester. Since there will be students that the professor does not

know well, grading becomes more impersonal. Rules for missed examinations and late

assignments need to be stated and followed. There are likely to be more problems with

uninterested students talking, reading a newspaper, or sleeping. Formal rules are required so

that the students know what is acceptable behavior. An attendance policy needs to be set. Since

there is a good correlation between attendance and grades, attendance should be encouraged.

Even if attendance is not required, it is still useful to keep track of who attends since poor

attendance often explains poor grades, and poor attendance always reduces the professor’s

tendency to be lenient in grading. The best solution is to assign seats and have a TA take

attendance.

Unfortunately, increases in class size often do not mean an equivalent increase in the

number of TAs. When this problem occurs, there must be a decrease in the number of items

graded. It is possible to grade only a subset of the homework assignments and to use multiple-

choice problems for parts of tests. It may also be possible to get undergraduate graders to do

part of the grading (Kabel, 1983). Just keeping track of grades becomes a burden with large

classes. Use an electronic spreadsheet and periodically post the current scores for every

student by student number. Make it the students’ responsibility to check for clerical errors.

Cheating is more of a problem in large, impersonal classes (see Chapter 12). Thus, more

care is needed in administering the examinations (see Section 11.1.4). It may be necessary to

have two copies of the test if the class is too large for students to sit in staggered seats. Care

must be taken that all tests are collected and that there is no cheating during the chaos of hand-

in time. Uniformity in grading is very important, and each problem needs to be graded by a

single person. Rapid feedback is important, but more difficult to achieve in large classes.

Written regrade requests are a necessity (see Section 11.2.3).

Small classes, particularly those with fewer than fifteen students, develop interactions

between students and between the professor and students with very little formal effort by the

professor. This is not true in large classes. A structured period for interactions needs to be

provided in the professor’s lecture plan, either by small group discussions or a question period.

Informal meetings with the professor before and after class become more important, although

not all students can be accommodated. Some type of formal procedure such as a seating chart

or photographs of every student is required if the professor is to learn the students’ names.

Close rapport with students is essentially impossible if the professor does not learn the names

of the students.

Students in large lectures can be assigned seats in blocks corresponding to their laboratory

or recitation sections. Students feel less isolated since they see the same classmates more

often. It is worthwhile to set aside two minutes early in the semester to have students formally

introduce themselves to the students they are sitting next to. If cooperative group activities are

used (see Section 7.2), the students will be working with a group of students they are familiar

110

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

with. The laboratory or recitation section TA can also attend the lecture and sit with his or her

students. This provides someone close by to answer questions. And it will tend to reduce

disruptions since there is a person in authority close to each student.

Overall, teaching large classes is much more of a challenge than teaching small classes.

Small classes can be quite a bit of fun, but teaching large classes is hard work. To do

outstanding teaching in a large class is the mark of a master teacher–a rare professor.

We should never forget that lectures are only a part of the entire course, and it is the entire

course which determines how much students learn and what their attitudes will be. It is

important that appropriate learning principles are satisfied for the entire course, but it is not

feasible to satisfy all of them in the lecture alone. We will discuss the list of what works from

Section 1.4 and consider how each item can be satisfied in a lecture-style course.

The course objectives can be covered in lectures. Probably the most effective way is to hand

out a sheet of objectives for each section and discuss them in the lecture. This helps guide

students. The lecture is the appropriate place to develop a structured hierarchy of material and

the most appropriate place to use visual images. The textbook serves as a useful adjunct for

these two tasks.

Although a modest amount of practice and feedback can be provided in a modified lecture,

homework and tests serve best for providing practice and feedback. Even if homework is not

graded, it is still necessary to provide feedback. This can be done by making solutions available

to students.

An attitude of positive expectations will be shown by the way the professor presents the

lecture and the assignments. It is also conveyed by the TAs when they mark papers and talk

to students. This attitude needs to be conveyed in all aspects of the course.

Student success can be obtained first by enforcing reasonable prerequisite requirements,

second, by having homework problems of graduated difficulty, and third, by providing

sufficient help for students who need help. Making the class more cooperative can also help

ensure success. The class can be made more cooperative by requiring students to work in

groups during class and by encouraging group work for homework. If this is done, the

homework grade should be a modest portion of the course grade. Group work also ensures that

there is some opportunity for students to tutor other students.

Every lecturer should show enthusiasm and the joy of learning during lectures. With a little

effort thought-provoking questions can be included in the lecture, in group work, and in some

of the homework and test problems.

Individualizing the teaching style is difficult in a lecture, but quite a bit can be done by

teaching small parts of the course in a form that will appeal to different learning styles. For

example, visual and kinesthetic material can be used in addition to the usual auditory

presentation. Lectures plus homework can be arranged to encourage students to go through all

four steps in Kolb’s learning cycle. (See Section 15.3.) Some advance organizers can be used

6.8. LECTURES AS PART OF A COURSE

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

111

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

6.9. CHAPTER COMMENTS

6.10. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

to help global learners.

In addition to satisfying these learning principles, it is important that the students feel that

the professor is accessible for questions and that the grading scheme is fair. Accessibility for

questions includes answering questions both in and out of class. In-class questions can be

supplemented by the professor being available both before and after class, and by having a

reasonable number of office hours. Since some students are more comfortable talking to TA’s,

the TA’s should also have office hours. Fair tests and grading can be ensured by testing on the

objectives (see Section 11.1.1) and by being very careful that grading is uniform. The total

course workload should be challenging but not outrageous.

If your class includes all these aspects, it will be a good class even if you are not the most

polished lecturer in the world.

We have devoted much more attention and space to lecturing than we will any other

teaching method. This stems from an “if you can’t beat them, join them” attitude. Most

professors use some form of lecturing, so we wanted to do everything we could to ensure that

lecturing is well done and satisfies learning principles. Lecturing is both the best and the worst

teaching method imaginable–it all depends on the skill of the professor.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• List the advantages and disadvantages of the lecture method of teaching.

• Discuss how one selects the content and organizes a lecture. Use these principles to

prepare a lecture.

• List the performance characteristics of a lecture and determine how to improve your

lecture performance.

• Discuss procedures for answering and asking questions and practice improving your

questioning skills.

• List what can be done to develop rapport with students during lectures.

• Discuss various modifications of lecture methods and explain how these modifications

help lectures satisfy learning principles.

• Explain how large classes are more challenging than smaller classes and discuss what

needs to be done differently in large classes.

• Put lectures into the context of the entire course and explain how a lecture course can fit

together to optimize student learning.

112

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1 Professor X uses the lecture method. List four problems to be aware of and briefly discuss

solutions which will allow him to satisfy learning principles.

2 Consider one of the best lecturers you’ve ever had. Describe four qualities that made his or

her lectures exceptional.

3 Pick one class period in a specific undergraduate engineering course. Select and organize

the content to be covered in this one lecture.

4 Write lecture notes for the lecture in problem 3. Include stage directions and questions for

the students.

5 For the lecture in problem 3, consider what methods you will use to keep the students active.

Determine if one of the special lecture methods discussed in Section 6.6. would be

appropriate. Explain.

6 Make a list of performance characteristics which you think are desirable in a lecture. Make

a list of what you actually do. (It may be necessary to have a few students help with this list.)

Develop an action plan to make the two lists approach each other.

Alexander, L. T. and Davis, R. H., “Choosing instructional techniques,” Guides for the Improvement of

Instruction in Higher Education, No. 11, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1977.

Borns, R. J., “Professional guest lecturers,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington,

D C, 168, 1989.

Cashin, W. E., “Improving lectures,” Idea Paper No. 14, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Develop-

ment, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1985.

Dareing, D. W. and Smith, K. S., “Classroom demonstrations help undergraduates relate mechanical

vibration theory to engineering applications,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, D C, 396, 1991.

Davis, R. H. and Alexander, L. T., “The Lecture Method,” Guides for the Improvement of Instruction

in Higher Education, No. 5, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1977.

Eble, K. E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Engin, A. W. and Engin, A. E., “The lecture: Greater effectiveness for a familiar method,” Eng. Educ.,

368 (Feb. 1977).

Hickman, R. S., “Effective teaching in large engineering sections,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 211, 1987.

Hyman, R. T., “Questioning in the college classroom,” Idea Paper No. 8, Center for Faculty Evaluation

and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1982.

Johnson, G. R., Taking Teaching Seriously: A Faculty Handbook, Texas A&M University Center for

Teaching Excellence, College Station, TX, 1988.

Kabel, R. L., “Ideas for managing large classes,” Eng. Educ., 80 (Nov. 1983).

Lowman, J., Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985. (This book has

extensive sections on lecture presentations.)

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 6: LECTURES

113

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips. A Guidebook for the Beginning College Teacher, 8th Ed., D.C. Heath,

Lexington, MA, 1986.

Meador, D. A., “Parallel learning curve,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference,

IEEE, New York, 136, 1991.

Middleton, C. R., “Teaching the thundering herd: Surviving in a large classroom,” in Shea, M. A. (Ed.),

On Teaching, Faculty Teaching Excellence Program, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder,

CO, 13—24, 1987.

Osterman, D., Christensen, M., and Coffey, B., “The feedback lecture,” Idea Paper No. 13, Center for

Faculty Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1985.

Peck, R., “Examinations as a method of teaching,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 10, 76 (Spring 1979).

Tannen, D., You Just Don’t Understand, Ballantine Books, New York, 1990.

Taveggia, T. C. and Hedley, R. A., “Teaching really matters, or does it?” Eng. Educ., 546 (March 1972).

Wankat, P. C., “An elective course in separation processes,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 15, 208 (Fall 1981).

114

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

CHAPTER 7

NONTECHNOLOGICAL

ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURE

114

The lecture method can be particularly effective if the goal is to have students learn

objectives in the three lowest levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, but it is not the best method for

higher level cognitive objectives such as analysis, synthesis, evaluation, problem solving, and

critical thinking. In Chapter 8 alternatives to the lecture which use technology such as TV,

computers, and laser videodiscs are discussed. Chapter 9 covers methods commonly used for

teaching design and laboratory courses, and Chapter 10 considers one-to-one aspects of

teaching. In this chapter we look at nontechnological alternatives to lectures.

The discussion method of teaching, fairly common in the humanities, is seldom used in

engineering; however, it can be a very useful supplement in lecture classes. In cooperative

groups most of the learning occurs with students working together in small groups. This

method has been used for the entire course or as a supplement in lecture classes. A variety of

other methods such as panels or debates can be used to spark student interest and encourage

student involvement. Mastery learning requires that students reach a particular level of

mastery on tests but gives them repeated chances to do so. The Keller plan and the personalized

system of instruction method (PSI) employ mastery learning in a format that allows a student

to control the rate of progress through the course. In individual study a student studies alone

or with occasional tutorial help to satisfy certain objectives. Field trips can be used as part of

any course to help meet the course goals. Evidence will be presented that for certain objectives

these methods can be more effective than lectures.

Perhaps because discussion is a commonly used teaching method in their disciplines, social

scientists and professors of education have studied it extensively (Cashin and McKnight,

7.1 DISCUSSION

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

115

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Prof

FIGURE 7-1 INTERACTION STYLES. A. Questions. B. Instructor-lead discussions. C. Student-centered Discussions.

116

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1986; Davis et al., 1977; Eble, 1988; Lowman, 1985; McKeachie, 1986). There is ample

scientific evidence cited in these sources which shows that discussion is not an efficient

method for transmitting facts and data, particularly when compared to lectures. For teaching

the three lowest levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, discussion and lecture students do equally well

on tests, and the lecture students learn the material more quickly. However, discussion and

questioning are superior to lecture in teaching analysis, synthesis, evaluation, problem

solving, and critical thinking. There is also some evidence that students remember material

they learn through discussion or questions longer. Therefore, discussion should be considered

as a teaching method in engineering when the professor wants to work on these higher-order

processes. Since many of the benefits of discussion can be obtained with rather short periods,

the engineering professor does not have to change her or his entire teaching method.

In order to participate in an intelligent discussion, students have to know something about

the topic. Thus, we like to use discussion as a break in a class which is basically a lecture class.

Another use of discussion is the cooperative group learning method which is included in both

this section and in Section 7.2.

Discussions and questions (see Section 6.4) aim to involve students in the material and to

interact with others. The main difference between question sessions and discussion is in the

style of interaction. The interaction in a question period is clearly between the professor and

individual students (see Figure 7-1a). The professor is definitely in charge, whether asking

or answering questions. This is not an exchange among equals. In the student-centered

discussion shown schematically in Figure 7-1c, all participants are roughly equal. The

professor may participate but does not lead, and in small “buzz” groups the professor is often

working with another group. The instructor-led discussion shown in Figure 7-1b is interme-

diate between these two methods. The instructor is clearly in charge but encourages significant

interaction between students.

The instructor’s control is greatest in the question format and least in student-centered

discussions, so there is less that can go wrong in the question format and this procedure appears

to be more efficient. However, student gains in problem solving and critical thinking are

highest in well-functioning student-centered discussions (McKeachie, 1986). In addition,

student changes in attitude are highest in student-centered groups.

All teaching methods have advantages and disadvantages. The professor needs to select a

method which is appropriate for the material to be taught, fits the students to be taught, and

fits the professor’s style. Since the competition to discussion is often the lecture method, the

advantages and disadvantages of discussion will be compared to those of lecturing. Among

the advantages of discussion are the following:

1 Students learn how to do analysis, synthesis, evaluation, problem solving, and critical

thinking better.

7.1.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Discussion

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

117

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

2 There appears to be better retention of material.

3 Discussion is an effective method for changing student attitudes (affective objectives).

4 Intellectual development (see Section 14.2) is greater.

5 Students are more active and become more involved.

6 In engineering, discussion is a novel method which gains the students’ attention. It also

breaks up the routine of the lecture.

7 Discussion can improve students’ group interaction and communication skills.

8 In student-centered discussion students can be leaders and can teach other students.

9 Discussion is more likely to lead to commitment to a field (McKeachie, 1983).

10 Discussion does not have to be a “big deal” and can be included in a class which basically

follows the lecture format.

There are disadvantages to discussion:

1 “Developing the ability to conduct effective discussion is even more difficult than

learning to lecture effectively . . .” (Eble, 1988).

2 The process can be time-consuming and the rate of transfer of information is low.

3 Students do not show improved learning of knowledge, comprehension, and application

objectives.

4 It may be difficult to obtain student participation, particularly in engineering.

5 Students must know something before an intelligent discussion is possible.

6 The instructor has less control and may be uncomfortable with the method.

7 Entire group discussions are not possible with more than about twenty students and work

best with ten students or fewer (Davis et al., 1977). This problem can be surmounted by using

small student-led groups.

8 The discussion approach may be less acceptable to students, particularly engineering

students who want to learn from an expert.

9 Meaningful discussions may be difficult with immature students.

10 Engineering students often think that group interaction and communication skills should

be taught in another class, not in engineering classes (Hayes et al., 1985).

Engineering classes often include objectives which can be appropriately taught by using

discussion methods. For example, evaluation and comparison of competing designs, evalu-

ation of unproven scientific theories or data such as “cold fusion,” and determining the best

way to allocate scarce resources are all appropriate topics for discussion. If one of the course

goals is to help students define and explore problems to develop a variety of solutions, then

brainstorming (see Section 5.6), which can be considered a type of discussion method, is

appropriate. Small cooperative groups, which are appropriate for other aspects of problem

solving (see Section 7.2), include a significant amount of discussion. Ethical dilemmas seldom

have clear-cut answers and so are appropriate for discussion classes. Discussing ethics in class

is also one approach to changing attitudes and possibly producing ethical engineers. Although

the ethics dilemma does not have a correct solution, there are many incorrect solutions and

students can learn to recognize them. If communication, interpersonal, or leadership skills are

on your agenda (and many engineers in industry think they should be), then discussion

118

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

methods are one of the appropriate teaching methods. If you want the students to be more

active, to develop their higher-order processing skills, and to pay attention during the lecture,

then question and discussion periods of five to ten minutes can be inserted in the middle of

lectures.

Conducting discussions is an art, for good discussions don’t just happen; paradoxically,

they must be structured to occur spontaneously. And this is why conducting excellent

discussions is difficult. Discussion experts (Cashin and McKnight, 1986; Davis et al., 1977;

Eble, 1988; Lowman, 1985; McKeachie, 1986) have a variety of suggestions concerning what

to do to improve discussions. First, the professor must prepare for the class. Since discussion

classes can wander through a broad range of material, the professor needs broad knowledge

in the area. In lecture classes the professor can be one lecture ahead of the students, but in

discussion classes this is not generally true. At the beginning of the class period the professor

needs an agenda for the discussion session, even for only five minutes of discussion. It does

not work to tell the students, “Let’s discuss . . . ,” followed by silence. Until they have been

trained, engineering students won’t know what you want. If you plan on using discussion

techniques anytime during the semester, start early. Students expect the entire course to be

similar to the first two weeks, so you need to have some discussion during the first two weeks,

even if just as brief breaks in a lecture class.

Engineering students are generally very task oriented, so give the students a task. For

example, “We have discussed the engineering and political factors which affect the siting of

new airports. You have all studied the siting of a new airport for Chicago. Let’s see if we can

come up with a consensus of where to put the new airport.” Note that the purpose of the

discussion is really not to find a solution. The purpose is to expose the students to the process

of reaching a solution. In the give and take of a good discussion on this topic, the students

should learn something about the interaction between engineering and politics, about

communication, and about the process of obtaining a consensus. This topic would also be

useful for a panel discussion (see Section 7.3.1) or a debate (see Section 7.3.2). Since the

process will be different in these three techniques, they complement each other.

Engineering students tend to enjoy problem-solving discussions. However, the discussions

tend to become fragmented since students present comments at different stages of the problem-

solving strategy. As the professor, you can exercise some control. Break the problem into parts

and clearly tell the students which part to discuss. If a large class is broken up into small groups,

the instructions to the small groups can clearly state: “Now that we have defined the problem,

let’s explore alternatives by brainstorming. You have three minutes.” The leader ensures that

everything stays on track either in the big group or in the small groups. Note the time

constraint. If the purpose is to learn the process, a long period is not required since the lack

of a complete solution is not a major problem. There is another advantage to the time

7.1.2. Conducting Discussions

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

119

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

constraint. If a group gets off track, it isn’t allowed to go very far astray before being called

back on track.

Particularly in large groups, the first contribution is the hardest. Be patient. If silence

doesn’t work (and at least two or three minutes may be needed), there are some alternatives.

Ask a student to share a comment that he or she has made earlier. Since this is essentially a

prepared comment which already has instructor approval, it is less threatening than having to

volunteer something new. Make a provocative statement yourself. Challenge but don’t

threaten the students. Prepare ahead of time by planting a comment with a student or a TA.

We suggest this be done only very early in the semester since this procedure can backfire. Say

something encouraging like, “I’d really like to hear someone’s opinion,” and then try more

silence.

If the difficulty in getting a discussion started keeps you from using discussions, you can

always revert to questioning, but before doing so try dividing the class into small groups for

discussions. Many students find it much easier to talk in small groups, particularly when the

instructor is not sitting at the front waiting to pounce on the first remark. This is especially true

of women students (Tannen, 1991). Many students participate when they feel the responsibil-

ity to do so, and the instructor can include this responsibility in the charge given to small

groups. “I want each group to be sure that every student has the opportunity to speak.” Finally,

regardless of what the instructor does, some of the small groups will work. As the noise level

in the room increases, other groups will start to talk.

Once students start talking, the instructor needs to be encouraging and accepting both

verbally and nonverbally. The comments in Section 6.4 are all appropriate for discussion,

except that it is not necessary to respond to each comment in turn. Let several students talk

and let students respond to each other. In lectures the instructor talks—discussion is the

students’ chance.

What does a professor do? Davis et al. (1977) suggest several techniques which can be

useful for working with the entire class once the discussion starts.

1 Post ideas on the board and verify the ideas. This allows you to use correct jargon. It also

gives you something to do other than talk.

2 Serve as a gatekeeper to keep students on the topic. It’s easier to keep students on the topic

if the assignment is a clear task which has been broken into parts. You can exert some control

by calling on students who raise their hands. Most students have been socialized through many

years of school to talk only when called on. If you want to call on students who raise their hands,

it is a good idea to enforce this rule so that everyone is treated equally.

3 When the discussion falters, request examples or illustrations.

4 Encourage and recognize contributions. The act of writing a contribution down is

recognition. Also recognize contributions verbally: “Good!”

5 Test the consensus. Is the class ready to move on to the next part of the problem?

6 Summarize the discussion. To summarize the student discussion well you must listen.

This is another reason to talk less.

120

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The professor’s role with small groups is discussed in Section 7.2.

What problems might arise? One is disagreement and conflict between students. Conflict

can be resolved in a very positive way if the class is structured correctly (Johnson and Johnson,

1979). Early in the semester the instructor needs to set the climate that problems are to be

solved together. That is, the discussion climate is to be cooperative and not competitive. There

doesn’t have to be a winner. There should be a firm rule that topics, not personalities, are to

be argued. Students need to learn that they can agree to disagree and still have a high opinion

of the other person. When conflict occurs, you should ensure that everyone has the same

accurate information and then help the students to recognize similarities and differences.

When this is done, it may become clear that the conflict is either over semantics or over one

fairly small point. The result will often be a near-consensus. Another way to help students

come to a consensus is to use the principles of debate and have them switch sides and argue

for the other side. This works because students often see that the other side also has some valid

arguments. If the conflict becomes heated, you need to deal with feelings either during or after

class. Purposefully introducing controversy into a class is the topic of Section 7.2.3.

Nonparticipants are another problem. The discussion may drag if there are too many of

them. Even if there are only a few, they may not be involved in the class and probably are not

benefiting fully from the discussion. Quiet students may be quite involved in the material, but

the other students are not benefiting from their input and the quiet students are not improving

their communication skills. Pay special attention to these students to get their ideas and

opinions. If a nonparticipant ever raises his or her hand, call on that student. If they are

interrupted, come back to them. If they look ready to speak, encourage them verbally and

nonverbally. These students may not speak because they are slow at formulating responses.

Passing out one or two discussion questions as a homework assignment the period before may

get these students past this barrier. They are more likely to participate in a small group,

particularly if you specifically request that everyone participate. Women are less likely to

participate in discussions than men, especially in a class where ideas are attacked (Tannen,

1991). They are likely to speak out more when asked for personal anecdotes or about what was

useful to them in a reading or an assignment.

The overparticipant or monopolizer is another problem. In an instructor-led discussion the

instructor can say that someone else’s ideas need to be heard. This ploy often works since

many students do not want to monopolize the discussion. If the monopolizing continues, you

can call the student aside. We suggest trying a positive approach such as expressing concern

about the person’s need to work on listening skills. If the monopolizing behavior continues,

a sterner admonition may be required. Once the group is comfortable doing discussions, the

instructor may not have to step in to control the monopolizer. The other group members will

tell the person to shut up, and they will often be stronger than an instructor should be.

Often the problems of nonparticipation and monopolization can be solved simultaneously

by asking that each student speak at most twice during the class (Palmer, 1983). This forces

the impulsive to slow down and weigh what they want to say. The resulting silences give the

quieter students permission to talk.

Discussion should be considered part of the entire course. When the advantages of

discussion are compared to the list of learning principles in Section 1.4, discussion by itself

can satisfy some but not all of these principles. Discussions allow students a chance to be

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

121

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

active, practice certain tasks, and provide feedback if they are willing to participate. The

professor can easily communicate high expectations for the students and challenge them with

thought-provoking questions and discussion problems. The class can be made cooperative,

and in small discussion groups students can teach other students. Finally, the professor can

certainly radiate enthusiasm. What discussion does not do efficiently is guide the learner,

develop a structured hierarchy of material, and provide visual images. In addition, the

practice, feedback, and challenges are only of one type and do not include detailed numerical

calculations. Lectures, homework, and tests in addition to discussion can satisfy all the

learning principles.

The topic of this section is cooperative group learning, not cooperative (or co-op) education

which consists of alternating periods of work and of education on campus. In cooperative

group learning students work together to understand the material, do homework, complete

projects, and prepare for tests. Research has shown that a cooperative learning environment

is conducive to learning higher-order cognitive tasks such as analysis, synthesis, evaluation,

and problem solving (Johnson et al., 1991; Smith, 1986, 1989). Group work has long been

common in engineering education in laboratory and design courses (see Chapter 9), and the

Whimbey pair method for teaching problem solving discussed in Section 5.5 can also be

considered a cooperative group method. What is new in this section is the use of groups for

content-oriented classes which would normally be taught by lecture. We will start by

considering informal learning groups, extend our comments to formal learning groups, and

finish with a discussion on structured controversy.

Informal cooperative learning groups are “spur-of-the-moment” groups formed for a

particular short-term task and then dissolved. Their direct ancestor is the “buzz” group which

has been commonly used for discussion for many years. Informal groups can be quickly

formed in the middle of a lecture and students can be assigned a task such as solving a problem,

answering a complicated question, or developing a question for the professor. These groups

serve as a way to encourage students to be active in a large lecture class, provide for discussion,

serve as a break when the students’ attention starts to falter, and provide a more cooperative

atmosphere in the class. In addition, these small groups have a modest number of students

teaching students and provide students with an opportunity to practice teamwork. Inclusion

of a short break from lecture with an informal group helps to individualize the class for the

extroverts and field-sensitive individuals.

Informal cooperative groups also allow you to start experimentation with cooperative

learning. Including these groups within a lecture class is not difficult and takes no more

7.2. COOPERATIVE GROUP LEARNING

7.2.1. Informal Cooperative Learning Groups

122

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

preparation time than the lecture. Since the groups are informal, assignment into groups can

also be informal. We have found that the easiest thing to do at the start of the semester is to

have students cluster in groups of about four based on choosing students who are sitting close

to each other. This can be done in a normal lecture hall, although lecture halls are not ideal for

discussions. The first time the class breaks up into small groups the professor must be very

directive. A solitary student should be assigned to a group even if the student has to move. Later

in the semester you may want to experiment with different groups. There is an advantage in

having students move and work with students they do not know. Since small group dynamics

are different in same-sex groups, you may also want to experiment with groups of the same

gender (Tannen, 1991).

Once the groups are formed, tell the students to briefly introduce themselves to each other.

You may want to assign a leader and a reporter, or let the group act informally. If no

assignments are made and you notice that the group is not working, you can assign a discussion

leader to get things going.

As the professor you must structure the small group experience and provide an agenda.

Give a clear problem statement and a deliverable. Although the groups are formed on the spur

of the moment, your agenda must be preplanned. As noted in Section 7.1, asking students to

discuss a topic is not sufficient. The task for small groups should fit the following (Hamelink

et al., 1989):

1 Have several possible solutions.

2 Be intrinsically interesting.

3 Be challenging but doable.

4 Require a variety of skills.

5 Allow all group members to contribute.

Hamelink et al. (1989) note that “if the task has one right answer or involves simple

memorization then competitive education methods are far superior.”

Most engineering students are pragmatic and want to do something, so there must be a

deliverable. For example, if the problem is to come up with a list of five possible solutions,

the deliverable is this list. If the problem is to come up with a consensus about some question,

then the deliverable is the consensus. These deliverables should be presented to the entire

class. If a reporter has been assigned, that student can make the presentation. Otherwise, let

the group choose who will report, or call on a group member at random. Small groups should

be told in advance how this reporting will be done. When the groups present, you can post the

solutions on the blackboard or the overhead projector. Also note in advance that the first group

to present has a major advantage since everything they report will be new. The last group may

repeat items which have already been presented.

The problem statement should be very clear. Be sure to delineate what the deliverable is,

either orally or with written instructions. If different groups have different instructions, then

written instructions will probably be less confusing. Tell the groups roughly how much time

they have. Then, say something like, “Let’s get started. I want to hear some noise.”

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

123

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

During the group discussion the professor and the TA can circulate among groups. If a

group is working well together, there is no need to interrupt. Groups which have trouble

getting started need a little help. A group with only introverts may have trouble. In the future

you can mix the groups up and avoid the exact grouping which caused the trouble. At this time

you might want to assign a discussion leader and a recorder to get things started. (One nice

thing about informal grouping is that problem groups last for only about 10 minutes, and the

next time the class can start over with new groups.) The instructor should also watch the time.

Although it is not necessary for students to finish the task (Felder, 1990), we find being

assigned a task with no chance of finishing to be frustrating. Thus, we like to watch the groups

and to close the discussions when about half of the groups are essentially finished with the task.

The entire process, including the reports to the whole class, can be completed in 10 to 15

minutes. Thus, informal groups can be conveniently inserted within a lecture.

These informal groups can satisfy many of the learning principles discussed in Section 1.4,

and they also provide for some individualization in teaching style. They can satisfy most of

the five elements necessary for cooperative group success (see Section 7.2.2). Cooperative

groups help make the class seem more friendly and thus help the professor establish rapport

with the students. Finally, informal groups are simple to implement and thus are a good

approach with which to start.

Formal cooperative learning groups are formed to teach each other and to work on

longer-term tasks than are informal groups, even lasting for the entire semester. These groups

often produce a project which is graded as a team effort. Since these groups are longer-term

and grading is involved, a bit more thought might be put into forming and structuring them.

Students who have worked in informal groups will have a good start in working in formal

groups.

Getting started with cooperative learning groups can appear daunting at first since most

professors have not experienced this teaching method. However, you do not have to convert

the entire course to group work. Informal groups can be interspersed into the lecture, and one

project can be done with a formal group. Then as you become more familiar with the strengths

and weaknesses of this approach, you can convert more or less of the class to cooperative

groups. Step-by-step procedures for getting started are outlined below (Smith, 1986):

1 As the instructor, you need to have clear objectives and a plan. The clearer the objectives,

the easier it will be to get the groups started and functioning well.

2 Assign the students to groups. Smith (1986, 1989) suggests the use of random groups,

while Goldstein (1982) recommends placing one good and one poor student (based on grade

point average) into each group before randomly assigning the other students. Johnson et al.

(1991) suggest even more instructor control, with high- medium-, and low-achieving students

in each group. Both good and poor students can benefit from working together. The good

7.2.2. Formal Cooperative Learning Groups

124

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

students will teach the poorer students, and both will benefit. If the groups are to do significant

discussion, there is also an advantage to having groups which are all women or where women

are not in the minority (Tannen, 1991). All-women groups give women a chance to practice

leadership. However, at least during part of the semester men and women need to be together

in groups since they need to learn to work together; men, in particular, need to learn to work

with a female team leader. Other criteria which can be used in selecting groups are discussed

in Section 9.1.2. Depending on their purpose, groups should have from two to six students.

Topping (1992) suggests starting with dyads since the teacher has more control. The class

should meet in a room with circular or square tables, so that the groups can sit facing each other.

3 Carefully explain the task of the group. Early in the semester be very explicit about the

task and the job of the group. It is desirable to promote interdependence. That is, one student

cannot get a good grade when the group fails to perform its task satisfactorily. Thus, the

grading procedure needs to be explained carefully. Some students will resist being graded on

the results of the entire team. The rationale for this is that most industrial jobs are too big to

be done by individuals and teamwork is a necessity. The team must function together to get

the job done correctly and on time. Students might as well get used to the concept of teamwork

now. If projects are chosen to be large enough that one student cannot complete them in the

time available, there will be less complaining. Teamwork and cooperation should be

emphasized in this explanation.

Grading on tests should also be carefully explained. One option is to give group take-home

tests with each group receiving a single grade. The students can also be tested in pairs where

time is available to confer with one’s partner (Buchanan, 1991). If individual tests are given,

it is important not to grade on a curve since grading on a curve fosters competiveness, not

cooperation. Either mastery or a fixed scale should be used for grading individual tests. The

professor can also assign bonus points to group members if everyone in the group gets above

a cut-off score. (Johnson et al., 1991).

4 Monitor groups to ensure that everyone is working together and intervene if there are

problems. You may need to know something about group dynamics to help groups if there are

problems. Also, you may want to impose some structure on the groups such as requiring that

everyone contribute once before anyone can contribute a second time. Or the recorder can be

asked to keep a running account of the number of times different students speak. You and a

TA can circulate and serve as resource persons when the groups are unsure about something.

If there are technical problems, caution the students to check something or give a mini lecture

to explain a complicated point.

5 Provide closure to the group session. Ask the students in each group to prepare a summary

of their results for that day. If appropriate, ask for an outline of their future plans. Provide

homework or additional assignments for the group.

6 Evaluate the achievements of each group and of the individuals in each group. Discuss

with each group how well they are collaborating. Give them advice on how to improve.

Students who have been pitted against their fellow students for years cannot be expected

suddenly to blossom as cooperators without some practice and guidance. Be sure that class

grading does not reinsert competitive behavior into the class. For example, individual tests

can be mastery (see Section 7.4.1) or can be graded on an absolute scale. Group grading

strategies are discussed in Section 9.1.

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

125

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Now that you no longer spend the bulk of the time lecturing, what do you do? First, set clear

objectives and provide learning materials such as a clear textbook, articles, and a study guide.

As noted in Chapter 6, this plus a test is sufficient to ensure that students will learn the lower-

level cognitive objectives (Taveggia and Hedley, 1972). You may also want to give different

students different material to master. Then the contributions of all group members are essential

for the group to have the complete picture.

Next, develop the activities the students will do in class and out. These are projects and

open-ended problems with a clear deliverable. Problems must be challenging yet solvable with

the basic principles, be realistic and attention-grabbing, and have multiple solutions. Particu-

larly, early in the semester problems should be clearly defined. Later in the semester

definitions can be quite vague.

Third, set up the groups and get them started. A good start will convince many otherwise

skeptical students that they can learn efficiently in a cooperative group. It is important that the

first problems not be trivial or closed-ended because at least the better students can do these

more efficiently on their own.

During the functioning of the groups, the professor and the TA are both resource persons

and troubleshooters. The professor can help when a group is struggling technically. This is

important early in the semester when many groups want reassurance that their path is correct.

Some groups will click, and some won’t. The professor needs to help groups which aren’t

functioning well. There are several things that you can try. Remind them that the evaluation

is a group evaluation and then let the group muddle through. It may be helpful to provide more

structure to a group by assigning a group leader for this set of problems, or to focus on what

the students are doing and remind them to do one problem solving step at a time. (This is the

same procedure as that used in Section 7.1.2 for discussions.) You may also want to watch

the interaction patterns for a while and then discuss group dynamics with the group. Finally,

the groups may need to be shuffled. During this process of working with the groups, monitor

the contributions of all group members.

The professor also serves as a time keeper and moves the group onward through a series

of tasks. Students who are not experienced in working in groups often need to be guided

through the process. The professor must also be sure that there is time for the group reports

to the entire class, and that there is time for group processing at the end of the period.

An alternative group problem-solving procedure is a group-based socratic approach

(Felder, 1990). Groups are given a problem to work on in class. Then a series of questions are

used to guide the students toward the solution procedure. Students are given short periods (two

to three minutes) to work on each question. This is followed by a brief discussion, with the

instructor providing the answer if the groups have not had time to finish. The groups are then

asked the next question in the sequence required to solve the problem. This procedure gives

the professor considerable control and ensures that every student will be active and no student

will become totally lost. However, it does reduce group interactions and group responsibility.

This type of strongly directed group process is probably beneficial for freshman and

sophomore classes where considerable direction is still desirable.

One advantage of cooperative groups is that the professor focuses on what the students are

doing, not what the professor is doing (Astin, 1985). Since the students are the ones who must

learn, this focus is appropriate. The group procedure also encourages most students to be active.

126

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Five elements of group success, which should be remembered when groups are set up and

operated (Smith, 1989; Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Johnson et al., 1991), have been

identified.

1 Positive interdependence means that students believe that for one to succeed they must

all succeed. The professor can promote positive interdependence by appropriate grading

procedures, by making sure that that the group depends on the resources of all the students,

or by requiring that a division of labor be used to complete the task. Early in the semester

positive interdependence can be promoted by giving the group only one set of instructions.

2 Face-to-face promotive interaction means that students work together discussing,

explaining, teaching, and solving problems. This face-to-face interaction promotes learning

since it helps support the students’ efforts to learn and motivates them.

3 Individual accountability and personal responsibility must be stressed so that an

individual cannot “hitchhike” on the work of others without contributing. The professor can

monitor attendance and contributions, call on students at random for presentations, and give

individual examinations.

4 Social skills to work together are needed. Students need help in learning how to lead,

teach, reach consensus, resolve conflicts, and communicate. For example, an engineering

professor can encourage groups to check that everyone understands. Engineers in industry are

expected to do these things, and students who learn how while in school will have an advantage

on their first job.

5 Group processing is a necessary maintenance activity to keep a group working

smoothly. What have members done to support the functioning of the group? What can they

do in the future? Group processing can be checked by requiring each group to submit a

summary of their processing. Johnson et al. (1991, pp. 3–10) help explain group processing

by quoting Willi Unsveld, a mountain climber. “Take care of each other. Share your energies

with the group. No one must feel alone, cut off, for that is when you do not make it.”

There are gender differences in how people react in groups (Tannen, 1990). In general,

women have been socialized to develop group rapport and to seek interaction. Thus, many

female students are experienced in social skills and group processing. Male students, on the

other hand, have been socialized to seek independence and not the interdependence necessary

for proper group functioning. Thus, initial resistance and attempted sabotage of group work

is much more likely to come from male students.

The results that have been achieved with cooperative groups include superior learning of

higher-level cognitive processes and superior problem solving (Hamelink et al., 1989;

Johnson, et al., 1991; Smith, 1986). In addition, cooperative groups report the formation of

positive relationships and increased social support with the development of professional self-

esteem (Johnson et al., 1991; Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Smith, 1989). Students in

cooperative learning environments liked the subject more and wanted to learn more about it

(Johnson et al., 1991). Cooperative learning also increases retention of students in college

(Johnson et al., 1991; Tinto, 1987). In minority programs cooperative groups have led to

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

127

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

greatly increased retention and a large increase in facilitators going on to graduate school

(Hudspeth et al., 1989; Shelton and Hudspeth, 1989). Many students (and professors) are

searching for an educational community (Palmer, 1983). Cooperative group education can

deliver this sense of community.

Structured controversy is a special type of cooperative group in which students confront an

emotional issue in a structured format and strive for a consensus (Smith, 1984). This procedure

is useful for issues which combine technology and public policy. Appropriate issues for a

structured controversy include the siting of roads, landfills, nuclear facilities, and government

research centers; regulations for air pollution and control of acid rain; proposals to outlaw

greenhouse gases such as Freon; and the legality of company rules which prevent women of

child bearing age from working at certain jobs.

The professor first develops packets of materials with all the facts and with opinions both

for and against. The packet in favor of one side has all the positive arguments and facts. The

con packet has all the negative arguments and facts. A complete picture can be seen only by

combining both packets. For many controversies there are organizations which have

essentially already prepared either the pro or the con package. Normally, the built-in biases

of materials from advocacy groups is a problem, but not in the structured controversy

procedure.

The class is divided into groups of four students with one pair of students being assigned

on the pro side and one pair of students on the con side. Each pair receives the appropriate

packet and is told to study it thoroughly and to prepare a position statement. This preparation

can be done as homework if the pairs can meet together. In the four-person groups each pair

first presents its position. The other pair is told not to refute the presentation (this is not a

debate), but to listen and ask for clarification. Then the issues are discussed. The other pair

then presents its position while the first pair listens and asks for clarification. Then there is

a group discussion where all four group members try to achieve a consensus position. The

consensus positions are then reported to the large group, and an attempt is made to achieve an

overall consensus position.

Before starting a structured controversy, the professor needs to state the discussion rules

clearly. These rules are the same as those for handling controversy in discussion (see Section

7.1.2) (Johnson and Johnson, 1979). Ideas, not personalities, are argued. The focus is on

attaining the best group decision or consensus, not on winning. Listing, restating, understand-

ing and integrating all facts—this is forced by the structure of the groups since no side has all

the facts. All sides must be understood, and evidence used to determine logical fallacies in the

positions. Finally, everyone must participate.

It is useful to give the students specific rules for reaching consensus. Palmer (1983) lists

the following:

7.2.3. Structured Controversy

128

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1 Do not argue to achieve your rankings or solution.

2 Do not change your mind just to avoid conflict. Be suspicious of too rapid agreement.

3 Do not use coin flips or majority votes. These do not represent consensus.

4 When there is a stalemate, search for a compromise position which is acceptable to all

parties. However, do not reward a member for finally agreeing by giving in later.

5 Look at differences of opinion as healthy and natural. These differences of opinion help

the group arrive at a better final decision.

6 Use consensus procedures with groups where the members are comfortable with each

other.

With a procedure like this it is the process and not the answer which is important. Thus,

after the group discussion the professor should clearly set out the procedure and the rules which

make reaching a consensus possible. Experience in activities such as this should make

engineers much more effective communicators when working with the public on controversial

issues.

In this section we will briefly explore three other group methods which can be used to

involve students: panels, modified debates, and “quiz shows.” These methods are useful as

breaks in a lecture course and often serve as marker events for students. Thus, they are useful

additions to the teacher’s bag of tricks. However, we would not recommend using them for the

entire semester.

The use of a panel consisting of three or four experts is a good way to start a question-and-

answer period about a topic which has more than one correct answer. Professional seminars

often use panels on topics such as job hunting, interviewing, what the first year in industry is

like, what industry wants from young engineers, obtaining research funding, and achieving

tenure. Panels can also be used for controversial technical topics, particularly those where

technology and policy interact.

First choose the topic and decide on the date for the panel; then pick the panel and obtain

the panel members’ agreement to participate. Each panelist should prepare a very short (three

or four minute) presentation which can serve as a springboard for questions and discussion,

and on the day before the session remind the panelists of the meeting and the topic. Tell the

class ahead of time about the panel meeting and assign readings.

During the panel discussion, of which you are the moderator, introduce each of the panelists

and ask for a brief statement. When the time has expired, gently ask for a summary and

7.3. OTHER GROUP METHODS FOR INVOLVING STUDENTS

7.3.1. Panels

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

129

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

introduce the next panelist. When the last panelist has finished, ask the class for questions. If

there are none, start the period with a question. Once the questions start you can control the

session by calling on students. As many students as possible should be involved. It may be

appropriate to ask a specific panelist to answer a question because occasionally one panelist

will tend to monopolize the conversation.

An interesting alternative to this procedure is to assign students to the panel. The students

are assigned the task of becoming an “expert” on a particular topic before the panel discussion.

Serving as a panelist can be an alternate assignment to giving an oral presentation, serving on

a debate team, or being on a quiz team. If the students are unfamiliar with panel discussions,

they will need a clear set of directions, preferably written. The panelists will certainly become

very involved in the discussion, and if a good topic is chosen, so will the class. The result will

often be a much smoother class than having four separate oral presentations which are not

directly connected.

A variety of forms of modified debates are useful whenever there are two or more sides to

a question. In our teaching class we debate the question, What is the best teaching method?

One can also debate topics concerning resource allocation such as the site of a new airport or

how much government money should go to super large science. One can structure a debate

around competing designs or controversial technology. Reynolds (1976) found simulated

historical debates useful in a class on the history of technology.

In a classical debate there are two teams with two members each. One side takes the pro side

of an issue, and the other takes the con side. The debate pattern is affirmative-negative-

rebuttal-rebuttal. Good debaters are taught to prepare for both the pro and con sides of the

question. The argument requires inference based on reasoning. Evidence consisting of facts

and the opinions of authorities is used to bolster the argument. In classical debates, there is

little room for personal opinion and no room for personal attacks. Debaters are taught to attack

the logic and doubtful facts of the opposition. Each team in a classical debate tries to win; it

is not an exercise in cooperative consensus building.

Debate is an excellent way to involve students in the material, work on communication

skills, and require group effort. Unfortunately, in most classes the classical debate approach

involves too few students. More students can be involved by increasing the size of the debate

teams and by having more than two teams. For example, in our teaching class one team

champions lectures, another PSI, and another cooperative groups. In a debate on siting a new

airport each team champions a different site.

Many ways of running a modified debate are possible. We have found three groups with

three members each to be convenient. Students are assigned to groups in advance and are given

the topic to support. (An interesting alternate for advanced students is to have them prepare

for all positions without knowing in advance which side they will be for.) The groups are told

that each student will talk for four or five minutes. The first speaker from each group is told

7.3.2. Modified Debates

130

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

to take an affirmative position and present only positive statements. After each group has

presented its affirmative positions, a second speaker from each group takes a mixed

affirmative and negative position. The last speaker rebuts any damaging statements from the

first two rounds and summarizes the team’s position. The teams decide who goes first, second,

and third and what will be presented.

The professor must first assign teams. We try to balance the teams as much as possible. The

professor must choose the topic and pick the sides. The rules of the debate are spelled out, and

the idea of an argument backed by evidence is explored with an example. Reynolds (1976) also

requires that debaters prepare a position paper in advance which is turned in immediately after

the debate.

One of the nonparticipants can serve as the debate moderator. Others can serve as judges;

this makes the entire class active participants. It helps to give the judges a rating sheet so that

judging is somewhat uniform. We use a rating sheet with five 5-point scales: analysis,

evidence, argument, refutation, and delivery. The rating sheets are collected, and the team with

the most points is declared the winner.

In our classes debates have always proven to be marker events. The students prepare hard

and try to win. The competitive nature of the debate is a strong motivator for many students

even though the results have little effect on the their grades. A debate is also another

opportunity to practice communication skills, to improve analysis and evaluation, and to work

together in teams.

Another break in the usual routine is to use one class period as a quiz show following the

format of Trivial Pursuit, Jeopardy, or College Bowl. This can be done with either individuals

or groups. Students are told to become experts on the class material. The participants can be

selected in advance, or at random on the day of the quiz show. As in most competitive

activities, this procedure works best if the teams or contestants are evenly matched. The

professor can act as moderator and ask the questions. The contestant who presses a buzzer or

rings a bell first gets to answer the question first. Points are awarded for correct answers and

subtracted for mistakes. The winner or winning team is the one with the highest score at the

end of the show.

This format works best for knowledge-level questions since they have the most straight-

forward one-line answers. The professor needs to generate the questions and answers ahead

of time. A panel of judges can be selected from the noncontestant students to decide if answers

are correct. Another noncontestant can judge which student was first at pushing the buzzer.

Since this type of quiz show is intense, twenty to twenty-five minutes of the period is probably

sufficient.

We have never had the opportunity to use this procedure in class (we have used Trivial

Pursuit in a student fund raiser) but think it would be a good break in a class where the students

have to learn a large number of facts. Because of the competitive nature of a quiz show, many

students will prepare diligently to try to win.

7.3.3. “Quiz Shows”

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

131

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

7.4. MASTERY AND SELF-PACED INSTRUCTION

7.4.1. Mastery

Requiring students to achieve mastery in each topic is an appealing idea. However, this

concept is more complex than it first appears. Once the concept has been explored, two

instructional methods utilizing mastery will be discussed: self-paced (the Keller plan) and

instructor-paced mastery courses. This is a logical but not chronological sequence. (The

development could have logically occurred in the order presented but did not. In engineering

education the Keller plan became quite popular before the key element, mastery, was isolated.)

This section is important since these teaching methods are the only methods which show a

clear advantage in the amount students learn. The extensive review by Taveggia and Hedley

(1972), which found no difference in learning based on content examinations, did not include

mastery-type classes.

Mastery is a very simple, yet powerful, idea: Make students understand material well before

allowing them to move forward. For hierarchical material this concept makes a great deal of

sense. For any material, retention is better and relearning is easier when material has been

mastered. In addition, success is motivating and the opportunity to master a subject often

convinces students that they can learn.

If mastery is to be required, the material must first be divided into units or modules and

objectives must be developed for each unit. Then the students must be tested for mastery of

the objectives. Students who have not mastered the material need prompt feedback and

probably some type of aid in learning the material. Repeated tests may be required. Thus, in

a mastery course all students could theoretically earn A’s, but the time required would vary

significantly. In courses graded on a curve, grades correlate with ability, while in a mastery

class the time required correlates with ability (Bloom, 1968; Stice, 1979). The need for

repeated tests requires some modification in class schedules. Two different ways to do this are

discussed in Sections 7.4.2 and 7.4.3.

What does mastery mean? For simple, lower-level cognitive objectives an unequivocal

definition is easy. For example, the student can spell 100 words perfectly, or the student can

quote the Gettysburg Address, or the student can repeat the definition of technical words

without error. Since 100 percent is not required to achieve an A when straight-scale grading

is used, mastery can be defined as 90 or 80 percent accuracy. Once the number (80, 90, or 100

percent) has been agreed on, it is easy to determine if the student has mastered the material.

But how does one determine mastery for higher-level cognitive objectives? In engineering

most problems involve either application or analysis. Even for relatively simple technical

concepts an infinite number of problems can be generated. How does the professor decide if

the student has mastered the material? This question has been argued strongly by critics (e.g.,

Gessler, 1974). We think these arguments miss the practical point. Any professor who

routinely awards partial credit for problems can separate student tests into mastery, near-

132

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

mastery, questionable, and not-mastered piles. The near-mastery pile includes the tests of

students who clearly understand the theory and how to apply it but have made a mistake in

algebra or arithmetic. These students should probably be allowed to move forward. Students

whose examinations are placed in the questionable pile can be talked to individually to see if

they understand the concepts. Alternately, they can be told to study more and take another

test—the only penalty is time, not a grade. Our conclusion, based on nine years of experience

with mastery tests, is that there is no practical difficulty in using mastery learning for

application and analysis problems in engineering.

Synthesis problems may present a practical difficulty. However, grading synthesis prob-

lems or grading for creativity presents a practical difficulty with any grading scheme. Our

pragmatic solution has been to include a few synthesis problems where appropriate and then

to score them very leniently. Mastery is probably not an appropriate grading scheme for design

courses which include a significant amount of synthesis.

A second major question is, Can all students master the material if given sufficient time?

The answer is probably no, but the percentage who can is much higher than the percentage that

do with other teaching methods. Bloom (1968) found that 80 to 90 percent of the students in

a mastery class could achieve test scores which would have given them an A in a lecture class

(where 20 percent earned A’s). In many engineering classes concrete-operational thinkers (see

Section 14.1.1) will be unable to master the material. There are also students who could master

the material but are unwilling to work hard enough or decide they do not want to be engineers.

The vast majority can and do master the material. As a rough rule, Bloom (1968) thought that

90 percent of students can benefit from mastery learning, 5 percent will stumble, and 5 percent

will master the material with any teaching technique.

If we adopt the concept of mastery learning, what is good instruction? Instruction which

helps the student efficiently master the objectives is good instruction. This means that

instruction must be individualized. Bloom (1968) states that the optimum would be a talented,

dedicated tutor for each student. Before dismissing this as utopian, note that throughout grade

school and high school many middle-class students have exactly this situation—their parents

tutor them. The Keller plan can come close to reaching this ideal (see Section 7.4.2).

There are a host of practical questions. How big should the modules be? What are the

important objectives? (This question should be asked in every course regardless of the

teaching method used.) How does one arrange the schedule to allow for test retakes and extra

learning time? If almost everyone masters the material, how does the professor grade? What

method is used for presenting content? How do students receive feedback? How do students

receive help if they do not understand a concept? These practical issues are discussed in

Sections 7.4.2 and 7.4.3.

The results from many different types of mastery courses show that based on tests students

learn more than they do with other teaching methods (Bloom, 1968; Hereford, 1979; Kulik et

al., 1979; Stice, 1979). The previously cited extensive comparison of teaching methods

(Taveggia and Hedley, 1972) found no differences between teaching methods in the amount

students learned, but did not include mastery courses in the comparisons. In addition to

learning more, students in mastery courses like the subject, are motivated to learn, and have

an improved self-concept.

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

133

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

All teaching methods have disadvantages. These will be discussed when the detailed course

types are considered in Sections 7.4.2 and 7.4.3.

Self-paced courses handle the scheduling problem by letting students decide what pace

they want. They are allowed to take mastery tests whenever they wish and thus can move

through the course at their own pace. Several variants of the self-paced or personalized system

of instruction (PSI) have been adopted in engineering. It is useful to consider the basic plan

which was first developed by Keller (1968) in a psychology course.

What the student first sees in a Keller plan course are a course outline and a set of

instructions. The student then gets a study guide and studies alone or in groups. When ready,

he or she reports to a proctor and takes a test. The proctor grades the test with the student

present. If the test is in the uncertain category, the proctor asks the student a few questions. If

the student passes, the proctor marks the student as passed and gives him or her the next study

guide. If mastery has not been achieved, the student studies some more before returning to take

a different test on the same topic. The student continues to take tests on the area until the topic

is mastered. After each test he or she automatically receives some tutoring as the proctor points

out the mistakes and explains why the answers are wrong. After all required units are

completed, there may be optional units and/or a final examination. A Keller plan course has

the following six recognizable characteristics:

1 The course is self-paced. In the pure form no pressure is put on students to complete units

at a given time. Many professors have found that for practical reasons students need to be

encouraged to complete modules at some minimum rate.

2 The course is modularized, there are clear objectives for each module, and learning

materials such as a study guide and a textbook are available. Clear objectives and the

availability of learning materials are the necessary and sufficient requirements so that students

learn as much as with other teaching methods.

3 Mastery. Mastery appears to be the key reason why students in PSI courses learn more

than in nonmastery courses.

4 Undergraduate proctors as tutors to grade mastery tests and provide immediate feedback

and help to students. The use of undergraduate proctors is extremely helpful and is appreciated

by the students taking the course. Proctors can approach the ideal of providing individual

tutoring for each student. In addition, the proctors learn a good deal and often become

motivated to go on to graduate school. However, proctors do not seem to be essential for

success as long as there is reasonably rapid feedback and help is available.

5 Lectures and demonstrations are used for motivation but not for transfer of basic

information. This is clearly not necessary for the success of students using the method, and in

instructor-paced classes lectures can be used for information transfer (see Section 7.4.3).

Lectures may be necessary for the success of the professor since it is widely believed that

“teaching and talking go hand in hand” (Keller, 1985).

7.4.2. Self-Paced Courses (Keller Plan or Personalized System of Instruction)

134

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

6 Written and oral communication are used for testing. It is clear that a mastery class can

be successful with only written communication on tests, and we see no reason why only oral

communication could not be used.

Based on over twenty-five years of experience and experimentation since Keller first tried

self-paced courses, it appears that there are three successful ingredients:

1 The course must be modularized with clear objectives and available learning materials.

2 Mastery must be required, but the exact level set (e.g., 80, 90, or 100 percent) is not

critical.

3 Prompt feedback is necessary.

Regardless of who does the grading and provides the feedback, one result of a mastery

course is that poorer students are forced to obtain more practice and receive more help than

better students. This is the reverse of what often happens in nonmastery courses. The other

details used by Keller are not critical for success (of course, if self-pacing is not used, the course

is not a Keller plan course but can still be a mastery course).

Many variations in grading have been used in PSI courses. Keller (1968) based about 75

percent of the grade on the number of mastery quizzes which were successfully passed and 25

percent of the grade on the final. There is no penalty for taking a quiz and failing it. Some

professors have required that students complete all required sections and then have awarded

an A when this was done. The course grade distribution was either an A or an F/incomplete.

This procedure has been extensively criticized. Some professors award a C when the basic

modules have been completed and allow students to work for a higher grade with optional

modules, an optional final, or other optional learning activities such as computer programs.

This is a type of contract grading where the student contracts to do a specified quantity of work

to earn a grade. The professor can also base the entire grade on the final examination which

the student takes after completing the required modules. Grades in mastery plan courses are

usually higher than in nonmastery courses. Mastery courses have been criticized for this;

however, since the students are learning more, why shouldn’t they earn higher grades?

No longer a lecturer, the professor becomes a facilitator of learning and chooses the content

to cover, develops the objectives, selects learning material such as articles and textbooks, and

writes the study guides. The professor must write the mastery tests and decide what constitutes

mastery. He or she supervises the proctors or TAs and checks the grading. In many schools

proctors are hired, though in small classes the professor may do the grading. The professor

helps to motivate students and helps with the tutoring, particularly when the student has

difficult questions. The professor is responsible for selecting the grading scheme and for

assigning the final grades.

Billy Koen of the University of Texas first introduced the method into engineering

education in a nuclear engineering course in 1969. A very wide variety of engineering courses

have been taught by variations of the PSI method in every engineering discipline (e.g., Baasel,

1978; Conger, 1971; Craver, 1974; Grayson and Biedenbach, 1974; Harrisberger, 1971;

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

135

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Flammer, 1971; Koen, 1970; and Koen et al., 1985). Because of a variety of time, money and

administrative constraints, engineering professors have often modified the standard Keller

plan. Pressure is often applied to students to keep them progressing in the course. Most

professors do not present the motivation lectures or demonstrations. A TA or the professor may

substitute for the undergraduate proctors. Tests may be only in written form with no

opportunity for oral explanations. Since these changes keep the three key components intact,

these courses are usually successful.

As noted in the previous section, students learn more in PSI courses than in nonmastery

courses, and students do better on common final examinations (Keller, 1968; Kulik et al.,

1979; Stice, 1979). Stice (1979) found that 75 percent of students preferred PSI to lecture

courses. Small classes received particularly high ratings (this is not a surprise; see Section

16.3.3), and ratings were high in all classes (Hereford, 1979).

There are some problems with self-paced courses. The first time a professor teaches a PSI

course the time commitment is roughly twice that for a nonmastery course (Craver, 1974;

Hereford, 1979; Stice, 1979). This experience has prevented some professors from continuing

with PSI. The good news is that subsequent offerings take about as much professorial time as

lecture classes. Proctor costs are real, and PSI courses may be a bit more expensive than other

classes. Hereford (1979) found that proctor costs ranged from $16.11 to $50.80 per student

with a mean of $33.60. Because of inflation these costs have undoubtedly increased. However,

there are major benefits of using carefully selected undergraduate proctors, and if they can be

afforded they are a plus.

One advantage of PSI courses is that students are not competing with each other for a grade.

Thus, they can be encouraged to cooperate. However, in most PSI variations no formal effort

is made to arrange for cooperation, and some students work through the course in total

isolation. These students talk only to proctors, and if the student masters the material this

contact may be minimal. This shortcoming can be overcome without compromising the PSI

procedure by developing cooperative groups and encouraging students to work together.

Procrastination can be a major problem because it can lead to excessive drops, incompletes,

and lower grades. Drops increase because students realize that they are far behind and feel that

they cannot catch up. Incompletes increase if students are allowed to receive an incomplete

if they don’t finish on time. This can be controlled by allowing incompletes only if the student

meets the university’s requirements for an incomplete which usually means illness, involun-

tary military service, or death in the family. Grades often decrease since the grade is based on

the number of units the student has finished. In addition, procrastination spreads out the tests

students take. This is a burden for the graders since they must be expert in a wider range of

material and must have more tests available. Procrastination is worse with freshmen and

seniors and is much worse with instructors who are inexperienced in using PSI (Hereford,

1979). Clearly, there are things the instructor can do to reduce procrastination. Students can

be told the rules on incompletes, and they can be given both an average rate of progress and

a minimum rate of progress. The professor or proctors can call and confront students who fall

behind. All of these are successful in reducing procrastination, but they do compromise the

concept of self-pacing. Extreme measures to control procrastination lead to an instructor-

paced course.

136

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

A variety of instructor-paced mastery courses have been devised (Block, 1971, 1974;

Bloom, 1968; Stice, 1979; Wankat, 1973). In the original development of this procedure

(Block, 1971, 1974; Bloom, 1968) the instructor used whatever group teaching procedure that

he or she wanted. The students took regularly scheduled formative examinations which were

scored but not graded. The instructor marked the tests as mastery or not mastery. For each

problem missed the student received information about alternate learning resources to learn

the material. This diagnosis of problems is the key step in this procedure. The learning

resources could consist of specific passages in other textbooks, articles, programmed texts,

audiovisual material, workbooks, and so forth. The use of an alternate to the first way the

student has studied helps to individualize the instruction for each student. Students were

expected to study and learn the corrective material on their own time. Since the formative tests

were not graded and did not affect the student’s grade in the course, students were encouraged

to cooperate with each other and with the professor to learn the material. In other words, the

class and the professor became a team that tackled the real enemy—the content to be learned.

All the students proceeded through the course unit by unit at the same rate. Students who had

not mastered a previous unit were also simultaneously studying the unit they had not mastered.

At the end of the semester the class was given a final examination which was scored and

graded. The course grade depended entirely upon the final. Bloom (1968) found that 80

percent of the students received A’s on the same final that 20 percent of the students in a

nonmastery course had received A’s on. When the formative examination results were

compared to the previous year as a measure of progress, 90 percent of the students received

A’s. In this case the instructor spent extra time on those topics with which students were having

additional problems.

In an absolute sense mastery was not required in these applications as it is in PSI courses.

The frequent formative evaluations and diagnostic feedback were apparently sufficient for the

students to learn more than in a usual class. The course was also modularized and had clear

learning objectives. Feedback to the students was highly emphasized and was individualized

to help each student learn. Unlike the situation in PSI, the instructor did “teach” in addition

to structuring the course. As in PSI, students were not competing with each other. This was

true even on the final since the grade necessary for an A was predetermined by what students

in a lecture class had achieved.

The success of this type of course calls into question the need to make students achieve

exact mastery on every test, and also makes moot the argument about what mastery is.

However, based on our experience, a few students slip through who do not know the material

well, and they do poorly on the final. This can be prevented with a instructor-paced mastery

class which requires students to pass each formative test.

Our experience has been in developing and using such an instructor-paced mastery course

(Wankat, 1973). The course was developed as an elective course for seniors and graduate

students. To avoid procrastination problems, which can be severe with seniors, students were

forced to move with the instructor. Each week the first mastery quiz on the old material was

given on Tuesday, a lecture on new material on Thursday, and a repeat quiz on the old material

7.4.3. Instructor-Paced Mastery Courses

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

137

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

on Saturday. The results of the first mastery quiz were posted on Wednesday. Students who

did not master the material were required to come on Saturday and had to turn in homework

before taking the repeat quiz. On Saturday the professor and the TA graded the quiz while

the student watched; the mistakes were explained so that the student did not repeat them.

Because of budget constraints proctors were unavailable and the staffing was the same as for

a lecture course. If students did not pass the first repeat quiz, they had to return the next

Saturday. Because of university scheduling, the quizzes on Tuesdays were timed, but the

Saturday quizzes were not. With this arrangement some students fell quite far behind. The

insertion of a two-week computer design module with no new Tuesday quizzes in the middle

of the semester allowed them to catch up. Students who mastered the twelve required modules

received a C. They could improve their grades by exercising one of three options: writing a

computer program, mastering an optional module in a maximum of three attempts, or mastering

the final in one attempt. Many graduating seniors worked for a C or a B and did not try to earn

a higher grade.

The instructor informally compared the results to previous years and found that the students

learned more. In most years when the course was taught there were no D’s, no F’s, and no

incompletes. There were slightly more A’s, many more B’s, and fewer C’s than when the

course was taught as a lecture. Student ratings were very favorable. However, students who

earned C’s thought that they had put in more work and learned more than required for a C in

other courses. Interestingly, the mastery course took an unfavorable schedule (Saturday

morning classes) and turned it into an advantage. Many students studied diligently to avoid

coming to the Saturday class. The instructor’s time requirements were very similar to those

reported for PSI classes.

In its simplest form, an independent study class consists of a study guide, a textbook, and

a final examination. A student follows the study guide, reads the textbook, works any

appropriate problems, and takes the final examination when ready. The student’s grade is

determined entirely by the final examination. If the study guide includes detailed objectives

and the textbook is well written, any student with enough self-discipline to work through the

material should do well on test questions at the lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. Obviously,

this approach will not work well for fostering higher-level cognitive skills, communication

skills, and teamwork. Although uncommon in engineering, such independent study courses

are fairly common in the humanities and social sciences. Independent study courses have the

advantage of ultimate flexibility in scheduling. It is not necessary that the student complete the

course in one semester, and either more or less time can be used.

Many variants of the basic independent study course are possible. Lectures can be carried

on radio or TV, and taped lectures may also be available. Then students have the option of

listening to the broadcasts in addition to reading the text. This additional mode of information

transfer may be useful to some students. The broadcast schedule can also serve to provide some

structure and as an indication of how fast they must progress in the course.

7.5. INDEPENDENT STUDY CLASSES: INCREASING CURRICULUM FLEXIBILITY

138

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Another variant of independent study is to have a tutor available to answer questions and

check homework problems. Otherwise, the student’s pace and learning are independent and

the course grade depends on test results. We have used this procedure to satisfy a very

important prerequisite requirement in the chemical engineering curriculum. No test was given,

and no course credit was earned; however, students were allowed to take the prerequisite

course as a corequisite. Because of the structure of prerequisites in chemical engineering, this

procedure allowed transfer students to graduate in two instead of three years. Over about a ten-

year period we have had very good success with this use of independent study in a select group

of motivated students. Since these students were seeing the material in the required course for

the second time when they took it for credit, it is perhaps not surprising that they tended to do

well. The only quality control applied was the requirement that the tutor be a chemical engineer

and sign a letter stating that the student had covered the required book chapters; the tutor also

had to list the homework problems that were worked.

Various other independent study options could be useful in providing flexibility in

otherwise inflexible curricula. In addition to allowing students to take a prerequisite course as

a corequisite, independent study could be used to allow students to continue taking engineer-

ing classes after flunking a required course. This would be particularly useful at schools where

courses are offered just once a year and would reduce some of the pressure on students and

professors. The independent study course would again satisfy the prerequisite requirements

only—the student would have to retake the course for credit when it was reoffered. Since the

reoffering would, in effect, be the third time, many students would be able to pass an otherwise

impossible course. Independent study options would also be of interest to select students

during the summer or when on co-op assignments.

The professor’s task in these independent study options is first to decide what the essential

material is and then develop the key learning objectives for this material. Next he or she must

determine the required sections of the book and some representative homework problems.

Finally, if the option will be used for a credit course, the professor must select the test(s) that

will be used to grade the student.

Independent project and thesis courses are fairly common in engineering. They often

involve fairly close work with a professor or graduate student and may involve student teams

(see Sections 10.4 and 11.4).

Field trips and visits to local facilities are an underutilized teaching method in most

engineering courses. Seeing real equipment or manufacturing operations provides students

with a concrete, visual, and often kinesthetic learning experience. Such first-hand experience

can make abstract equations seem much more real, and the trips can be motivating to many

students. These trips can also serve as marker events. (We remember field trips that were taken

25 years ago, while we rarely remember individual lecture classes.)

Unfortunately, many engineering professors believe the myth that a field trip has to be an

all-day affair which requires much time to set up. Such longer trips are often necessary to see

7.6. FIELD TRIPS AND VISITS

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

139

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

particular types of engineering operations. However, local trips to facilities on campus or at

the university’s research park can often be completed in one class period, or even part of a

period, and can provide a useful supplement for many courses. For example, many freshmen

or sophomores will benefit from a “field trip” to the senior laboratory down the hall. This can

be done in the last ten or fifteen minutes of a class. A class studying power production can visit

the university’s power plant, which is also of interest to a class studying cooling towers.

Classes in structures or foundations can visit the sites of new buildings or bridges. Environ-

mental engineers can visit the local wastewater treatment plant. Industrial engineers can

obviously benefit from visiting any manufacturing facility, but less obviously can also learn

from seeing the university’s printing and mailing rooms or from a visit to a local travel agent.

Practical information on steam transmission can be found in the basement of many campus

buildings. Many research laboratories have specialized equipment which will at least give

students an idea of what something looks like.

Field trips and visits offer many advantages: They are often a welcome break in the routine,

are visually and kinesthetically rewarding, are often marker events, and provide the concrete

experience of seeing real equipment and engineering operations, which can be motivating,

with “real” engineers explaining the equipment or operation. Disadvantages include the loss

of time for covering content and the loss of some control of what happens. In addition,

appropriate trips require work to set up and this must be done well in advance, long distance

trips are very time-consuming and arrangements must be made for students to miss one day

of classes, trips away from campus cost money and often the professor has to find an “angel”

to cover the cost, and some students do not take the trip or visit seriously since it is not covered

on the test.

Our experience has been that ten-to fifteen-minute visits are very useful motivators for

sophomores. Longer field trips are useful for seniors who have not had industrial experience,

but the scheduling can be difficult. Optional trips arranged by a student organization are a

useful alternative, and students often have an easier time raising money. In our class on

teaching methods visits to local audio-tutorial laboratories, computer teaching presentations,

and laser videodisc demonstrations have been among the highlights of the semester.

This chapter has been a smorgasbord of different methods which can be used either as part

of basically a lecture class, as a break in a class, or instead of lecturing. All these methods try

to involve the student with the content and work to make him or her active. The methods

included here certainly do not exhaust the possibilities. With some creativity engineering

professors can develop new variations to involve their students.

You may decide that you have no interest in using cooperative group or mastery techniques;

however, both of these methods clarify the need for clear learning objectives. Cooperative

group learning has emphasized that professors should focus more on what the students do and

less on what the professor does. Mastery learning shows clearly that a criterion-referenced

grading scheme can be used, and that professors do not have to grade on a curve. All these

truths can be adopted in other teaching methods.

7.7. CHAPTER COMMENTS

140

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Introducing change in the classroom can be difficult. Professors cling to lecturing because

it gives them power, minimizes risk, and is socially acceptable within their department. Many

students also prefer known teaching methods because the known is more secure. If a new

teaching method has been used previously, student acceptance can be increased by showing

the improved grade distribution obtained with the new method as compared to the old method

(Tschumi, 1991). Elective courses are a good place to experiment since professors are

scruntized less and the students are all volunteers.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Outline the use of and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the following teaching

methods.

Discussion Mastery and PSI

Cooperative group learning Individual study courses

Panels, debates, and quiz shows Field trips

• Incorporate appropriate methods into an engineering class taught by lecture.

• Develop an engineering course taught by a method where lecturing is clearly a

supplemental teaching method instead of being the major teaching method.

1 Choose a specific undergraduate engineering course which is normally taught using the

lecture method. Determine how you can incorporate two of the teaching methods listed in

the first objective in Section 7.8 into the lecture course. Explain what you would accomplish

by doing this. Develop your script for one day using one of the methods, and for another day

using another method.

2 Choose the same engineering course selected in problem 1. Determine how to teach it using

a nonlecture method. Prepare a detailed script for two days of class.

Astin, A. W., Achieving Educational Excellence, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

Baasel, W. D., “Why PSI? How to stop demotivating students,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 78 (Spring 1978).

Block, J. H. (Ed.), Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York,

1971.

7.8. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

141

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Block, J. H. (Ed.), Schools, Society and Mastery Learning, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1974.

Bloom, B. S., “Learning for instruction,” Evaluation Comment, University of California, Los Angeles

(2) (May 1968). Also RELCV topical paper and reprint no. 1.

Buchanan, W., “An experiment in pairs testing with electrical engineering technology students,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC , 1764, 1991.

Cashin, W. E. and McKnight, P. C., “Improving discussion,” Idea Paper No. 15, Center for Faculty

Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1986.

Conger, W. L., “Mass transfer operations—A self-paced course,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 5(3), 122 (1971).

Craver, W. L., “A realistic appraisal of first efforts at self-paced instruction,” Eng. Educ., 448 (March

1974).

Davis, R. H., Fry, J. P., and Alexander, L. T., “The discussion method,” Guides for the Improvement of

Instruction in Higher Education, No. 6

, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1977.

Eble, K. E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Felder, R. M., “Stoichiometry without tears,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 188 (Fall 1990).

Flammer, G. H., “Learning as the constant and time as the variable, Eng. Educ., 511 (March 1971).

Gessler, J., “SPI: Good-bye education?” Eng. Educ., 252 (Dec. 1974).

Goldstein, H., “Learning through cooperative groups,” Eng. Educ., 171 (Nov. 1982).

Grayson, L. P. and Biedenbach, J. M. (Eds.), Individualized Instruction in Engineering Education,

ASEE, Washington, DC 1974.

Hamelink, J., Groper, M., and Olson, L. T., “Cooperation not competition,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 177, 1989.

Harrisberger, L., “Self-paced individually prescribed instruction,” Eng. Educ., 508 (March 1971).

Hayes, R. M., Friel, L. L., and Hess, L. L., “Learning groups in statics instruction,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 152, 1985.

Hereford, S. M., “The Keller plan within a conventional academic environment: An empirical ‘meta-

analytic’ study,” Eng. Educ., 250 (Dec. 1979).

Hudspeth, M. C., Shelton, M. T., and Ruiz, H., “The impact of cooperative learning in engineering at

California State Polytechnic University, Ponoma,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, New York, 12, 1989.

Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T., “Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning,” Rev. Educ.

Res. 49(1), 51 (Winter 1979).

Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T., Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research, Interaction

Books, Edina, MN, 1989.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A., Active Learning: Cooperation in the College

Classroom, Interaction Book, Edina, MN, 1991.

Keller, F. S., “Good-bye, teacher...,” J. Appl. Behav. Anal., 1, 79 (1968).

Keller, F. S., “Testimony of an educational reformer,” Eng. Educ., 144 (Dec. 1985)

Koen, B. V., “Self-paced instruction for engineering students,” Eng. Educ., 60(7), 735 (1970).

Koen, B. V., Himmelbau, D., Jensen, P., and Roth, C., “The Keller plan: A successful experiment in

engineering education,” Eng. Educ., 280 (Feb. 1985).

Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. C., and Cohen, P. A., “A meta-analysis of outcome studies of Keller’s personalized

system of instruction,” Am. Psychol. 34(41), 307 (1979).

Lowman, J., Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

McKeachie, W. J., “Student anxiety, learning and achievement,” Eng. Educ., 724 (April 1983).

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips. A Guidebook for the Beginning College Teacher, 8th ed., D.C. Heath,

Lexington, MA, 1986.

Palmer, P. J., To Know As We are Known: A Spirituality of Education, Harper-Collins, San Francisco,

1983.

142

CHAPTER 7: NONTECHNOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES TO LECTURES

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Reynolds, T. S., “Using simulated debates to teach history of engineering advances,” Eng. Educ., 184

(Nov. 1976).

Shelton, M. T. and Hudspeth, M. C., “Cooperative learning in engineering through academic excellence

workshops at California State Polytechnic University, Ponoma,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers

in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 35, 1989.

Smith, K. A., “Structured controversies,” Eng. Educ., 306 (Feb. 1984).

Smith, K. A., “Cooperative learning groups,” in Schomberg, S. F. (Ed.), Strategies for Active Teaching

and Learning in University Classrooms, Continuing Education and Extension, University of

Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 1986.

Smith, K. A., “The craft of teaching. Cooperative learning: An active learning strategy,” Proceedings

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 188, 1989.

Stice, J. E., “PSI and Bloom’s mastery model: A review and comparison,” Eng. Educ., 175 (Nov. 1979).

Tannen, D., You Just Don’t Understand, Ballatine Books, New York, 1990.

Tannen, D., “Teacher’s classroom strategies should recognize that men and women use language

differently,” Chronicle Higher Educ., B1 (June 19, 1991).

Taveggia, T. C. and Hedley, R. A., “Teaching really matters, or does it?,” Eng. Educ., 546 (March 1972).

Tinto, V., Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures for Student Attrition, University of

Chicago Press, Chicago, 1987.

Topping, K., “Cooperative learning and peer tutoring: An overview,” The Psychologist, 5(4), 151 (April

1992).

Tschumi, P., “Using an active learning strategy in introduction to digital systems,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1987, 1991.

Wankat, P. C., “A modified personalized instruction—lecture course,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 144, 1973.

143

TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

CHAPTER 8

This chapter also focuses on the how-to of teaching, except that here technological means

are used to deliver the instruction. The delivery media include television and video, computer

and laser videodisc, and audiotutorial. Many different teaching methods such as lecture,

interactive tutoring, discussion, and drill can be used with different delivery media. Television

and video are discussed first because these media are often used with the traditional lecture

method of Chapter 6. In universities, educational television has been used to deliver lectures

to remote sites or at different times. Television and video are also useful as backups for live

lectures and for providing feedback to students. A computer can be used as a tool to reduce

the repetitive nature of calculations (see Sections 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 on spreadsheets and equation

solvers and simulation programs), while most of the teaching uses traditional teaching

methods and a live delivery medium. A computer can also replace the traditional live delivery

through computer-aided instruction (Section 8.2.3) or interactive laser videodisc (Section

8.2.4). The audiotutorial technique involves a combination of technology, laboratory, and

other teaching methods.

In this chapter it is necessary to draw a distinction between the teaching method and the

delivery medium (see Figure 8-1). A teaching method (lecture, discussion, drill, etc.) is chosen

and then paired with a delivery medium (live interaction, live TV, videotape, noninteractive

computer, etc.) to reach the learner. The general flow sheet is shown in Figure 8-1a, and

specific applications are shown in Figures 8-1b to 8-1g. In Chapters 6, 7, 9, and 10 the delivery

medium is usually live interaction. In this chapter various technological media are used to

deliver the instruction.

Over the years, the introduction of new technology for education has generated initial high

excitement, but that has been followed by disillusionment, although eventually most technolo-

gies find a niche in the educational system. Throughout this chapter we will consider what

delivery of instruction by technological media can do better than the nontechnological

TEACHING ENGINEERING

144

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Homework-

drill

Method

Medium

Learners

Lecture

Live TV

Learners

Lecture

Live classroom

Learners

Lecture-

discussion

Tutored

Videotape

Learners

Computer

Learners

Lecture/video/

photos/problems/etc.

Interactive laser

videodisc

Learners

Problems

Interactive-

computer

Learners

FIGURE 8-1 INTERACTIONS OF TEACHING METHODS AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS.

A.General flowsheet. B. "Normal" lecture (Chapter 6). C. Live TV (8.1.1). D. Tutored

videotaped (8.1.2). E. Non-interactive CAI drill (8.2.2). F. Interactive CAI (8.2.2).

G. Interactive laser videodisc (8.2.3).

delivery alternatives such as lecture, discussion, cooperative groups, and PSI. Gibbons et al.

(1977) present the following list of guidelines for the successful use of technology in

education:

1 Plan use for a specific audience.

2 Define objectives which are relevant to the audience.

3 Pick a technological medium and a teaching method which are appropriate to the topic.

4 Pick educators interested in using the technology.

5 Plan for personal interaction, particularly among students.

6 Monitor the course and change materials and methods as appropriate.

Of course this list can be applied to any teaching method if the words “teaching method”

replace “technology.” If use of the technological medium does not have an advantage as

compared to nontechnological delivery, the combination of technological delivery medium

FIGURE 8-1 INTERACTION OF TEACHING METHODS AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS.

A. General flowsheet. B. "Normal" lecture (Chapter 6). C. Live TV (8.1.1) D. Tutored videotape

(8.1.2). E. Non-interactive CAI drill (8.2.2). F. Interactive CAI (8.2.2). G. Interactive laser

videodisc (8.2.3).

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

145

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

8.1. TELEVISION AND VIDEO

8.1.1. Instructional Delivery by Television and Video

and teaching method will probably not survive after the innovator has moved on to other

activities.

We will discuss television and video as delivery media for the education of engineering

students (Section 8.1.1), describe a particular form of instruction with video called tutored

videotape instruction (Section 8.1.2), discuss the steps the professor should take to improve

television teaching (Section 8.1.3), and finally, briefly consider the use of television as

feedback for students (Section 8.1.4).

What can delivery of instruction by television or video do better than other means of

delivering instruction? First, television and video make it possible to provide instruction at

remote sites. This ability has been extensively used for continuing education and graduate

programs for engineers employed in industry away from universities. Second, television can

be used to break a huge class into much smaller sections. Third, videos provide flexibility in

that they can be observed at any time. And fourth, a professor can use them to make

“electronic” field trips to observe technology.

“Distance education,” or the use of television and video to deliver instruction at remote

locations, has become important in both continuing education and graduate education as well

as in many fields in addition to engineering. It has even spawned The American Journal of

Distance Education (Penn State University, 205 Rackley Building, University Park, PA

16802). Both live television delivered by satellite and video are used, although the applications

are somewhat different. Most universities that have used television have used it for graduate-

level courses. Practicing engineers can continue their education to a master’s degree with

minimal disruption of their careers and of their family life. Seigel and Davis (1991) also found

increasing acceptance of television for undergraduate engineering courses, and thirty-nine of

the schools surveyed allowed this option. On a national scale, the National Technological

University (NTU) collaborates with many universities to present a wide variety of live

broadcasts most of which are of interest to engineers and scientists. These vary from single

two- to three-hour broadcasts for continuing education, to three-credit courses, to ninety-hour

certificate programs, to masters programs in engineering. For more information write to the

National Technological University, 700 Centre Ave., Ft. Collins, CO 80526. The Public

Broadcasting System (PBS) has televised college-level courses since 1981. Almost 2 million

students have earned credit toward undergraduate degrees at a variety of universities

(Anonymous, 1991). Unlike the courses at the NTU, the PBS courses are of much more general

interest, and PBS is not the credit-granting institution.

146

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Live educational television in engineering has usually employed a teaching method where

a professor lectures in a television studio. Often there is a live audience of students taking the

course for credit at the university and at a number of remote sites. A typical studio has a camera

for the professor, an overhead camera for the notes the professor writes on a tablet, and a

camera for the audience. Students in the studio audience can ask questions of the professor,

and their questions are picked up by microphones so that the remote sites can also hear them.

The remote sites usually have some form of two-way communication with the professor.

The most common form is two-way audio over telephone lines with speaker phones. This is

certainly the cheapest form of two-way communication, and in most instances it is adequate.

In engineering some form of visual feedback is also very useful since it is difficult to discuss

equations or drawings with audio alone. An electronic blackboard such as the AT&T Gemini

100 is one option (e.g., Gupta, 1981; Walker and Donaldson, 1989), but it was not widely

adopted by schools and is now obsolete. Audiographics has proven to be a more acceptable

technology for interactive delivery of both audio and graphics to remote sites (Chute and

Elfrank, 1990). Audiographics uses networked personal computers to transmit text and

graphics. Speakerphones can be used for two-way voice transmittal while television provides

visual and audio transmittal, but audiographics can be used without the television link. A third

option which is useful for equations is electronic mail, but this has also not been widely used

since many remote sites are not on networks. Fax could be used, but the transmission delay

might be a problem. Perhaps the best, but most expensive, solution is two-way video which

is used by Washington State University (Howard and Peters, 1986). This example illustrates

a common problem in education: An adequate technology is used because it is significantly

cheaper than a technology with fewer limitations.

The television delivery system must be of high quality (Canelos and Mollo, 1986). This

means that a professional-quality studio must be available. It is not feasible to do high-quality

television or video without professional-quality equipment. The downlinks from the satellite

must also be of professional quality for live television. These requirements mean that

television courses are expensive. Live television becomes cost-effective when a large number

of sites share the same broadcast. For a single remote site it is probably cheaper to have the

professor travel to the site or to use video instead of live television. The quality of the

professor’s presentation is also critical, and this is discussed in Section 8.1.3.

The major instructional difficulties with live television are the lack of contact between the

students and the professor, and the cost and difficulty in doing anything other than “straight”

lecturing. Television can be an impersonal environment for learning. The term “distance”

applies to psychological distance as well as geographic distance. Field-sensitive individuals

in particular will have more difficulty adjusting to a television course. (See Section 15.2.1)

Since the majority of engineers are field-independent, this will be less of a problem in

engineering than in other fields. Still, the professor needs to do whatever is feasible to create

a sense of contact and to help build rapport. Visits to the remote sites during the semester can

help tremendously. Professors can also have phone office hours every week, although many

students will not take advantage of this opportunity. Discussion and questions are more

difficult in a live television course even with the students in the studio. Thus, the professor

must increase the effort made at soliciting and answering questions. Television encourages

student passivity, which is not productive for learning.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

147

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Television excels at showing visuals; unfortunately, most engineering programs do not

take advantage of this characteristic. For example, a course in structures could include video

of the site before, during, and after construction of a building or bridge. A course in robotics

could show an actual assembly line in operation before and after the installation of robots.

With planning and organization appropriate visuals can be included. For example, the

professor can take a hand-held video camera to a construction site or into a plant. With some

modest editing the result can be used as part of the television broadcast for both local and

remote sites. Full utilization of television requires some creativity on the part of the professor.

Television and videotape classes on campus have the advantage of additional flexibility

for students. If a student cannot schedule the class, he or she can always watch the videotape

at a more convenient time. We had this experience in a live television class. Halfway through

the semester a student was unable to attend the lectures, but he was able to keep up with the

class by watching a videotape of the live broadcast. In addition, he presented an oral report to

the class on videotape. Since finals were scheduled separately, he was able to take the final with

the rest of the class. Although not widely used, videotapes could also be helpful to students

with limited mobility who might prefer to watch a video in their homes rather than come to

the campus every day.

Videotapes can also be useful supplements to other classes. A videotape can show how a

laboratory experiment should be done (e.g., Kostek, 1991). Then instead of each group being

shown how to do the experiment when it is their turn, they can be handed the videotape. We

have used this procedure with good results even though the videotapes were homemade. Since

the students were very motivated to learn from the tape and since they watched it in groups of

three, the homemade character of the tape was not a problem. Videotapes of the apparatus or

of various pieces of equipment can also be made to save time in the students’ getting-

acquainted process before the experiment begins. They can also be very useful for electronic

field trips. In a biochemical engineering class, for example, students can use a videotape to

observe the operation of specialized and often delicate equipment (Austin et al., 1990). Once

produced, the videotape can also be used at schools which do not have the equipment but want

to present an up-to-date course. Druzgalski (1988) notes a similar application where biomedi-

cal equipment and techniques can easily be videotaped and shown to classes which might not

otherwise be able to see the procedures. Squires et al. (1991) used company-produced

videotapes of plant tours to show students a chemical plant without the time and expense of

a field trip. The advantage of involving the companies was that once they decided to support

the videotape they paid for a professional company to produce it. These tapes can then be used

at many schools to justify the production costs. Other applications of videotape supplements

to other teaching methods await the ingenuity and energy of individual professors.

How well do students learn from television or video courses? Based on a variety of studies,

the answer is that there are no significant differences between student learning from either

television or video and from more traditional courses (Canelos and Mollo, 1986; Chute and

Elfrank, 1990; Gibbons et al., 1977; Moore, 1990; Scidmore and Bernstein, 1986; Walker and

Donaldson, 1989; Wergin et al., 1986). Although some studies have found that on-campus

students do better, others have found that off-campus students do as well or slightly better. The

net result is that the medium used is not critical. Much more important are the quality of the

delivery and the message.

148

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The other system which has been used extensively for the delivery of classes to remote sites

is tutored videotape instruction (TVI) which is illustrated in Figure 8-1d. This method was

originally developed at Stanford University (Gibbons et al., 1977). With this technique a video

is produced on campus by essentially the same procedures as live television. It seems to be

most effective if the video is made of a live class. The video is then shipped to the remote sites

where it can be shown at a convenient time. When the video is shown at a remote site, a local

engineer who is qualified to help teach the material serves as a tutor. The video is shown for

roughly five to ten minutes and then halted for questions and discussion. The next segment of

the video is then shown followed by a question-and-discussion period. This procedure is

repeated until the video is finished. The tutor may discuss example problems at any time. If

there is a time constraint on class length, the video should be about thirty minutes long so that

there is time for the questions and discussion. If the tutor is unable to answer any questions,

the professor can be called on the telephone at prearranged times. This is apparently rarely

necessary. The professor prepares homework and examinations, sends them to the tutor, and

then supervises the grading after the tutor returns them.

This procedure is more flexible than live television and has more live contact except that

the contact is with the tutor instead of with the professor. Groups should have from three to

ten students with the optimum size appearing to be from three to eight students. This procedure

can then act as a cooperative learning group (see Section 7.2.2) and will have the advantages

of cooperative groups.

The selection of tutors is important. Gibbons et al. (1977) suggest that tutors at remote sites

should be:

1 Practicing engineers at the site.

2 Have a personal interest in reviewing the subject but not be so expert that they will be

bored by the tapes.

3 Have a desire to help teach the course.

4 Be sensitive to the needs of the students and able to draw them into discussion. Tutors

with a discussion style are more effective than tutors who want to answer all the students’

questions.

Tutored videotape instruction has also been used to advantage on campus (Gibbons et al.,

1977; Robinson and Canelos, 1989; Scidmore and Bernstein, 1986). TVI allows the school

to offer a course even when the professor is not available because of sabbatical or other

commitments. Graduate students are happy to serve as tutors and probably find the assignment

more enjoyable than being a grader. For on-campus applications of the method Scidmore and

Bernstein (1986) found “as much, if not more, success with undergraduate tutors as with

graduate student tutors. Undergraduate tutors have frequently just completed the course and

are closer to the students’ problems than a graduate student.” TVI has also been used in

undergraduate classes to break supersized classes down into much more manageable sections.

With a tutor assigned to each section the students have the benefits of contact and of seeing

8.1.2. Tutored Videotape Instruction

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

149

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

the professor lecture on the material. Since small classes are always appreciated by students,

this application of TVI should receive particularly high student ratings if the class size is kept

within the suggested range of three to ten students per section.

One possible abuse that does not occur with live television is failure to update the

videotapes. Once prepared, tapes often continue to be used even though they may have become

outdated. TVI can also be abused if the professor who produces the tape abandons the class

or if sections are allowed to grow too large in order to keep tutor costs down.

The TVI method appears to be a very effective instructional technique. Gibbons et al.

(1977) found that TVI students performed better than students in live lecture classes, who

performed better than students in live TV classes, who performed better than students in video

classes without a tutor; but the results were not statistically significant because of the small

numbers of students in the sample. There was also evidence that the poorer students benefited

most from the TVI teaching technique. Gibbons et al. (1977) hypothesized that the small class

size and the ability to interrupt the lecture frequently for discussion were more important

factors in the success of the method than the use of videotape. (That is, the method was more

important than the medium.) Scidmore and Bernstein (1986) compared on-campus TVI

students to on-campus students in lecture courses. For three years of use in sixteen sections

spread out over three different electrical engineering courses, the TVI students consistently

averaged better on a comprehensive final examination than did the lecture students.

As with all techniques and classes, it is the instructor who controls the quality of instruction.

Obviously, with television and video there is the added requirement that the production must

be well done. Production details are discussed by Canelos and Mollo (1986) and Yoxtheimer

(1986). However, even great production facilities cannot compensate for poor instruction. The

following hints are from Canelos and Mollo (1986), Garrod (1988), Yoxtheimer (1986), and

our personal experience.

1 Be prepared and well organized. Since television magnifies problems, you must be

prepared and organized.

2 Arrive early at the studio. Extra time is required for setting up the cameras, and the

producer will become very agitated if, as the starting time approaches, the “star” of the show

is absent.

3 If possible use an overhead camera for visuals instead of a blackboard. It is difficult to

obtain in-focus pictures of the entire blackboard.

4 Make sure the presentation is of high quality. Material which is prepared ahead of time

must be neat and carefully proofread. If you write notes as the lecture is presented, have the

ideas prepared ahead of time. Write few words and few equations. Write neatly. Orient the

material horizontally since television uses dimensions with a height of three and a width of

four. If large quantities of written material are required, use prepared material which has been

handed out to all students in advance. Be sure that the handouts are also of high quality.

8.1.3. Instructional Hints for Television and Video

150

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

5 Use the principles of good teaching and good lecturing. Aim for variety in the

presentation. A head talking in a monotone is even more boring than a boring presentation in

person. Break the lecture into small parts with time for questions, discussion, and group

activities.

6 Work to obtain group participation. Learn the names of the students both in the studio

and at the remote sites. Allow extra time for questions from the remote sites. Repeat all

questions since the microphones may not pick up student questions.

7 For feedback watch the tape. If necessary, adjust your teaching style. If the tapes will

be used, edit or reshoot unsatisfactory portions. Prepare a practice tape before the semester

starts and discuss your performance with a television expert.

8 In a TVI course develop written instructions for the tutors for live, in-class activities. Do

not assume that they can develop these by themselves. Encourage the tutors to stop the tape

frequently for discussion and other activities. Meet with and get to know them since the

professors and the tutors form a team. Monitor the tutoring throughout the term.

9 Have copies of the tapes and the written materials available at the library or learning

center.

Videotape is the premier technology for showing students how others see them. The gift

which Robert Burns prayed for is now here, and it is videotape. If oral communication or

interpersonal teamwork is required, videotape feedback to students is invaluable. Fortunately,

such use can be relatively inexpensive. It is not necessary to have a studio, and it may be

preferable not to have one. Many students are afraid to appear before a camera, and

videotaping in a normal classroom is less threatening. The equipment needed includes a

camera, a tripod, a VCR, and a TV monitor. In the classroom only the camera and the tripod

are necessary, and it is probably better not to have the other equipment in sight. Although it

is convenient to have a TA or undergraduate assistant serve as camera operator, this is not

absolutely necessary. The camera can be prefocused on the tripod and then be turned on before

the students start.

Procedures for videotaping oral reports are discussed by Wankat et al. (1977). First, get the

students accustomed to the camera. This can be done by asking every student to make a very

short, ungraded oral presentation in front of the camera. Although they may learn something

from watching these short videos, the main purpose is to reduce anxiety when they make their

regular presentations.

The regular presentations should follow the normal format for oral presentations in class.

The reports should be timed. Students should be encouraged to use visual aids such as an

overhead projector. These visuals will probably not show up on the tape, but this is

unimportant since the purpose of the tape is feedback, not communication to others. Have the

class ask questions and continue to videotape the speaker while he or she responds.

8.1.4. Videotape Feedback for Students

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

151

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

No one likes the sound of their voice on a tape, and many people do not like the way they

appear on camera. Since the student is likely to be embarrassed, show the tape privately. Most

students will be very severe critics of their presentation when they see the tape. If a student

becomes upset while watching the tape, be sure to give some positive feedback and point out

what worked. The camera is very blunt in showing problems, and usually there is no need to

point out what is obvious to the student. Give the student a few pointers on what to do to

improve, but do not overload him or her with too much advice. However, after more than ten

years of taping student presentations, both undergraduate and graduate, the more common

response we have seen is a positive one. Students discover that all the nervousness they feel

while speaking does not show up on the tape; it’s all internal—their knocking knees aren’t

visible for all to see. Also, they generally concede that the talk went better than they thought

it would, or that they didn’t sound as bad as they thought they would. For every student that

is appalled at seeing himself or herself, many more enjoy watching themselves. Our favorite

reaction was that of one student who sat back as he watched himself and in all seriousness

proclaimed, “Damn, I’m good looking!”

Additionally, videotaping oral reports greatly improves the instructor’s ability to give

feedback. While watching the tape, instructors regularly see mannerisms and nuances they did

not see the first time. The student also receives much more individual attention, which is

important for improving presentation skills. Once students see their presentations, they

seldom complain about the grade they receive on the oral report. Finally, the old adage of a

picture being worth a thousand words holds very true with videotapes of oral presentations.

You can tell a student over and over that he or she says “um” too often, but the impact of

watching oneself “um” and “er” through fifteen minutes of material is much more powerful

and immediate. The reality becomes painfully obvious.

Although much less common in engineering classes, videotapes can also be very helpful

for interpersonal training. A camera is a very effective device for showing students their

behavior and the reactions to their behavior in groups. In counseling programs it is common

to use a room equipped with one-way mirrors so that the presence of an observer and of the

camera does not disturb the group. Even without a one-way mirror, videotaping can be

valuable for providing feedback. Once they get started, most groups tend to forget that the

camera is there. The camera operator should attempt to be unobtrusive and should never give

directions to the group. The quality of the camera work is not very important; it is much more

important to capture the group in action. One problem with groups is that members behave

differently at different times. It may be necessary to videotape several hours of group

interaction to obtain the entire range of any individual’s repertoire of group responses.

If the group proceeds well, the entire group can watch the videotape for feedback. Be sure

to stop the tape at appropriate places for a discussion of what has happened. If one member

of the group was obstructive, it is probably appropriate to show the tape to that person

privately. Otherwise, there may be a tendency for the group to beat up on that person now that

he or she cannot deny the behavior. Discuss with the student what can be done to improve her

or his skills in groups.

152

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

There has been a computer revolution in engineering education, but to date it has been much

less far-reaching than many prophets predicted. Computers and calculators have greatly

increased the ability of students (and practicing engineers) to perform calculations. Since

computers and calculators allow professors and students to do a much better job at calculation,

they have been widely adopted in engineering education. As a result, professors have changed

the nature of the problems presented, and they have changed many of the mathematical

techniques taught. This has been an important change in the way engineering is taught (and

practiced). However, we have not seen significant adoption of computers for the delivery of

instruction.

In this section we will first explore the use of computers as tools in the classroom. The

commonly used generic computer tools are spreadsheets, equation solvers, and symbolic

algebra programs. Simulation programs tend to be much less generic but will be discussed with

the other tools. Then we will discuss computer-aided instruction which uses a computer to

deliver instruction. Finally, interactive laser videodisc instructional methods will be considered.

Before any computer application is adopted, the professor needs to determine whether five

prerequisites for instructional use of computers have been met. The first three are from Trollip

(1987/88).

1 Accessibility. Both the hardware and the software must be readily accessible to both

students and faculty.

2 High-quality software. The software must do something that the students want it to do,

it must have clear and unambiguous screen displays, the interaction between user and machine

must be easy, the software must be easy to use, the software must be relatively fast, and above

all, the software must be robust.

3 Faculty interest. The faculty must have sufficient interest and energy to follow through

with the project. The amount of interest and energy required depends on the project. For

adopting generic tools such as spreadsheets, the amount is modest, but for writing computer-

aided instruction packages it can be staggering.

4 Advantage. A computer must be able to do something better than the student can do it

working without the computer. If there is no perceived advantage, then students will not use

the computer and the faculty will drop the experiment.

5 Student computer background. Students must be taught how to use both the hardware and

the particular software. If this has not been done in a prerequisite course, then they must be

taught in the current course. Particularly for weaker students, learning about unfamiliar

hardware and software in a discipline-oriented course can lead to cognitive overload and a

poorer performance (Whitney and Urquhart, 1990).

8.2. COMPUTERS IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

153

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Engineering professors have recently discovered the use of generic software such as

spreadsheets and equation solvers for the solution of engineering problems. As the available

packages have become more powerful, robust, and user-friendly, it has become clear that they

represent an extremely useful middle ground between hand solutions and computer program-

ming. Some students will do almost anything to avoid programming, but the generic packages

are user-friendly enough that, with a little training, almost all students can be induced to use

them. Thus, in many applications computer tools are a significant advance over both hand

calculations and programming. Because of this advantage, computer tools, particularly

spreadsheets, have been widely adopted.

Students need to learn how to use the various software tools. Probably the ideal arrange-

ment is to teach engineering students how to use the software as freshmen and then use it in

all subsequent engineering courses. If students have not learned a particular software tool

before it is introduced in class, most of them will not use it unless they receive help. Keedy

(1988a) suggests the development of core manuals for software using the “20-80 rule.” That

is, identify approximately twenty concepts and the associated keystrokes which represent 80

percent of the power of the package—and everything the students need to do. When students

first learn the package, they don’t need to know the most efficient way to do something; instead

they need to know the easiest way to learn and remember. Once the 20-80 items have been

identified, write a short core manual which explains how to use these selected features.

Interested students will learn other operations on their own or from other students once they

know how to use the basics of the software.

Applications of spreadsheets in engineering courses have exploded since 1987, and they

have been used in all engineering disciplines: for example, aeronautical engineering (Stiles et

al., 1989), chemical engineering (Misovich and Biasca, 1991; Rosen and Adams, 1987), civil

engineering (Anderson et al., 1988; Mortimer, 1987), electrical engineering (Lofy, 1988),

freshman engineering (Genalo and Dewey, 1988; Keedy, 1988b), and petroleum engineering

(Cress, 1988, 1989). Chapra and Canale (1988) show how spreadsheets can be used to

implement a variety of numerical methods, and Burman (1989) illustrates the conditioning of

climatic data with spreadsheets. This list of references is only the tip of the iceberg, and

anyone who wants to can easily find many more.

As long as a spreadsheet has appropriate graphing and scientific function features and is fast

enough, the choice of spreadsheet is almost immaterial (Lofy, 1988). In addition, students who

learn how to use one type of spreadsheet can easily learn to use a different spreadsheet on their

own. Thus, there is no need to worry about them seeing a different spreadsheet when they

graduate.

The advantages of spreadsheets are discussed by Cress (1989), Misovich and Biasca

(1991), and Mortimer (1987), among others. Spreadsheets are easy to learn; one two-hour

laboratory is sufficient to learn the basics. Spreadsheets remove much of the tedium from

doing calculations and allow the professor to assign more meaningful problems. “What if?”

8.2.1. Computer Tools

154

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

experiments are easy, and students can explore the effect of changing parameters, thereby

gaining a feel for the magnitudes of parameters in problems. And in certain circumstances they

can see what effects can be ignored. Spreadsheets are also easily adapted to discovery learning

methods. Instead of being told, students can discover the effect of variable changes for

themselves.

Spreadsheets are in many ways easier to use than programming. They are structured and

encourage students to structure their calculations, even for hand calculations. A spreadsheet

can easily show tabular solutions. It is easy to debug since syntax errors are shown

immediately, and the instant display of numerical results makes it easier to spot obvious

mistakes. Input and output are easy since any cell can be displayed or changed at any time. The

inclusion of graphics capabilities means that students can easily prepare presentation-quality

graphics and can search for trends visually instead of looking at a mass of numbers. In addition,

spreadsheets are easily documented since each cell can be labeled.

Students invariably prefer spreadsheets to programming. In addition, it doesn’t appear to

make any difference if they learn programming or spreadsheets first (Genalo and Dewey,

1988). Students are also able to generalize the use of spreadsheets to other classes and will use

them in follow-up courses.

Spreadsheets are not without problems. They are slow, large-scale branching is difficult,

and it is difficult to use variable names (Mortimer, 1987). If students are unfamiliar with

spreadsheets or do not use them for a significant period of time, their introduction along with

engineering material may decrease the learning of material (Merino, 1989). This could well

be due to oversaturation with new material. If spreadsheets are introduced early in a course

and used throughout the course, this should not be a problem. For very large problems the use

of spreadsheets becomes cumbersome if not impossible. For these problems discipline-

specific programs are often preferable. For the solution of large systems of equations and for

many numerical methods, equation-solving software is preferable.

In many engineering classes spreadsheets allow students to get to real engineering

problems faster, and permit them to focus on thinking since the program does the routine

calculations. We are strongly in favor of the integration of spreadsheets into the engineering

curriculum at all levels.

Much of what has been said about spreadsheets also applies to equation-solving programs.

There are many examples of the use of these programs in engineering education: FORMULA/

ONE (Baxter, 1988), MathCAD (Head and Fry, 1989; LaBlanc, 1991; Rogers et al., 1989),

MATLAB, and TK!Solver (Fowler, 1985; Harbach and Wiggins, 1985; Keedy, 1988b). With

an equation solver the user lists equations and the program automatically generates a list of

variables. The user gives values for the known variables and asks for a solution. The program

then finds a direct solution or iterates to find a solution after the user supplies initial values.

Equation solvers perform the input and output routines for the user, including graphing

routines, and they choose the algorithm, although the user may be able to override this choice.

They are quicker to set up than programming. The user can do “what if?” calculations and can

thus learn by discovery. The programs can be used for optimization by trial and error and thus

are useful for design problems. The simple features of an equation solver can be learned in one

or two laboratory sessions, but some of the more advanced features take considerably more

time before the user becomes proficient.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

155

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The programs require that students know how to write the equations. However, they do not

need to know how to solve the equations, and in the worst case the program can become a black

box. Generally, the programs have little logic capability and cannot do branching. Each

program has limitations; for instance, TK!Solver cannot solve differential equations either

symbolically or numerically. MathCAD can solve differential equations numerically, but the

manual is difficult to follow (Head and Fry, 1989). Unfortunately, equation-solving programs

do not appear to be as generic as spreadsheets, and experience with one program does not

necessarily translate to facility with another.

Since equation-solving packages have more power than spreadsheets, we recommend their

use in upper-division engineering courses. Some coordination within a department is appro-

priate to ensure that professors are using the same package. Spreadsheets should be taught first

since they are more generic, are more visual, are easier to learn, and are applicable to the

problems taught in lower-division courses. Additionally, students who learn the power of

spreadsheets are more likely to believe that the time invested in learning to use an equation

solver will be well spent.

Symbolic algebra programs such as MAPLE, MACSYMA, Mathematica, Derive, and

Theorist are starting to have an impact on the teaching of calculus throughout the United States

and Canada (Tucker, 1990; Goodman, 1991). A significant number of math teachers think that

these programs can remove some of the repetitive calculations and drudgery from learning

calculus and that the net result will be better learning of the theory of calculus. However, very

preliminary results suggest that it may be the better students who benefit from computer use

and that the poorer students may actually do worse than in standard classes (Watkins, 1991).

Although the majority of calculus students are still taught by traditional methods, the

movement toward using symbolic algebra programs appears to be gaining momentum. This

brings up several questions for engineering education. Should engineering professors be

exploring the use of symbolic algebra programs in engineering education? What can symbolic

algebra programs do in engineering education? How do we accommodate students who have

been taught calculus with a symbolic algebra program and who want to continue to use the

program?

A student who wants to use advanced software such as a symbolic algebra program should

be encouraged to do so, but at the same time, he or she needs to realize that the program may

not be available on tests. For relatively complicated problems, symbolic algebra programs

appear to be useful in engineering analysis (Prudy, 1990) and engineering design (Lee and

Heppler, 1990). Students using these programs were able to work much more complicated

problems in greater depth than students who did not use the programs. The number of errors

was reduced since the program did the routine manipulations and could check whether the

solution was algebraically correct. Symbolic algebra programs can plot functional relation-

ships. At least some of them can generate FORTRAN code from equations written in the

symbolic language, which obviously saves time and reduces errors. However, symbolic

algebra programs can make mistakes, do not mesh with each other, and demand large amounts

of memory (Heppenheimer, 1991).

Unfortunately, a significant amount of time is required to become proficient with symbolic

algebra programs (Prudy, 1990). Students who have used a program in a calculus class are

already past this barrier. If other students are to use them, they will benefit from instruction

156

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

either in class or in an optional short course. This need for instruction brings up the old question

of whether engineering professors should teach computer applications (or communication or

whatever) instead of engineering. If a professor believes that there will be a net gain in the

amount of engineering that students do in class, then the time spent learning a symbolic algebra

program is well spent. Naturally, many engineering professors will also need to learn how to

use the programs if they are to employ them in class.

Commercial application software such as CAD programs, ADAMS, ASPEN, NASTRAN,

SPICE and pSPICE, and specialized simulation programs also have a place as tools for

teaching engineering. These programs are extremely powerful, specialized, and realistic since

they are written for practicing engineers. Unfortunately, they are usually not particularly user-

friendly and are expensive to license. Commercial programs are often used in design classes

(see Section 9.1) since they allow students to attack realistic problems. However, a university

needs a large commitment to support computing (Eisley, 1989), and professors need to be

committed to teaching students how to use the programs.

Specialized simulation programs written for a particular problem can be very useful since

they allow students to “experiment” with otherwise inaccessible equipment (Squires et al.,

1991) or to gain experience which would not normally be available until they are employed

in industry (Kabel and Dwyer, 1989). Unfortunately, the commitment in time and money

needed to produce large simulation programs robust enough for student use is huge. The only

justification (other than a labor of love) for such a development is sharing programs throughout

the country. Unfortunately, there are still barriers such as equipment incompatibility, a “not

invented here” syndrome, and a lack of distribution networks which make such sharing

difficult. A promising start for the disemination of specialized programs has been made with

centers such as the NSF/IEEE Center for Computer Applications in Electromagnetic Educa-

tion (Iskander, 1991).

Students using computer tools can suffer from the black box syndrome. As the program

becomes more complex, it becomes increasingly likely that the student will not understand or

perhaps even care what it is doing. When this occurs, the possibility of “garbage in, garbage

out” becomes increasingly likely, and the student may not be able to detect errors. We believe

that students should do simple hand calculations and then repeat the problem with a computer.

This helps them understand what the computer is doing, gives them confidence, and shows

them how the computer can save time. Whelchel (1991) professes the opposite view and states

that technology has become too complicated for students to understand all the techniques;

thus, he suggests trusting the software.

In computer-aided instruction (CAI) a computer is used to teach the material to the student.

Thus, the computer becomes more than a calculational tool; it supplements or replaces the

traditional forms of instruction. In the past CAI was hardware-limited, but at many schools

this is no longer true. Software has now become the limiting step, and we will focus on what

the software does and on the problems of software development. It is not possible here to

8.2.2. Computer-Aided Instruction

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

157

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

describe exactly what a well-written CAI program can do. Readers interested in exploring this

teaching method will need to explore the capabilities of a well-written CAI program on their own.

Simons (1989) identifies three major modes for CAI. In the drill-and-practice mode a

student is presented with a question or problem, the student responds, and the computer

provides feedback on the response. This mode can serve as a supplement to traditional

instruction. In many ways drill and practice is similar to textbook homework assignments

followed by feedback from a TA or a grader. The advantages of a computer are that the

feedback is instantaneous and private. And since the student is already using the computer, he

or she is more likely to use computer tools to solve the problem. Although problem statements

must be clear and unambiguous, the real art in developing a drill-and-practice program is

writing the interactive feedback. The program should follow Figure 8-1f. A good program

will help the student see where the error is and to avoid similar errors in the future. The

feedback must be highly individualized for what a particular student does, and the environ-

ment must be highly interactive.

The disadvantages of drill and practice are similar to the disadvantages of other CAI modes.

The student must get past the barrier of using a computer, which for weaker students may be

a major impediment. Students can practice only when the computer is available, whereas a

textbook can be used practically anywhere (e.g., while waiting at a doctor’s office or sitting

on a bus). Finally, developing good programs (discussed in detail later) is a major task.

The tutorial mode is a more complex, higher-level program than drill and practice. A

tutorial contains instructional material and may be a replacement for traditional delivery

methods such as lecturing and textbooks. In addition to content material, the tutorial should

contain example problems and figures, include questions and problems, and have richer

feedback than typical drill-and-practice program. Tutorials can guide a student to different

lesson parts depending on his or her response. Since many students find a completely

externally controlled tutorial frustrating, most tutorials now also allow the user to control

movement through paging or a menu. The tutorial can guide the student through problem

solving with prompts and then gradually reduce the number of prompts until he or she is

solving difficult problems without help.

The third mode listed by Simons (1989) is simulation (discussed in Section 8.2.1 as a

computer tool). We classify a simulation program as a tool if the program is written for general

use. If it is explicitly written for instruction, we classify it as CAI. In engineering, the advantage

of commercial simulation programs is that they have a potentially broader market, and more

money will probably be spent on their development. In addition, these programs are clearly

realistic since they are used by practicing engineers. A CAI simulation program is more likely

to consider decision making explicitly and to have feedback if the student has difficulties. The

simulation should have many options and decisions for the student so that he or she can practice

the functions of an engineer.

Does CAI work? Yes, but only if the students use the programs. This is not a trivial

statement since it not unusual for many students to refuse to use CAI programs (Canelos and

Carney, 1986). Of course, this is not unique to computers. Some students refuse to read a

textbook or attend a lecture, but the problem does appear to be worse with computers.

Do students who use CAI learn better than by traditional methods? It depends on the

program. Many instances of improvement are reported (Canelos and Carney, 1986; Turner,

158

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1988), but there have also been reports of no improvement when compared to traditional

methods (Turner, 1988). If a computer program is simplistic and just does what a textbook can

do (e.g., as shown in Figure 8-1e), then there is no gain in using CAI. If the computer makes

a diagnosis of where the student’s difficulties lie and refers the student to the appropriate

information, then improvement is observed. Combining immediate feedback from a drill-and-

practice program with diagnostics appears to produce increased learning. Complex simulation

programs, particularly those involving dynamic operations, can utilize the full visual power

of computers, and significant increases in learning can be observed (Turner, 1988). Thus, it

is the quality of the message and not the use of the computer that is important.

One major difficulty with CAI is the amount of time required to author a CAI program. In

his pessimistic article, Trollip (1987/88) states, “Whether or not assistance is sought, it comes

as a nasty surprise to most who start in the field of instructional computing just how difficult

it is to produce useful, good material, and how long it takes to do it.” Most engineering

professors do not have all the skills necessary to develop CAI programs, and a team must be

assembled. The necessity of working with professionals outside engineering may be hard on

an engineering professor’s ego but is necessary to achieve a quality product (Onaral, 1990).

Nelson et al. (1985) organized a twelve-member team to write CAI for a one-semester statics

course, a multiyear project. This CAI was to support an existing textbook, and only twenty-

five hours of CAI was being prepared. Much of the effort was expended to be sure that the CAI

programs would give the user as much control as he or she normally has with a textbook! Of

course, when completed, the CAI program will have the advantage of interaction and

immediate diagnostic feedback. The use of new authoring languages such as the cT language

can reduce the effort (Kuznetsov, 1990), but writing a CAI program remains a formidable

undertaking.

This effort should be compared to writing an engineering textbook where a single author

can do the job in about the same time period. Writing a textbook makes sense only if the book

can be marketed and used by other professors. Then these professors and their students will

benefit from the effort expended by the author. Fortunately, a highly sophisticated and

effective marketing and sales system exists for textbooks. Although most textbook authors do

not feel that their universities place enough value on writing textbooks, this activity is

recognized for promotions and tenure.

The same arguments apply to CAI software, but unfortunately the marketing and sales

system is not yet well developed for courseware. However, recent developments at both

universities and commercial textbook publishers indicate that a marketing and sales system

is being developed rapidly (Onaral, 1990). There are several additional obstacles to the wide

distribution of CAI courseware:

1 Computer incompatibility. With the very rapid changes in hardware, software needs

continual updating. This is difficult when the market is small.

2 Professorial indifference or in some cases hostility to CAI. Even if a professor wants to

use CAI, there is the “not invented here” syndrome.

3 Cost. Not only must the very high development cost be recovered, but this has to be done

from a smaller base than for a textbook. In addition, students will revolt if they have to pay for

both a textbook and CAI software.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

159

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

4 Rewards. Many universities give little if any credit toward promotion and tenure for the

development of instructional software (Trollip, 1987/88). With the national publicity that the

EDUCOM/NCRIPTAL software awards have received, this situation may be changing.

5 Identification with television. CAI is often identified with television and may be seen to

encourage students to abandon books and traditional scholastic values (O’Neal and Vasu,

1991). This can feed professorial hostility.

Because of these problems, we think that the outlook for CAI is limited to courses that have

large enrollments across the country. In engineering education, large enrollment classes

include calculus, chemistry, physics, computer programming, and certain lower-division

engineering classes. The engineering classes with large enrollments include circuits, thermo-

dynamics, statics, dynamics, and fluids. Courseware for many of these courses has been

developed under the $70 million Project Athena at MIT. Courseware is also available in

electromagnetics (Iskander, 1991). The hope is that some of this courseware can be

economically used at other institutions.

Interactive laser videodisc (ILV) is a new technology which allows for the combination of

a number of technologies. The capabilities of ILV are discussed by Flammer and Flammer

(1986) and Meyer (1991). One side of a videodisc can store up to 54,000 still frames or twenty

hours of audio combined with still frames. Each still frame can hold about 400 kilobytes; thus,

the storage capacity for computer information is immense. Each side can store thirty minutes

of live action. This means that live action is by far the most storage-intensive use of the disc.

The videodisc has random access of any frame in two to three seconds. Access of adjacent

frames is faster. Any frame, even from live action, can be frozen and looked at as long as

desired. The access can be controlled manually or by computer. ILV systems can incorporate

a number of media:

• Photographs and text material.

• Overhead transparencies.

• Slides.

• Motion pictures.

• Videotape.

• Computer text and graphics.

One major advantage of new ILV systems is that a full screen of computer text and/or graphics

can be recorded directly onto a videodisc frame.

An intelligent videodisc coupled to a powerful computer has all the capabilities of CAI

systems with the added availability of multimedia presentation (see Figure 8-1g). Thus, ILV

adds a new technological capability to what can be done with CAI. Because of the ability to

8.2.3. Interactive Laser Videodisc

160

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

record directly from a computer to the ILV frame, existing CAI programs can probably be

converted to ILV without a huge investment of time and money.

With write-once discs and videodisc recorders the costs of producing laser videodiscs has

plummeted. McInerney and Kyker (1987) produced their own discs for $3000 and $5000,

which is probably the current absolute minimum. These costs do not include the cost of the

authors’ time. This is thus not an inexpensive technology, even when done as cheaply as

possible. However, a single disc can probably hold an entire course so long as no live action

is included. In addition, once the master disc has been made, additional discs are not very

expensive. Because of the random access nature of the discs, updating them is relatively easy

even though they are write-once. A number of frames can be left blank, and they can be written

onto when the program is updated. The computer access code can be changed so that obsolete

frames are no longer accessed and the new frames are.

What are the advantages of ILV? First, there is the huge storage capacity which might allow

the storage of an entire course on one disc. Second, ILV consolidates a variety of media into

a single package. The problem of switching from one medium to another is solved (Meyer and

Zoltowski, 1989; Meyer, 1991); this is particularly useful if short segments from a variety of

media are to be used. Third, this technology allows the developer to bring in any visuals that

are desired. Since most people prefer to learn visually (see Section 15.2.2), ILV should be an

effective learning method. Several uses for ILV in engineering education have been proposed

or tried.

1 Remote locations. ILV is a video technology which can be used in the same way as video.

This can be in either a tutored or an untutored environment. One advantage of ILV over video

is that shipping costs are significantly lower since the whole course can be sent in one small

package. ILV has been used for continuing education in composites (Gillespie, 1989).

2 Individual self-study and PSI courses. ILV combines CAI with a host of visuals and could

serve in self-study courses. In a PSI course a computer can test and grade a student and keep

track of what tests the student has taken as well as the student’s progress.

3 Student tutorials. ILV can be used in the same way as CAI, but again with enhanced visual

capabilities (Flammer and Flammer, 1986). The remote access capability of ILV makes it

preferable to video since students can quickly find the one segment they want to use (Meyer,

1991).

4 In-class use. The consolidation capabilities of ILV allow an instructor to show multime-

dia without switching problems. Dynamic simulations from a computer can be shown in faster

than real time because the final results of simulations can be shown.

5 Laboratory simulations. The combined computer simulation and visualization power of

ILV allows the development of very realistic laboratory and plant simulations. Students can

“experiment” with situations which would be too expensive or too dangerous in real life. A

nuclear power plant simulation, for example, could show a melt-down situation if the operator

makes too many mistakes.

6 Outreach programs. McInerney and Kyker (1987) made a disc for high school teachers

to interest students in physics.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

161

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ILV has a variety of different applications which involve different capabilities of the

equipment. If a professor has already developed a multimedia presentation, then conversion

to ILV would be relatively simple and could be done for a few thousand dollars. If a CAI

program has been developed, conversion to ILV would again not be too expensive. Costs

become very high when development is started from a zero base; thus, our comments about

CAI are appropriate for ILV. ILV development makes sense only if the resulting disc can be

shared among a large number of users. This requires a distribution network for either on- or

off-campus use. One added expense is the equipment on which the discs will be used after they

have been prepared. This cost is higher than for either CAI or video. Gillespie (1989) gives

a list for IBM equipment.

Since ILV is a very new technology, it is too early to tell what impact it will have on

engineering education. Advances in Hypertext software have reduced the advantages ILV

once had compared to CAI. Our best guess is that ILV will carve a unique but small niche

where it is clearly the best delivery system.

The audiotutorial (AT) method is an educational system which uses technology and

instructors to satisfy a number of the learning principles outlined in Section 1.4. First

developed in 1961 by Sam Postlethwait in the biology department at Purdue University

(Postlethwait, 1980, 1984), the method has had a considerable impact on the teaching of

biology (Creager and Murray, 1971). AT has evolved significantly since 1961, and many

different variants are practiced. We will describe it as currently practiced in two biology

courses at Purdue University.

The course is divided into modules which require one week to complete. It is an instructor-

paced course, but during each week students may select when to go to the AT facility. The

facility is open Monday through Friday and on Sunday evening. Students are given a detailed

course syllabus and a description of how the course works. For each week’s module the student

receives:

• Clear objectives.

• A reading assignment in the textbook.

• A journal article to read.

• Supplemental notes and study questions.

• A schedule of extra credit activities.

When students go to the AT facility, they first sign in with a TA. They are then assigned

a carrel which contains simple instructions as to the order in which to proceed through the

assignment. Lectures have been recorded on audiotape, and the students listen to them. The

lecturer frequently tells the student to turn the tape off and do activities such as answering

8.3. AUDIOTUTORIAL METHOD

162

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

questions or working on problems. In addition, students are directed to pick up and examine

various objects in the carrel. They then must answer questions about these objects. They are

also directed to a few laboratory experimental stations to conduct simple experiments such as

looking at samples through microscopes, and so forth. TAs move through the room to help

students who are having difficulty. A few of the modules use videotapes when there is a major

advantage to having video in addition to audio. Obviously, with a large number of carrels

(forty-seven), providing audio recorders is cheaper than video equipment. When ready, the

student can participate in graded activities.

1 Every day there are small group teach-about-biology (TAB) sessions during which

students make a short presentation on an item (specimen, demonstration materials, experimen-

tal results, etc.) which was seen during the student’s self-study. The students do not know

ahead of time what the item will be. The student is to teach the other nine students in the group

about this item, and the TA grades each presentation.

2 The student has two opportunities during the week to take a “C-level” quiz, and the

highest score is recorded. Mastery is the goal but is not always achieved in these quizzes.

Successful completion of the C-level quizzes gives the student a C in the course.

3 During the semester the student takes two “AB-level” tests which are given in large

lecture halls for one hour.

4 The student can take an optional final during finals period.

5 Several laboratory sessions must be completed and written up during the course of the

semester.

6 The student can earn extra points by attending a general assembly for a lecture, film,

demonstration, and so forth, and then writing a summary about the session. The summary is

written in the last twenty minutes of the period. Extra points can also be obtained by writing

summaries of journal articles.

7 The student can obtain bonus points by taking an optional quiz or by doing optional

dissections.

The points are added up at the end of the semester, and a straight 90-80-70-60 scale is used

for grading. Approximately half the students enjoy the course very much, work hard, and

receive A’s or B’s. Procrastination lowers the students’ grades, and approximately one-quarter

of them receive D’s or F’s.

This course requires some responsibility on the part of the students since they must set aside

time to go in. The deadlines have proven to be critical to the success of this course since first-

year students still need structure. Students are aware of their progress, and they know the grade

they have earned at every point in the semester.

In an AT course the professor plans and modularizes the entire course. This requires a

mastery of the content. The professor records the tapes and revises most of them every year,

prepares the objectives, and writes the supplemental material. When the textbook changes,

most of the supplemental material must be extensively revised. He or she writes quizzes and

tests, supervises the grading, and must be a manager if a large number of TAs are employed.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

163

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The professor arranges for the general assembly sessions, even giving a few lectures, and

finally, sets the tone for the entire course.

This system has built in many of the learning principles discussed in Section 1.4. Students

are forced to be active. There is frequent feedback, and students can ask for help whenever they

need it. They must teach others in the TAB sessions. Since a straight grading scale is used, the

class is not competitive. Students are encouraged to cooperate and help others. A variety of

visuals are used, and the class is multimedia (audio, video, real objects, tutoring, presentations,

etc.). The student can to a large extent control his or her pace through the material and is given

time to practice. Clear learning objectives and material for learning these objectives are

provided, and the student is guided through this material. The audio lectures structure the

material for the student. Each student is challenged in the course, yet each student can be

successful. Finally, Postlethwait was extremely enthusiastic and clearly expected that every

student would do well.

Applications of the AT approach in engineering were reviewed by Lindenlaub (1974). The

method has been used for entire courses normally considered “lecture” courses. Several

laboratories have been taught as AT courses. In addition, the AT method has been used to

supplement both regular and laboratory courses. Use of the AT method appears to have

peaked, even though many of the principles could clearly be adapted to other technologies. The

problem is cost. Compared to a lecture course with one professor lecturing to anywhere from

400 to 500 students with a handful of TAs for office hours and grading, the AT class is

expensive. Not only is additional equipment necessary, but a room must also be dedicated to

this one class and more TAs are needed. The students in an AT class on average put in more

time on the class and learn more. Retention for other classes and for graduation is higher.

Unfortunately, most universities do not factor student learning into their system of determin-

ing the economics of a class.

We have included the AT method in this chapter because it can serve as a model of how

technology can be incorporated into a system which satisfies essentially all the learning

principles.

It is extremely difficult to give the flavor of teaching with a technology in a book using print

as the medium. If you are interested in any of these techniques, obtain samples and be a student

for an hour or two using the sample to learn a topic. These demonstrations will give you a feel

for whether you want to proceed in exploring use of the technology.

This chapter was also somewhat difficult to write since we have not been personally

involved in developing CAI, laser videodisc, or AT courses. We have read extensively and

seen extended demonstrations of these methods, but this is not a substitute for the first-hand

experience we have had with all the other teaching methods discussed in this book.

8.4. CHAPTER COMMENTS

164

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the following teaching

methods:

• Live television.

• Tutored videotape instruction.

• Videotape feedback for students.

• Computer-aided instruction.

• Interactive laser videodisc.

• Audiotutorial.

• Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using generic software packages in an

engineering course.

1 Pick one of the teaching methods listed in the first objective of Section 8.5. Visit a facility

where this technique is in use and act as a student for one class period to experience the

method.

2 For the teaching method chosen for problem 1, outline in detail how the method could be used

either to teach or to supplement a specific engineering course.

3 Outline how you would use generic software in a specific engineering course. If appropriate,

consider how the students would learn to use the software.

4 One of the arguments against extensive use of simulations in engineering education is that

students will use the software as a black box and will not look at the output critically.

Delineate this argument. Read Whelchel’s (1991) paper and discuss his arguments. Then

develop methods to prevent this from being a major problem.

Anderson, M. L., Buttry, K. E., McCullough, E. S., and Wetzel, R. A., “Lotus 1-2-3 applications in civil

engineering education,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1516,

1988.

Anonymous, “The Public Broadcasting System’s Adult Learning Service,” Chronicle Higher Educ.,

A26 (Sept. 4, 1991).

Austin, G. D., Beronio, P. B., Jr., and Tsao, G. T., “Biochemical engineering education through

videotapes,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 176 (Fall 1990).

Baxter, H. R., “Teaching electronics using an equation solver,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

8.5. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

165

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1857, 1988.

Burman, R., “Conditioning climatic data for classes using a spreadsheet,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 900, 1989.

Canelos, J., and Carney, B. W., “How computer-based instruction affects learning,” Eng. Educ., 298

(Feb. 1986).

Canelos, J., and Mollo, R. A., “Using instructional television in engineering education: It can be

workable, but watch out for the pitfalls,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Confer-

ence, IEEE, New York, 338, 1986.

Chapra, S. C., anDCanale, R. P., Numerical Methods for Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988.

Chute, A. G., and Elfrank, J. D., “Teletraining: Needs, solutions and benefits,” International Telecon-

ferencing Association 1990 Yearbook, McLean, VA, 1990.

Creager, J. G., and Murray, D. L., The Use of Modules in College Biology Teaching, Publ. 31,

Commission on Undergraduate Education in the Biological Sciences American Institute of Biologi-

cal Sciences, Washington, DC (March 1971).

Cress, C., “Introducing spreadsheet modeling across the engineering science curriculum,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 909, 1989.

Cress, D., “Integrating spreadsheet modeling into a fluid mechanics course,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 2141, 1988.

Druzgalski, C., “Videotape—A next step after computer graphics in biomedical engineering instruc-

tion,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1684, 1988.

Dutton, J. C., “A comparison of live and videotaped presentations of a graduate ME course,” Eng. Educ.,

343 (Jan. 1988).

Eisley, J. G., “Using commercial applications software in instruction,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 404, 1989.

Flammer, B. L., and Flammer, G. H., “The intelligent (interactive) videodisc and its promise for

engineering education,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 821, 1986.

Fowler, W. T., “TK!Solver, a microcomputer-based mini-expert system with a 'student expert',”

Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 12, 1985.

Garrod, S. A., “How to adapt your teaching style for teaching on TV,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 2204, 1988.

Genalo, L. J., and Dewey, B. R., “What if: Spreadsheets for freshmen,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1138, 1988.

Gibbons, J. F., Kinchelve, W. R., and Down, K. S., “Tutored videotape instruction: A new use of

electronics media in education,” Science, 1985, 1139 (18 March 1977).

Gillespie, J. W., Jr., “Impact of interactive videodisc courseware on composites education,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 745, 1989.

Goodman, B., “Calculus education. Toward a pump, not a filter,” Mosaic, 22, no.2, 12 (Summer 1991).

Gupta, M. S., “Remote teaching by electronic blackboard,” Eng. Educ., 163 (Nov. 1981).

Harbach, J. A., and Wiggins, E. G., “TK!Solver in senior level design courses,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 2, 1985.

Head, J. H., and Fry, D. W., “Solving intermediate-level classical mechanics problems using MathCAD,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 857, 1989.

Heppenheimer, T. A., “Computer algebra: Speed is not all,” Mosaic, 22(4), 28 (Winter 1991).

Howard, E., and Peters, D., “New dimensions in education by two-way television networks: Graduate

engineering and management programs,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washing-

ton, DC, 866, 1986.

Iskander, M. F., “Computer applications in electromagnetic education,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 208, 1991.

166

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Kabel, R. L., and Dwyer, C. A., “Scaleup, software development, and collaboration,” Academic

Comput., 3(8), 14 (1989).

Keedy, H. F., “If they don’t need it, don’t give it to them,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 1916, 1988a.

Keedy, H. F., “Introducing engineering software tools to freshman engineering students,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1142, 1988b.

Kostek, T. E., “Video recording laboratory experiments for open laboratory environments,” Proceedings

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 475, 1991.

Kuznetson, H., “Interactive computer courseware for teaching and testing statics and strength of

materials,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC , 233, 1990.

LaSalle, A. J., “Meeting a need: Televideo course in computing,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers

in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 412, 1986.

LeBlanc, S. E., “The use of MathCAD and Theorist in the ChE classroom,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Meeting, ASEE, Washington, DC, 287, 1991.

Lee, T., and Heppler, G. R., “Algebra systems for enhancing the learning environment for control

systems,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 113, 1990.

Lindenlaub, J. C., “Audio tutorial instruction at Purdue University,” in Grayson, L.P. and Biedenbach,

J.M. (Eds.), Individualized Instruction in Engineering Education, ASEE, Washington, DC, 103,

1974.

Lofy, F. J., “Design of electronics circuits using spreadsheet techniques,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1567, 1988.

McInerney, M., and Kyker, G. C., Jr., “Interactive videodiscs at the Rose-Hulman Institute of

Technology,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1965, 1987.

Merino, D. N., “Effectiveness of computer based problem solving in teaching engineering economics,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 293, 1989.

Meyer, D. C., and Zoltowski, C. B., “Use of the laser videodisc medium as an educational delivery tool,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 174, 1989.

Meyer, D. G., “On the delivery of visualizations for teaching engineering design using the laser videodisc

medium,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 591, 1991.

Miscovich, M. J., and Biasca, K. L., “The power of spreadsheets in a mass and energy balances courses,

Chem. Eng. Educ., 46 (Winter 1970).

Moore, M., “An overview of distance education research,” Indiana Conference on Technologies for

Distance Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 1990.

Mortimer, K., “Spreadsheets ain’t just for bean counters,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1529, 1987.

Nelson, C. C., Hughes, B. J., and Virgo, R., “CAI applications in statics,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 284, 1985.

Onaral, B., “Engineering courseware: A developer’s perspective,” Acad. Comput., 4(4), 12 (1990).

O’Neal, J. B., Jr., and Vasu, E. S., “The limitations of instructional technology,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 496, 1991.

Postlethwait, S. N., “Improvement of science teaching,” BioScience, 30(9), 601 (1980).

Postlethwait, S. N., “Using science and technology to teach science and technology,” Eng. Educ., 204

(Jan. 1984).

Prudy, D. J., “Symbolic algebra in mechanical engineering,” Proceedings, ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 717, 1990.

Robinson, J. W., and Canelos, J. J., “Innovative format using television and teaching assistants in a

heavily-enrolled electrical engineering service course,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 317, 1989.

CHAPTER 8: TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY

167

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Rogers, D. A., Helt, J. L., Lee, D. J., and Aslakson, J. T., “Using “MathCAD” in introductory antenna

analysis,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 903, 1989.

Rosen, E. M., and Adams, R. N., “A review of spreadsheet usage in chemical engineering calculations,”

Comput. Chem. Eng., 11(6), 723 (1987).

Scidmore, A. K., and Bernstein, T., “TVI: The Wisconsin experience,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 345, 1986.

Seigel, A. E., and Davis, C., “Televising undergraduate courses: A survey,” Eng. Educ., 482 (July/Aug.

1991).

Simons, J. M., “Computer-assisted instruction programs as a productivity tool in engineering educa-

tion,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 274, 1989.

Squires, R. G., Reklaitis, G. V., Yeh, N. C., Mosby, J. F., Karmini, I. A., and Anderson, P. K., “Purdue-

industry computer simulation modules,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 98 (Spring 1991).

Stiles, R. J., Russell, J. H., Smith, M. L., and Winn, R. C., “Teaching aeronautics with spreadsheets,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 407, 1989.

Trollip, S. R., “Wrestling with instructional computing,” Acad. Comput., 2, 26 (Dec. 1987/Jan. 1988).

Tucker, T. (Ed.), “Priming the calculus pump: Innovations and resources,” MAA Notes, No. 17,

Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC, 1990.

Turner, J. A., “Books vs computers: The message, not the medium, is said to be important for student,”

Chronicle Higher Educ., A22 (Oct. 5, 1988).

Walker, M. B., and Donaldson, J. F., “Continuing engineering education by electronic blackboard and

videotape: A comparison of on-campus and off-campus student performance,” IEEE Trans. Ed., 32,

443 (1989).

Wankat, P. C., Houze, R. N., and Barile, R. G., “TV taping of laboratory oral reports,” Proceedings

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 37, 1977.

Watkins, B. T., “The electronic classroom,” Chronicle Higher Educ., A26 (Sept. 4, 1991).

Wergin, J. F., Boland, D., and Haas, T. W., “Televising graduate engineering courses: Results of an

instructional experiment,” Eng. Educ., 109 (Nov. 1986).

Whelchel, R. J., “Engineering as a generalist profession: Implications for engineering education,”

Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 151, 1991.

Whitney, R. E., and Urquhart, N. S., “Microcomputers in the mathematical sciences: Effect on courses,

students, and instructors,” Acad. Comput., 4(6), 14 (1990).

Yoxtheimer, T. L., “Developing video courseware: A starting point,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Fron-

tiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 333, 1986.

168

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

CHAPTER 9

DESIGN AND LABORATORY

168

9.1. DESIGN

“Engineering without labs [and design] is a different discipline. If we cut out labs [and

design] we might as well rename our degrees Applied Mathematics” (Eastlake, 1986).

We agree with this modified quotation that design and laboratory sessions are at the heart

of an engineering education. There is nothing wrong with a degree in applied mathematics,

but that is not the degree that students and companies think they are getting. Design and

laboratory classes are also important in accreditation (see Section 4.6) and in the ASEE Quality

in Engineering Education Project (ASEE, 1986). Despite almost general agreement on the

importance of design and laboratory work, there is a tendency to cut these programs since they

are expensive, messy, hard to teach, time-consuming, and not connected to the university’s

other mission—research.

Since this book cannot delve into the technical details which become important in teaching

both design and laboratory courses, the discussion will necessarily be more abstract. We will

consider the purposes of design and laboratory work and then consider particular methods for

teaching these courses.

Many engineers contend that designing is the heart of engineering. All the mathematics,

physics, chemistry, and engineering science courses are background for what makes engineer-

ing different from applied mathematics or the physical sciences. Yet there is no universally

accepted working definition of what design is, and the Accreditation Board for Engineering

and Technology continually struggles despite frequent criticism to be sure that sufficient

design is included in the curriculum (Jones, 1991). An inadequate design curriculum is often

noted as a deficiency during ABET visits.

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

169

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

In this section we will first discuss appropriate goals for the design part of courses and then

explore methods for teaching design and including design throughout the curriculum. Finally,

we will examine four different methods for teaching design—design projects, case studies,

guided design, and design clinics. What we will not attempt to do is to list activities or projects

which are appropriate for teaching design in different areas of engineering.

Instead of trying to define design, ABET (1989) describes activities and processes which

may be included in design (see Section 4.6). Design

• Produces a system, component, or process to meet a specific need.

• Is an iterative process which utilizes decision making with economics and employs

mathematical, scientific, and engineering principles.

• Includes some of the following: setting objectives, analysis, synthesis, evaluation,

construction, testing, and communication of results.

• Has student problems which are often open-ended, require use of design methodology and

creative problem solving, require formulation of the problem statement and an economic

comparison of alternate solutions, and may require detailed system details.

From this description of design a wide variety of possible goals for the design part of a

course can be generated:

Problem definition and redefinition. Students will learn to define and redefine problem

statements as they work their way iteratively through open-ended problems.

Synthesis and creativity. Students will be able to synthesize new designs using the

principles of creative problem solving (see Section 5.6).

Troubleshooting. Students will be able to take an existing design that does not work up

to specifications and make it work. Since troubleshooting is quite different than designing a

new device or process, students need a chance to practice (Middlebrook, 1991; Woods, 1980,

1983).

Use of engineering, mathematics, and science principles. Students will be able to

integrate a variety of engineering, mathematics, and scientific principles into the solution of

design problems.

Computer tools. Students will use computer tools such as spreadsheets, general math-

ematical packages (MAPLE, Mathematica, MATHLAB, etc.), and engineering discipline-

specific simulation packages (ASPEN, PRIMAVERA, SPICE, etc.) to do detailed routine

calculations. “A course which does not use a professional software is preparing our students

for a type of work which does not exist any more” (Paris, 1991).

Decision making. Engineers must be willing to take the responsibility of making decisions

knowing that something could go wrong since perfection can never be attained (Florman, 1987).

9.1.1. Design Goals

170

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Generic design procedures. Students will learn and use generic design procedures.

Examples of these procedures are given by Warfield (1989) and Magleby et al. (1991).

Economic evaluation. Students will evaluate solutions based on economic and other

criteria to determine the best solution among several alternatives.

Completion of a deliverable. It may be possible to have students carry out all steps of a

design including the construction and testing of a deliverable. When this is possible, it is

extremely motivating for them to see their design built and used.

Industrial or real-life experience. Design projects are normally much more realistic than

engineering science problems which are concocted to illustrate a single principle. An

additional goal may be to have students solve actual industrial problems.

Oral and written communication. Students are expected to develop professional skills

to communicate their results.

Planning and managerial skills. Students can learn how to plan effectively and direct

fairly complicated projects.

Interpersonal skills. While working in groups students can learn interpersonal skills,

become adept at teamwork, and start developing leadership skills. Teamwork has become

increasingly important as technology becomes more complex (Florman, 1987).

Confidence. Students can develop confidence in their ability to function as engineers. This

may be the primary objective of the course (Overholser et al., 1975).

This is a long but certainly not all-inclusive list. Dekker (1989) and Harrisberger (1986a,

b) discuss other possible goals. No single course can satisfy all these goals, although some

professors make a valiant effort. However, an entire curriculum can be designed so that these

and other objectives are satisfied. The professor’s task is to select appropriate goals for the

design portion of a course. These goals must be appropriate for the student level and the time

allotted to design. For example, completely open-ended, unstructured problems with no

guidance are not suitable for first-year students but may be very appropriate for seniors. Once the

goals have been determined, teaching methods can be selected (see Sections 9.1.2 through 9.1.6).

The old ABET criteria state, “Some portion of this [the design] requirement must be

satisfied by at least one course which is primarily design, preferably at the senior level, and

draws upon previous coursework in the relevant discipline” (ABET, 1989). This sentence is

often interpreted as requiring or suggesting a capstone course in design. The new requirements

(see Sec. 4.6) require a meaningful, major engineering design experience. It is explicitly stated

that the design experience must be developed and integrated throughout the curriculum. We

feel that the strict dichotomy between engineering science and engineering design is a false

one. Engineering design should appear throughout the curriculum. Culver et al. (1990) discuss

two general ways that this can be done, Green (1991) gives details for an electrical engineering

curriculum, and Juricic and Barr (1991) give specifics in mechanical engineering.

9.1.2. Teaching Design

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

171

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Spreading design throughout the curriculum allows the faculty to develop a design

experience where students start working open-ended problems as freshmen or sophomores.

These first projects are presented with a significant amount of guidance using a procedure such

as guided design (see Section 9.1.5). Procedures for teaching freshmen design are discussed

by Evans and Bowers (1988) and Evans et al. (1990). Design ideas can be included in

traditionally nondesign classes (e.g., Henderson, 1989; Miller et al., 1989; Peterson, 1991;

Riffe and Henderson, 1990) in both the second and third years. The traditional design classes

and design laboratories would be retained and strengthened in the senior year. However,

students would be better prepared for these classes, and professors would see fewer students

who are totally unprepared for open-ended design problems.

Introducing some ideas of engineering economics into the curriculum during the first or

second year allows a professor to include relatively simple design problems and economic

optimizations which can only be talked about instead of being done if the students have not

studied economics (Sullivan and Thuesen, 1991). Talking about something is a totally

ineffective teaching method; students must do what they are to learn. In our experience,

students find some of the economics (costs, cost indices, payout periods) easy, while other

parts (such as discounted cash flow) are more challenging. It helps if the textbook talks about

economic factors, but unfortunately many engineering textbooks are written in an economic

vacuum. Since students see the design problems with economics as real engineering, these

problems are motivating as long as the professor does not overburden the problem with

detailed calculations. Computer tools such as spreadsheets, mathematical packages, and

simulation programs are appropriate here to remove the burden of routine calculations.

How do you add design problems to an already overloaded curriculum and overloaded

courses? Cover less in the lectures and expect students to learn some of the material on their

own. If the design problem includes this material, students will learn it, and they will learn how

to learn on their own. As the professor, you can help by having clear objectives, making sure

resource material is readily available, and believing that students can master the material on

their own. The design problem can be included as a small project, a case study, or as a guided

design project.

An important part of design is creativity and synthesis. Since most traditional curricula

cover only application and analysis during the first three years, it should be no surprise that

many students have difficulty with creativity and synthesis in senior design. Including

creative exercises and synthesis problems throughout the undergraduate program should

make most students more creative designers. The methods for teaching problem solving and

for fostering creativity discussed in Chapter 5 are appropriate for the design component of

classes. Specific methods for teaching creative design classes are discussed by Cundy et al.

(1987) and Jansson (1987).

There are many significant difficulties in teaching design at any level. The first difficulty

confronting the professor is the development of good design problems. Every engineering

professor has one or two good design problems stored in her or his head. Design problems

cannot be recycled and reused since students quickly convert the course into an exercise in

rewriting files. New problems are needed every year. Thus, the first year is not the problem;

it is the second, third, and following years. There are sources of problems which can be tapped

by professors but are unlikely to be tapped by students. Published case studies such as the

172

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ASEE case studies (see Section 9.1.4) and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers

Contest Problem are useful. Industrial interaction can produce interesting problems with the

added benefit that the problems are “real” (Emanuel and Worthington, 1987; Sloan, 1982).

Ring (1982) suggests that cities can be used as a source of problems. Other possible sources

of projects are bicycle design (Klein, 1991) and designs for handicapped people (Hudson and

Hudson, 1991). Finally, we would like to suggest that a group of professors from different

schools collaborate on developing design problems. Each year a professor from a different

school could develop a problem and all the schools would use the problem and grade their own

students. The labor of preparing new problems could thus be reduced significantly.

Since design problems are usually team efforts in industry, it is appropriate that they be

team efforts in school. How does the professor select the teams? Some professors allow

students to pick their own teams. This does not follow industrial practice and tends to result

in teams which are very uneven in ability. Emanuel and Worthington (1987) suggest that the

professor assign groups and include the following selection criteria:

• Mix leaders and followers within a team.

• Distribute abilities and experience among teams.

• Place one person with initiative on each team.

• Mix foreign students among teams to force communication in English.

• Do not put roommates on the same team.

• Mix men and women in teams.

• Use teams with three members.

• Be sure at least one team member lives close to the campus as this facilitates copying,

computer use, and so forth.

• If travel to a company is required, be sure at least one student in each group has a car.

The MBTI (see Chapter 13) has been used for team selection (Emanuel and Worthington,

1989; Sloan, 1982). However, dysfunctional teams can result if team members try to act in

accordance with their Myer-Briggs type instead of as is appropriate for the situation (Emanuel

and Worthington, 1989). After trying both selection procedures, Emanuel and Worthington

(1989) stopped using the MBTI for selection but instead used it to help the groups function

better during the semester.

Groups malfunction during the semester for a variety of reasons. Perhaps the most common

problem arises when one student does not do a fair share of the work. If the class is to be a

learning experience in teamwork, the professor should not ignore these problems. The MBTI

can be used as a diagnostic tool to help explain the problems; however, students must not be

allowed to use their type as an excuse for behavior. Instead, students should be told that the

types show both strengths and weaknesses, and that the weaknesses need to be worked on if

they cause group problems. Even without the MBTI the professor should encourage students

to discuss group problems, and then he or she should meet with the group to try to find

resolutions. Design groups can be considered as a type of cooperative group, and many of the

comments in Section 7.2 are appropriate for instruction and management of these groups.

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

173

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Grading of groups can also be a problem. Since the group is producing a group report, it

is appropriate to give the students a group grade. However, students often feel that this is unfair

if one student has not done a fair share of the work. This problem can be resolved in several

ways. The professor can talk to individual students and then to the group, and if appropriate

assign a lower grade to the shirking student (Baasel, 1982). Second, the students can be given

a group grade and the group can assign points to each student. Most groups will assign each

student an equal number of points, but groups where one student has obviously shirked

responsibility will differentiate. However, Eck and Wilhelm (1979) point out that these groups

often engage in significant conflict over grade distribution and that some type of arbitration

scheme may be necessary. Third, every student can be required to turn in an individual

progress report every week (Stern, 1989). From these the instructor can usually make a

rational decision on how to partition the final grade (and incidentally can usually predict which

groups will turn in good reports). Fourth, all students can be assigned the same grade despite

the claims of unfairness. Finally, a formula can be designed for partitioning the grade so that

a variety of inputs are included. (Emanuel and Worthington, 1989).

What about important technical content which was either skipped in prerequisite classes or

which students did not learn? A significant portion of many design courses covers economics;

however, we do not think this time should also be used as a catch-all to reteach other material.

Provide the students with resources (perhaps their own textbooks) and have them learn the

material on their own. Engineering students can be surprisingly efficient learners when they

see the need to learn material in order to complete a design assignment.

A final significant problem in design classes is time—both student and instructor time.

Students need to learn how to develop a work plan and how to schedule a design project. In

addition, some help in improving efficiency is appropriate. If design is included throughout

the curriculum, then efficiency, time management, and scheduling can be discussed every

semester. This repetition is helpful in learning how to apply these ideas. The problem with

instructor time is that many universities undervalue design classes and overload professors

who are teaching these classes. Design classes are time-consuming because of the need to

develop problems, consult with student teams, and grade lengthy reports. Providing sufficient

resources for design requires an administrative solution, which should include sufficient

rewards for professors teaching these courses (Jones, 1991).

The most common way to teach design and to have a "meaningful, major design

experience" is with design projects. Students, usually in groups, are given a design problem

and told to do the design. Since engineers learn design by designing, this is certainly an

appropriate procedure. In addition, people remember the things that they do. We can

remember our senior design (and laboratory) projects after twenty-five years, but we don’t

remember details of any of the lectures. The projects must be open-ended to be considered

design. Multiple solutions of a well-defined problem are optimization, not design (Dekker,

9.1.3. Design Projects

174

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1989).

The amount of guidance students need depends upon their maturity. Freshmen need

significant guidance, and a guided design procedure (see Section 9.1.5) should be considered.

Seniors need the opportunity to solve significant design problems with little guidance. It is

helpful to most students if they have the opportunity to work up to a totally unguided design

project by working on increasingly difficult designs with decreasing guidance during their

junior and senior years. Design projects can be classified in many ways. Dekker (1989)

suggests classifying them on the basis of various dichotomies.

Fun versus serious

Academic versus real world

Paper versus hardware

Creative versus structured

Individual versus group

Disciplinary versus interdisciplinary

Small versus large

Fun projects can include brainstorming a float design for a parade, creating a “Rube

Goldberg” design, and so forth. Hardware projects, which mix design and laboratory skills,

can be extremely motivating because students can see what they have designed. Dekker (1989)

suggests that designing will be creative if students design something which is unknown. For

example, have them design a “dollar bill picker-upper.” Creative designs can be encouraged

by showing students one design for accomplishing a task and then asking them to develop a

competing design. This can be made more realistic by giving them the patent and telling them

to develop a design which does not infringe on the patent. This procedure also brings up the

subject of patents and patent law in a meaningful way. Since many companies use interdisci-

plinary design teams, an interdisciplinary project is a useful experience. Pierson (1987)

discusses administering interdisciplinary design projects. A series of small projects allows for

variety, different leaders, multiple grading opportunities, and a gradation in the degree of

guidance. Large projects allow for more realistic problems, can be more open-ended, and

require much more detailed planning and scheduling. It is useful if students see some of each

of these different types of projects during their period in school.

It is obviously desirable to use projects that are real and have input from practicing

engineers from industry or government. A variety of ways of obtaining this input are discussed

by Bishop and Huey (1988), Griggs and Turano (1990), Harrisberger (1986b), Manning et al.

(1988), Pierson (1987), and Sloan (1982), among others. Setting up the appropriate industrial

or government contacts can be very time-consuming for a professor. Once the contacts have

been made, he or she needs to arrange for sponsors. Companies are much more serious about

design projects if they pay for the direct costs (not including labor) of the projects. Requiring

payment helps to ensure their continued interest. Projects must be screened since some may

be too easy or too difficult for the time allotted. A company engineer needs to be involved in

the evaluation of projects, but if many different companies are sponsoring projects, the

professor needs to control grades to ensure uniformity in grading. Other additional problems

include the need for student travel to and from the client and the occasional lack of cooperation

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

175

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

when a company refuses to release necessary information.

Balancing the difficulties in working with companies on design projects are the benefits.

The opportunity to work with practicing engineers can give students contacts for future jobs

and references. There is no question in their minds that the project is real and relevant.

Professionalism is obviously important, and students are more likely to behave as profession-

als. Finally, successful performance can give students confidence that they can be successful

engineers.

Regardless of the type of project, both oral and written reports should be required to stress

communication. Weekly progress reports are useful to help prevent procrastination and to

pinpoint problem groups. If a company is sponsoring the project, a presentation to the

company is in order, but only after a full-scale dress rehearsal in front of the faculty.

A case study is a detailed description of how a professional approaches a problem. A

number of engineering case studies are available from the former ASEE Engineering Case

Library which is now the Center for Case Studies in Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of

Technology. In addition, many descriptions of solving tough engineering problems are

available in books (e.g., Herring, 1989; Kidder, 1981) and in the trade literature. Patents can

also serve as case studies (Whittemore, 1981). Smith and Kardos (1987) and Durbin (1991)

give other references. Video-based case studies are being developed (Sullivan and Thuesen,

1991).

Case studies can be used in a variety of ways and are useful in both design and nondesign

classes. Professors can assign case studies to students for reports and as the basis for discussion

(Henderson et al., 1983). Many case studies consider ethical questions and serve as an

excellent basis for discussion. They also help to introduce the engineering profession and serve

to motivate some students. This use of case studies is very appropriate in introductory

engineering classes to help show students that the material being studied is relevant.

Case studies can be used in design classes, although they are not a substitute for project

work since they are less open-ended (students will consider the case study the solution).

Instead, case studies should complement projects. They are particularly useful in showing the

human aspect of engineering. And they can show the importance of nontechnological factors,

such as marketing, in the success of products.

Case studies can also be the basis for instructor-generated projects. In this instance the

instructor does not show the students the case study, but obtains project ideas, data, a scenario,

and so forth, from the case study. Professors can also have students work through the case study

step by step and use it for feedback. This procedure is discussed in the next section.

Case studies are extensively used in law and business schools. Myers (1991) discusses the

history of case studies and provides references for applications outside engineering. He notes

that Harvard Business School introduced a seminar for professors to teach them to teach with

case studies.

9.1.4. Case Studies

176

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Guided design is a structured way of having students work through case studies. This

procedure is particularly appropriate for introducing students to open-ended design problems

since there is considerable guidance and feedback throughout. The guided design procedure

was developed by Charles Wales and his coworkers (e.g., Bailie and Wales, 1975; Stager and

Wales, 1972; Wales and Stager, 1973, 1977; Wales et al., 1974a,b; Wales and Nardi, 1982).

Guided design was first developed for engineering classes and has since spread to a variety of

other disciplines.

The guided design procedure is well summarized by Wales and Nardi (1982). The

professor uses printed handouts to guide teams of five to six students through an open-ended

problem in “slow motion.” After the groups are formed, the guided design procedure starts

with a printed handout which explains the problem situation and the student roles. The student

groups then define the problem statement and set goals. This is done by a cooperative group

discussion (see Section 7.2). After five to twenty minutes the groups receive a printed sheet

which tells what the professional engineer did. It is important to stress at this point that this

feedback sheet does not represent the solution but shows what one professional did. This point

can be made quite clearly if some of the feedback sheets contain actions which are not

particularly clever or are ethically dubious. The student groups then discuss the printed

feedback sheet and compare their responses to that of the professional engineer. Since it is the

design process which is being taught and not a particular answer, the professor must be careful

in evaluation.

The guided design procedure then advances step by step through a specific problem-

solving or design procedure. For example, the problem-solving strategy in Section 5.3 can be

used. Wales and Nardi (1982) recommend the following ten steps:

1 Outline situation

2 Define goals

3 Gather information

4 Suggest possible solutions

5 Establish constraints

6 Choose solution path

7 Analyze factors needed for solution

8 Synthesize solution

9 Evaluate solution

10 Make recommendations.

For each step the students first complete the step and then receive and discuss the feedback.

Guided design projects can take from two hours to several weeks. At the end of the guided

design students can be required to communicate their results orally and in writing. While the

guided design proceeds in class, the students can be assigned readings and homework for

outside class. The groups can be encouraged to meet outside class as cooperative learning

groups.

9.1.5. Guided Design

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

177

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Although guided design was first developed as a procedure where all information transfer

was in printed form (books and handouts), it can easily be adapted to the laboratory portion

of a lecture class (Eck and Wilhelm, 1979). For students who are unfamiliar with working in

cooperative groups, it is useful to use the first laboratory period for exercises in interpersonal

communication, such as paraphrasing, self-disclosure, maintenance contributions to the

group, and an ethics exercise with student observation (Eck and Wilhelm, 1979). After every

group exercise it is useful to do some group processing to help students improve their skills.

What does the professor do in guided design? The professor must prepare or select the case

studies and put them into a guided design format. Some prepared projects are available (Wales

et al., 1974; Wales and Stager, 1973; Eck and Wilhelm, 1979). If a prepared guided design

project is not available, then the professor can convert old design projects, convert case studies,

or develop new projects in the guided design format. Potential users need to be aware that

developing a good guided design project from scratch is very time-consuming.

Wales and Nardi (1982) discuss the development of new guided design projects. First the

project must be outlined and divided into labeled steps following the problem-solving or

design strategy of choice. A story line and realistic roles must be developed for the students.

This step is important since it establishes a need for the project and helps to motivate the

students, who must be active in each step. Since learning the process is the important goal,

students should gather information only once and have an opportunity to practice the decision-

making steps. Students should be asked to make important decisions. Asking them to make

trivial decisions reduces the credibility of the entire project.

The form of the written feedback is important. This feedback models what an experienced

engineer does to solve the problem. Be sure to write that the engineer would have done the

following, not that you should have done the following. Since the problems are open-ended,

the feedback can serve only as a model of possible actions. The students may tend to resist this

at first, and the professor must be careful not to reinforce their beliefs that this is the correct

solution. Be sure that the feedback responds to the questions that the students were asked in

the instruction.

In a guided design class students must learn the content outside class by reading, discussing

in their groups, doing homework, and so forth. In class they learn how to apply this content

to open-ended design problems. The professor needs to be sure that the printed learning

materials are good. If the textbook is not clear by itself, then additional notes or study guides

must be developed. Some class time needs to be available for answering questions, reviewing

the homework, making class assignments and so forth.

Once the guided design period starts, you, as the professor, are a guide and coach, not a

lecturer. The first challenge is to form groups and to get the groups off to a good start. Group

assignments are discussed in Sections 7.2 and 9.1.2. During the project the professor and the

TA can circulate among the groups. If a group is functioning well, the professor or the TA can

just listen and then briefly provide some positive feedback such as, “This is a great discussion.

Keep it up.” Some groups will need help getting started. Ask the group questions about the

project or about group processing. If necessary, appoint a leader and a recorder. The behavior

of students is often markedly more focused if they have an assigned role. In order to provide

proper feedback to the groups, a professor or a TA should be available for every twenty-five

to thirty students.

178

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

There are a variety of ways to assign group project grades. One approach is to have the

groups assign the grade that they think they have earned. If their grade is higher than what you

think they have earned, make them redo their project and their report until they have earned

the higher grade (Eck and Wilhelm, 1979). This procedure is most appropriate for long

projects.

The results reported for guided design have been impressive (Eck and Wilhelm, 1979;

Feldhusen, 1972; Stager and Wales, 1972; Wales and Nardi, 1982). The instructor spends

much more time with the students on high-level cognitive tasks. And they show better

retention, higher grades both in the guided design course and in follow-up courses, increased

confidence, and greater motivation. The classes show more cooperation and better group

dynamics than other design classes. Students rate guided design classes higher than they do

other design classes. However, it is not uncommon to have one or two poor groups which do

not function well. The members of these groups do not fully benefit from the guided design

experience.

Actual practice in engineering is obviously beneficial to students. A design clinic is one

way of providing an internship activity. Other approaches to providing industrial experience

are industrial cooperative programs and summer internships. The following are advantages of

the design clinic approach (Harrisberger, 1986a,b):

• Students have a significant industrial experience.

• Students make contacts with practicing engineers.

• Students become confident and more professional.

• The design clinic can fit into the normal course structure.

• Students need no extra time for graduation.

• The design clinic can be controlled by faculty members.

• The design clinic can be self-supporting.

There are models of the design clinic approach at Harvey Mudd College and at the

University of Alabama. Our discussion is based on the University of Alabama model

(Harrisberger, 1986a,b).

The design clinic assumes that basic technical knowledge has been covered in other

courses. In the clinic students first learn a variety of skills and then apply them in a supervised

professional practice working on a real industrial problem. Students take a three-credit skills

course in the first semester of their senior year which consists of two seminars and one three-

hour lab every week. In the seminars the students have lectures, take diagnostic tests such as

the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, make and critique presentations, listen to panels, and so

forth. The content is concerned with the practical aspects of engineering instead of technical

content. Thus students learn skills for presentation, listening, writing, record keeping,

9.1.6. Design Clinics

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

179

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

teamwork, leadership, project planning, creative problem solving, design methodology,

retrieving and finding information, persuasion, and assertiveness.

The laboratory portion of the skills course consists of group projects in which students have

the opportunity to practice the skills covered in the seminars. The laboratory is also used to

introduce them to the solution of open-ended design problems. The projects done in the

laboratory consist of an ideation exercise, a management simulation game, an extensive guided

design project, and an extensive competitive design study. Note that the class starts with

significant guidance in solving open-ended problems and then reduces the amount of structure.

During the second semester students take an internship course. Groups of three work on

company-sponsored problems. The companies are expected to pay all direct costs, which

average less than $1000 per project plus a clinic fee of $350 to cover administrative expenses.

The design group visits the company for an initial visit to learn about the problem and for a

final written and oral presentation. Other visits may be scheduled if needed. All companies are

within a four-hour drive of the campus, and student groups are selected so that at least one

member has a car. The companies are expected to provide the necessary information and to

have an engineer work with the students as needed.

Every group meets with a faculty coach once a week for twenty minutes. This coaching helps

keep the students from procrastinating and keeps them focused on solving the problem on time.

Each group presents a midterm progress report in the clinic. A dress rehearsal is presented in front

of a faculty jury before the final presentation to the company. All faculty in the department are

modestly involved by coaching two design teams, which takes about one hour per week.

Administrative details of running a clinic are discussed by Harrisberger (1986b).

Although the design clinic idea has not been widely adopted, it does appear to be a cost-

effective way of providing an industrial internship for all engineering students. In addition,

design clinics do not require that the faculty have extensive industrial design experience to

teach design.

More than any other topic in this book, teaching laboratory courses in engineering is

specific to the field of engineering and the type of laboratory. Since we must avoid discipline

specificity, this section is an abstract discussion of the most concrete part of engineering

education—the laboratory.

Laboratory courses can have a variety of different purposes, many of which are explored

by ASEE (1986), Eastlake (1986), Jumper (1986), Kersten (1989), and Radovich (1983).

Since the laboratory and the course structure depend upon the purposes of the laboratory

course, these objectives should be decided upon first. No laboratory can be optimal for all

purposes. The goals for the course can include:

9.2. LABORATORY COURSES

9.2.1. Purposes of Laboratory Courses

180

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Experimental skills. Students can learn a variety of skills involved in doing experimental

engineering work. These can include certain psychomotor skills, planning an experiment,

recording, analyzing and interpreting data, and using modern measuring instruments.

Real world. Students can learn to function in a real-world environment where the theory

may or may not work and the equipment occasionally malfunctions. They can learn to

distinguish reality from theory. They can also experience working in a climate of uncertainty

and can learn the manifold meanings of Murphy’s law.

Build objects. Students can actually build and test their designs. A sense of craftsmanship

can be gained. They can learn to use working models to solve engineering problems (Hills,

1984). Models are used in many industrial settings but are often ignored in the education of

engineers.

Discovery. Students can discover results which can improve theory and reinforce their

ability to predict the results of using complex devices.

Equipment. Students can work with modern equipment, which adds a concrete aspect to

an otherwise abstract education. While working with equipment, students can also learn about

the importance of safety.

Motivation. “The theoretical work was difficult—some of it exceedingly so—but the

physical doing made it seem worthwhile” (Florman, 1987, p. 8).

Teamwork. Many laboratories are team efforts, and students can learn to function as part

of a team. This can include an opportunity to be the team leader.

Networking. In addition to teamwork, students may have to find information from a

variety of sources including industrial contacts, professors not connected with the laboratory,

technicians, and so forth. This is an appropriate experience before accepting their first

industrial position.

Communication. Both written and oral communication skills can be emphasized through

preparation, progress, and final reports.

Independent learning. Since all the knowledge needed for laboratory classes will not be

at their fingertips, students will have to independently review old material and learn new

material. This can help prepare them for the real world where independent learning is

important.

We have not tried to be encyclopedic, and there are obviously other purposes for laboratory

courses.

The structure of the laboratory should depend upon the major purposes of the course. It can

range along a continuum from a totally structured, cookbook-type approach to a partially

guided experience to an unstructured class (Alexander et al., 1978). A cookbook approach can

be satisfactory if the purpose is to develop psychomotor skills and the ability to use measuring

instruments. These purposes have become less important as easy-to-use digital instruments

9.2.2. Laboratory Structure

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

181

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

have replaced analog instruments which often required considerable expertise. However,

learning to use instruments or tools is still a legitimate purpose for a laboratory course. A

cookbook approach may be used when the purpose is to reinforce theory. Unfortunately, this

does not tend to be extremely convincing, and a discovery approach is more effective.

In an unstructured laboratory students are given fairly general instructions or goals. For

example, the goal may be to design and build a new logic circuit, to survey a new subdivision,

or to scale up a chemical process. The students must decide what needs to be done and how

best to do it. An unstructured laboratory might ask students to explore a phenomenon such as

the effect of pH and temperature on a biochemical reaction. No other directions are given.

Unstructured laboratories are certainly appropriate for seniors who are mature enough to

handle the uncertainty and who need the experience in planning and decision making before

graduation.

Lower-division students may be lost in an unstructured laboratory. A partially guided

experience is appropriate. A student is given some guidance in setting up the experiment and

told what to do first. For later parts of the experiment much of the detail is left to the student.

For example, a student can be told to look at the effect of several temperatures in a given range

but not be told how many or which temperatures to use. In addition, the student would not be

told what to expect although he or she might be told to predict the behavior.

Laboratory experiments appear to be most effective when the solution is not known ahead

of time (Jumper, 1986). Measuring an orifice coefficient when fifty other students have

already done so is not the stuff of a marker event. As a professor you need to be creative.

Assume, for example, that the method of measuring an orifice coefficient is important in a

fluids laboratory. The method will be learned much better if the student is given a noncircular

hole as the orifice. Where does one look up the orifice coefficient for ellipses, rectangles,

parallelepipeds, and triangles? What about five- or six-pointed stars and quarter moons? By

varying the dimensions and the shapes, each student group can do a unique experiment, and

the groups will not be able to dry-lab the results. In addition, this sort of “research” can

eventually result in a technical note. Being the coauthor of a technical note or presentation

(even if it is in a student magazine or at a student convention) will make the laboratory a marker

event for the students. If time is available, this type of laboratory experiment can be made even

more useful by asking students to predict the behavior of their orifice ahead of time.

Laboratory classes can be structured to reinforce lectures not with cookbook exercises but

with the scientific learning cycle (see Section 15.1.) Do the laboratory work before the topic

is covered in lecture and have the students explore the phenomenon. Let them discover many

of the characteristics of the device. For instance, in the orifice example the students can

determine the general form of the equation relating velocity to pressure drop. Then in lecture

the theoretical development will be much more believable and would already have been

partially verified. The students will be more likely to appreciate the power of theory to include

additional terms without needing additional experimentation. The lecture would be the term

introduction step in Figure 15-1. For concept application students can use their data to

determine the orifice coefficient and solve additional problems.

Design laboratories are often unstructured. Students may be asked to design a large-scale

apparatus. The purpose of the laboratory is to determine certain coefficients or efficiencies

needed for the design. The students must determine what must be measured and must allocate

182

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

their time between laboratory experimentation and design calculations. A design laboratory

can also be used to design, build, and then test something. Hills (1984) suggests having

students design and build simple working models, while Balmer (1988) believes that they

should solve real industrial problems and test their solutions in the laboratory. Williams

(1991) requires students to design and then build microcomputer boards. Many electrical and

mechanical engineering problems can fit into these types of design laboratories.

A number of decisions must be made in any laboratory course. Should the laboratory be part

of a lecture course or should it be a stand-alone course? Both arrangements have their

advantages. If the purpose of the laboratory is to reinforce the theory and allow students to

discover results, then a laboratory attached to a theoretical course makes sense. Scheduling is

easier, and the connection between experiments and theory will be more obvious to the

students. If the purpose of the laboratory is to synthesize several theory courses and have

students design or build something, then a stand-alone course with appropriate prerequisites

makes sense. In either case, the laboratory workload should be congruent with the credit granted

(Radovich, 1983). If students are supposed to be able to finish laboratory experiments and reports

in the laboratory, then it needs to be structured so that at least the better groups can do this.

Should students work individually or in teams? Although there are a number of reasons why

teamwork is beneficial to students, the decision may be made on the basis of availability of

apparatus. Equipment availability often determines team size, but most schools seem to have

settled on two students for bench scale equipment, and three or four students per group for

larger equipment. If teams are used, how should they be selected? This question is discussed

in detail in Section 9.1.2. It is better to make a rational choice than just to continue what has

been done for many years.

Students should be required to plan their experiments in advance. Many laboratory courses

require students to pass an oral readiness quiz before they can go into the laboratory. This is

a good safety precaution which encourages students to think before experimenting. In a design

laboratory with projects lasting four weeks, we found it useful not to allow students to collect

any experimental data during the first class. This time was spent in planning.

What types of records should students keep, and how should they report their results?

Laboratory notebooks are commonly used in industry to support possible future patent claims.

Experience in keeping a neat laboratory notebook which follows industrial practice is

appropriate in an engineering laboratory (McCormack et al., 1990). Since communication is

often an important goal of the laboratory (and all too often of only the laboratory), both oral

and written reports are often required. The best feedback for oral reports can be provided by

videotaping student presentations and having them watch their tapes (see Section 8.1.3). For

written reports the most improvement in writing will occur if students receive prompt feedback

and then rewrite the report for a grade. This obviously requires proper scheduling of the

laboratory session and diligence on the part of the instructor.

9.2.3. Nitty-Gritty Details

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

183

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The quality of the equipment in the laboratory is a never-ending problem (ASEE, 1986),

and obsolete equipment and poor maintenance are often problems when programs are

accredited. We do not see any substitute for modern instrumentation. Components such as

resistors and transistors and major pieces of equipment such as nuclear reactors, distillation

columns, or jigs do not have to be new, but the analytical instrumentation does. Mechanical

balances, for example, are now obsolete and should be retired. If the purpose is discovery,

much of the equipment can be simple and homemade. If the purpose is to familiarize the

student with industrial equipment, then it is better to use commercial equipment. There is no

substitute for a planned and funded maintenance and equipment replacement program. Safety

should be a primary concern when equipment is repaired and when new equipment is

purchased. Safety needs to be stressed with undergraduates (and with TAs). Stern measures

are taken in industry when workers fail to follow safety rules, and stern measures should be

taken with students who do not follow safety rules.

Teaching assistants may try to avoid laboratory assignments because they are often more

work than the grading of papers in other courses. The department needs to be sure that the

workloads for all TA assignments are appropriate and roughly equal. Laboratory TAs usually

have significant contact with the students; thus, they should be able to communicate well. TAs

often need to be trained, and a convenient time to do this is the week before classes start.

Group grading needs to be carefully considered. It is appropriate in laboratory courses to

foster both interdependence and individual responsibility (see Section 7.2.2). Each student’s

grade should be partly based on the team effort and partly on the individual effort. Groups

should be encouraged to make the laboratory a group effort, not merely a leader with two

drudges. Professors and TAs should make a regular practice of circulating through the

laboratory and observing the groups at work. After a few weeks of casual observation, it is

usually clear who the malingerers are. This regular observation and a perusal of laboratory

notebooks also help to discourage dry-labbing. Students can also be asked to assign part of

the grade to the other students on their team. This procedure can work, but abuses can occur.

From the student’s point of view, laboratory work can provide a concrete learning

experience where principles can be discovered. The chance to design and possibly build

equipment can serve as a marker event in the student’s undergraduate career, and friendships

developed in laboratory teams may last for years. In addition, a student may get to know his

or her laboratory instructors better than any other professors, and the student will rely on the

laboratory professor for advice and letters of recommendation.

Of course, everything is not always this ideal, and there can be disadvantages. The

laboratory may be an incredible time sink as an overzealous professor tries to have the students

learn everything about engineering in one course. The equipment may not work or may be

obsolete. Files may be readily available, and drylabbing of cookbook experiments may be

rampant. A student’s group may malfunction, leaving him or her with all the work and only

9.2.4. Advantages and Disadvantages of Laboratory Courses

184

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

one-third of the rewards. The professor may be absent, and the TAs may not speak English.

Other than tradition, the reason for a laboratory course may be unclear.

The professor, whose task is to make the reality closer to the ideal, can have significant

student contact and a chance to make a real difference in students’ careers. Design laboratories

often require a synthesis of the material from several courses. This helps the professor stay

current in areas other than his or her research specialty. Working with real equipment can also

help the professor be a better teacher of theoretical concepts.

Grading can be a chore when a number of long reports are turned in. It helps to have

someone trained in English available to grade the communication aspects of the reports and

to work with students on their communication skills. This reduces the burden on the

engineering professors and provides the students with better instruction. Unfortunately, the

workload is often heavier in laboratories than in other courses, and less credit may be given

for teaching laboratory courses. This unfair workload has been criticized by ASEE (1986).

From the departmental point of view excellent laboratories are a source of pride. If you

don’t believe this, visit a department with an excellent undergraduate laboratory and note the

attitude of the professor who guides you through the laboratory. Excellent laboratories also

help produce well-prepared engineering graduates. And excellent laboratories are an advan-

tage at accreditation time. Of course, the department gets what it pays for. Excellent

laboratories require money for equipment, maintenance, a technician, and dedicated profes-

sors, who will remain dedicated only if suitably rewarded. Departments which use the

laboratory as a way to save money when the budget is tight will pay the price of less-than-

excellent laboratories fairly quickly.

It should be clear that we believe that design and laboratory classes are important. We also

believe that there are a variety of nontechnical skills which are critical for the successful

practice of engineering. These include communication skills, management skills, and inter-

personal skills. More engineers are removed from positions because of a deficiency in these

skills than because of a lack of technical ability. Design and laboratory courses provide an

opportunity for teaching these skills. Students learn by doing. However, the doing is more

effective for learning if it is initially guided and supervised. Thus, we have included teaching

procedures which specifically guide the student and provide feedback.

We enjoy teaching laboratory courses. The extra student contact makes up for the burden

of grading laboratory reports. In addition, our school has done an adequate job of financing

the laboratory and rewarding the participation of professors. Since we enjoy teaching

laboratory classes, most students don’t mind taking them from us.

9.3. CHAPTER COMMENTS

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

185

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Discuss what design and laboratory work add to the education of engineers. Discuss the

problems inherent in teaching design and laboratory courses.

• Develop a plan to incorporate design throughout the undergraduate engineering curricu-

lum.

• Compare and contrast the different ways to teach design. Highlight the advantages and

disadvantages of each method.

• Describe how you would select groups for a design project or laboratory experiment.

Justify your method.

• Explain the appropriate laboratory structure for students at different levels.

1 Determine what roles design and laboratory classes play in the curriculum at your school.

Do they meet the spirit of the ABET requirements? If not, what can be done to improve

them? Or, why do you think the ABET requirements are irrelevant?

2 Develop a plan to include design throughout the engineering curriculum at your school.

3 Choose one of the methods of teaching design. Outline how to incorporate this method into

one of the design courses at your school. Explain how this method would help students

achieve the course objectives.

4 Assume one of the design groups in your class is not functioning well. Develop an

intervention strategy to help get this group back to healthy functioning.

5 Select appropriate objectives for a laboratory course at your school. Outline a structure to

help students meet these objectives.

ABET, Criteria for Accrediting Programs in Engineering in the United States, Accreditation Board for

Engineering and Technology, New York, 1989.

Alexander, L. T., Davis, R. H., and Azima, K., “The laboratory,” Guides for Improvement of Instruction

in Higher Education, No. 9, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1978.

ASEE, “Executive summary of the final report: Quality of Engineering Education Project,” Eng. Educ.,

16 (Oct. 1986).

Baasel, W., “Goals of an undergraduate plant design course,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 26 (Winter 1982).

Bailie, R.C. and Wales, C.E., “Pride: A new approach to experiential learning,” Eng. Educ., 398 (Feb.

1975).

9.4. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

186

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Balmer, R.T., “A university-industry senior engineering laboratory,” Eng. Educ., 700 (April 1988).

Bishop, E. H., and Huey, C.O., Jr., “The administration of an industry-supported capstone design

course,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1661, 1988.

Culver, R. S., Woods, D., and Fitch, P., “Gaining professional expertise through design activities,” Eng.

Educ., 533 (July/Aug. 1990).

Cundy, V. A., Smith, S., and Yannitell, D. W., “Practical creativity—LSU’s senior design experience,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 472, 1987.

Dekker, D. L., “Designing is doing,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC,

784, 1989.

Durbin, P. T., “Coursework needs for technological literacy,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 174, 1991.

Eastlake, C. N., “Tell me, I’ll forget; show me, I’ll remember; involve me, I’ll understand (The tangible

benefit of labs in the undergraduate curriculum).” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 420, 1986.

Eck, R. W., and Wilhelm, W. J., “Guided design: An approach to education for the practice of

engineering,” Eng. Educ., 191 (Nov. 1979).

Emanuel, J. T., and Worthington, K., “Senior design project: Twenty years and still learning,”

Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 227, 1987.

Emanuel, J. T., and Worthington, K., “Team-oriented capstone design course management: A new

approach to team formulation and evaluation,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, New York, 229, 1989.

Evans, D. L., and Bowers, D. H., “Conceptual design for engineering freshmen,” Int. J. Appl. Eng. Educ.,

4, 111 (1988).

Evans, D. L., McNeill, B. W., and Beakley, G. C., “Capstone design for engineering freshmen?”

Proceedings Innovation in Undergraduate Engineering Education Conference, Engineering Foun-

dation, New York, 45, 1990.

Feldhusen, J. F., “Guided design. An evaluation of the course and course pattern,” Eng. Educ., 541

(March 1972).

Florman, S. C., The Civilized Engineer, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1987.

Green, D. G., “A curriculum approach to teaching engineering design,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1509, 1991.

Griggs, F. E., Jr., and Turano, V. S., “The Merrimack College capstone design program,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1279, 1990.

Harrisberger, L., “Development of human software for industry,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Confer-

ence, ASEE, Washington, DC, 479, 1986a.

Harrisberger, L., “Engineering clinics and industry: The quintessential partnership,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 979, 1986b.

Henderson, J. M., “Design in mechanics courses?” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 1146, 1989.

Henderson, J. M., Bellman, L. E., and Furman, B. J., “A case for teaching engineering with cases,” Eng.

Educ., 288 (Jan. 1983).

Herring, S., From the Titanic to the Challenger, Garland, New York, 1989.

Hills, P., “Models help teach undergraduate design,” Eng. Educ., 106 (Nov. 1984).

Hudson, W. B., and Hudson, B. S., “Special education and engineering education: An interdisplinary

approach to undergraduate training,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference,

IEEE, New York, 53, 1991. (This article has names, addresses, and phone numbers for organizations

that provide assistive technology.)

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

187

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Jansson, D. G., “Creativity in engineering design: The partnership of analysis and synthesis,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 838, 1987.

Jones, J. B., “Design at the frontiers of engineering education,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 107, 1991.

Jumper, E. J., “Recollections and observations on the value of laboratories in the undergraduate

engineering curriculum,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 423,

1986.

Juricic, D., and Barr, R. E., “Integration of design into mechanical engineering curriculum,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 358, 1991.

Kersten, R. D., “ABET criteria for engineering laboratories,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1043, 1989.

Kidder, T., The Soul of a New Machine, Little-Brown, Boston, 1981.

Klein, R. E., “The bicycle project approach: A vehicle to relevancy and motivation,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 47, 1991.

McCormack, J., Morrow, R., Bare, H., Burns, R., and Rasmussen, J., “The complementary roles of

laboratory notebooks and laboratory reports,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 1429, 1990.

Magleby, S. P., Sorensen, C. D., and Todd, R. H., “Integrated product and process design: A capstone

course in mechanical and manufacturing engineering,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 469, 1991.

Manning, F. S., Wilson, A. J., and Thompson, E. E., “The use of industrial interaction to improve the

effectiveness of the senior design experience,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 620, 1988.

Middlebrook, R. D., “Low-entropy expressions: The key to design-oriented analysis,” Proceedings

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 399, 1991.

Miller, L. S., Papadakis, M., and Nagati, M. G., “Design content in traditionally non-design courses,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 6, 1989.

Myers, D. D., “Need for case studies: New product development,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 89, 1991.

Overholser, K. A., Woltz, C. C., and Godbold, T. M., “Teaching process synthesis—The integration of

plant design and senior laboratory,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 16 (Winter 1975).

Paris, J. R., “Professional software in process design instruction: From why to how to beyond,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1161, 1991.

Peterson, C. R., “Experience in the integration of design into basic mechanics of solids course at MIT,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 360, 1991.

Pierson, E. S., “A team-based senior-design sequence,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, New York, 221, 1987.

Radovich, J. M., “What is needed for a good laboratory program?” Eng. Educ., 749 (April 1983).

Riffe, W. J., and Henderson, B. P., “A second year mechanical engineering design course,” Proceedings

ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 980, 1990.

Ring, S. L., “Don’t overlook the cities for engineering design labs,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers

in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 272, 1982.

Sloan, E. D., “An experimental design course in groups,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 38 (Winter 1982).

Smith, C. O., and Kardos, G., “Need design content for accreditation? Try engineering cases!” Eng.

Educ., 228 (Jan. 1987).

Stager, R. A. and Wales, C. E., “Guided design. A new concept in course design and operation,” Eng.

Educ., 539 (March 1972).

188

CHAPTER 9: DESIGN AND LABORATORY

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Stern, H., “Team projects can offer incentives,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 394, 1989.

Sullivan, W., and Thuesen, J., “Integration of economic principles with design in the engineering science

component of the undergraduate curriculum,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 525, 1991.

Wales, C. E., and Nardi, A., “Teaching decision-making with guided design,” Idea Paper No. 9, Center

for Faculty Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS (Nov. 1982).

Wales, C. E., and Stager, R. A., Educational Systems Design, Morgantown, WV, 1973. (Published by

authors.)

Wales, C. E., and Stager, R. A., Guided Design, Part I, Morgantown, WV, 1977. (Published by authors.)

Wales, C. E., Stager, R. A., and Long, T. R., Guided Engineering Design, West Publishing Company,

St. Paul, MN, 1974a.

Wales, C. E., Stager, R. A., and Long, T. R., Guided Engineering Design, Project Book, West Publishing

Company, St. Paul, MN, 1974b.

Warfield, J. N., “Design science: Experience in teaching large system design,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 39, 1989.

Whittemore, O. J., “Patents: A tool for teaching design,” Eng. Educ. 229 (Jan. 1981).

Williams, R. D., “A project-oriented class in microcomputer system design,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1514, 1991.

Woods, D. R. (Ed.), “Using troubleshooting problems,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 88 (Spring 1980), 130

(Summer 1980).

Woods, D. R., “Workshop in using troubleshooting problems for learning,” ASEE Annual Conference,

Session 3516, June 22, 1983. (This paper is not in the proceedings.)

189

ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

CHAPTER 10

10.1. LISTENING SKILLS

In a perfect world professors would have the time to get to know every one of their students

as individuals and would be able to tutor them when they had difficulties. Although this is

seldom feasible, professors do have significant one-to-one contact with students. One-to-one

contact occurs when a student asks a question and the professor makes eye contact while

answering the question. It also occurs when a student asks a question after class or in the hall,

and when a student comes to the professor’s office to ask questions. Although brief, these

encounters have a considerable impact on his or her rapport with students; thus one-to-one

contact has a major effect on the professor’s effectiveness as a teacher. Advising and

counseling usually involve significant one-to-one contact with students. The area where many

professors have the most contact with individual students is in serving as research advisers for

graduate students.

The one ability which is common to all these examples is skill in listening. Actively

listening to people and responding so that they know you understand is a necessary skill for

excellent one-to-one teaching and advising. Unfortunately, this ability is often neglected.

Listening skills will be discussed first, and then particular one-to-one teaching and advising

situations will be considered.

Everyone who writes about listening laments the lack of skill in this important communi-

cation area. Professors who take the time to listen to students will benefit, and their students

will greatly appreciate the rare chance to be heard. This will increase the professor’s

effectiveness as a teacher significantly. However, learning to listen can be very difficult for

TEACHING ENGINEERING

190

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

professors since many of them really do like to talk. Listening skills are also critical for

effective advising and tutoring. If one of the goals of your department is to improve the

communication skills of the engineering graduates, then it may be appropriate to teach

students to improve their listening skills. Exercises that do this can easily be incorporated into

laboratory and design courses.

Listening is a skill that can be learned, but practice is required. Listening skills are

discussed in many counseling books (e.g., Bolton, 1979; Brammer, 1985; Edwards, 1979;

Hackney and Nye, 1973), in many books on teaching (e.g., Eble, 1988; Lowman, 1985;

McKeachie, 1986), and in articles in the engineering education literature (e.g., Katz, 1986;

Miller, 1980; Root and Scott, 1975; Stegman, 1986; Wankat, 1979, 1980). Reading about

listening skills can be a first step in improving these skills, but long-term gains require practice.

As the professor you must first create a climate so that listening can occur. To become

known as someone who listens, you must be available, and the easiest time to be available for

the largest number of students is before and after class. Students must come to class anyway,

so the barrier to talking to the professor is significantly less than in coming to the professor’s

office. Make a point to come to class five or ten minutes early. Not only will this give you a

chance to make sure that the room is ready for class, but it will send a subtle message that you

are interested and looking forward to the class. It also gives students a chance to talk to you.

Early in the semester it is useful to walk around the room with your class list, talking to students

and learning their names. Later in the semester students will come up to you to talk.

Students often have questions after a class; by staying a few minutes you can further

develop a rapport with them. To do this you may have to avoid scheduling a meeting

immediately following the class. If the after-class period is too rushed, you might consider

finishing class five minutes early. Since you don’t want to delay the start of the next class, it

helps to be available for short questions in the hall. Office hours are useful for longer

discussions and for dealing with private concerns of students (see Section 10.2).

Professors and students are not equal. As the professor you have significantly more

knowledge and experience in the subject area. In addition, you have power over the student.

These inequalities in power and status inhibit some students (nothing inhibits other students).

You can facilitate student interaction by making the environment more equal. Reduce barriers:

Step from behind the podium and take a few steps toward the students. Wander in the audience

to solicit interactions with students. Be relaxed and nonverbally encourage students to talk.

Sitting down on the edge of a table or desk indicates that you are relaxed and have time to talk.

Rearrange your office so that the desk is not a barrier between you and the students. (If you

are new to academe and feel a bit insecure, you might want to have the desk between you and

the students.)

A professor’s attitude is important. Those who want to help students telegraph this attitude

to them. Generally speaking, people who are classified as feeling types on the Myers-Briggs

10.1.1. Setting the Climate

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

191

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Type Indicator (see Chapter 13) will have an easier time conveying to the students the

impression that they want to listen. Thinking types need to think about the students’ feelings.

Perceptives tend to enjoy the uncontrolled give-and-take of discussions with students, while

judging types need to schedule this time for students. By knowing yourself, you can adjust to

be available and to listen to students. A note of caution: If you don’t particularly like students

but love the content, don’t try to fake being the students’ friend. They will see through your

facade. Aloof professors who are content experts can be good teachers (see Table 1-1).

To encourage interaction with students, professors need to be nonjudgmental: There are

no “dumb” questions. There are questions which show a lack of understanding, and there are

questions you don’t understand. The purpose of listening is to clarify your understanding of

the questions so that you can help students understand the material. It is also helpful to avoid

being defensive. This can be difficult when students are angry and are attacking a test, and may

be attacking you. Although there are no dumb questions, there are hostile ones. Sometimes

acknowledging a student’s feelings (see Section 10.1.2) will calm her or him so that he or she

can listen to facts. Sometimes humor is useful in deflecting the hostility. If no progress is made,

offer to talk to the student privately after class. Discipline problems are discussed in detail in

Chapter 12.

Being nonjudgmental does not mean “anything goes” or that there are no standards.

Instead, it means that actions and behaviors are evaluated, not the inherent worth of the student.

There are times “when a student is rationalizing about the difficulties and needs to be told

bluntly to make an attitude adjustment and work harder (or more efficiently)” (Herrick and

Giordano, 1991). When being blunt with a student, tell him or her the probable consequence

of actions or inactions, but without a character analysis.

A professor’s first focus should be on the student. Make eye contact, move or lean toward

him or her, offering nonverbal encouragement. Listen to what the student says completely

without trying to formulate your response before he or she is finished. Use your brain’s “free

time” to ask yourself questions about what the student is trying to say. What is the underlying

message that may be hidden in the student’s response? (Katz, 1986). A useful technique is to

paraphrase the question briefly after the student is finished. This ensures that you have

understood it, and in a classroom situation ensures that everyone has heard the question.

Repeating the question also gives you a little more time to formulate an answer to the question.

Your focus should be on the student’s problem being considered. The best atmosphere for

a class is one where the professor is present to help the students master the objectives.

Unfortunately, in many classes the professor is the enemy. Anything that you can do through

one-to-one contact to help students feel that you are there to help them learn helps improve the

atmosphere in the classroom. How much of the student’s problem should be solved by the

professor and how much by the student is a judgment decision which is discussed in Section

10.2. Another trick for focusing on a speaker’s message is to take notes. This may help you

10.1.2. Focus

192

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

listen and pay attention at faculty and committee meetings, seminars, after-dinner speeches,

and so forth. It is also appropriate to encourage both undergraduate and graduate students to

take notes in meetings with you.

There should also be some focus on emotions. Emotions are always present, and if not dealt

with directly may prevent communication and learning. This is particularly appropriate in

private, but can also be appropriate in a classroom. In class, it is usually sufficient to

acknowledge the emotion and then move to the content of the question. For example, “This

appears to be an emotional issue for you. Let’s look at it from another angle” ; or, “I see that

you are upset about the grading of this test. Let me answer the question now and then we can

discuss the grading after class.” In private, more time can be spent exploring the student’s

emotions (see Section 10.3).

Although it is appropriate to focus on the student’s emotions, it is usually not appropriate

to focus on your emotions as the professor. Try to remain rational and nondefensive. This is

particularly true in class where an emotional outburst can do significant damage to your

standing and credibility. Unwind later by talking to a friend.

Individuals make nonverbal, minimally verbal, and verbal responses to others. An

additional response is silence. All these responses should be congruent. Students receive a

confusing mixed message if your words do not agree with the nonverbal signals. This is one

reason why most people cannot fake interest or caring for long periods.

Nonverbal messages include facial expressions, eye contact or lack of eye contact,

interpersonal distance, hand gestures, and body language (Axtell, 1991; Miller, 1980). In

Western cultures direct eye contact with occasional breaking and reforming of the contact is

expected. Leaning forward is usually interpreted as a sign of interest, as are nods and

encouraging hand gestures. An open stance or sitting position is interpreted as signifying

openness, whereas crossing one’s arms suggests a closed position. Clenched fists are often

interpreted as anger, as are angry facial expressions. These are powerful signals which most

individuals raised in a Western culture transmit and receive unconsciously (Axtell, 1991). The

signals are often so powerful that words are ignored if they are incongruent with the message.

An individual can change the nonverbal messages he or she is sending. Changing behavior

often changes the individual’s feelings. For example, if you find that you have your arms

tightly crossed and you are resisting listening to a message at a meeting, purposely opening

your arms and relaxing will probably result in your being more open to listening. Since

changing behavior often changes underlying emotions, it is useful to monitor and change the

nonverbal clues you are sending to your students. One problem with nonverbal messages is

that they have to be interpreted, and thus they may be misinterpreted. For example, the tightly

crossed arms in the previous example may simply mean that the person is cold, while it is

interpreted as being closed to an idea. In addition, the nonverbal messages of different

societies are different (Axtell, 1991). In India shaking one’s head signifies agreement, not

10.1.3. Responses

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

193

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

disagreement as it does in Western society. The appropriate degree of eye contact and

comfortable interpersonal differences are very different in different societies. If you are

listening to one of your students and the nonverbal and verbal messages appear to be

incongruent, it may be that you are misinterpreting her or his nonverbal messages. And he or

she may be misinterpreting your nonverbal messages.

Minimal verbal messages are sounds like “uh” and “uh-huh” and words like “oh,” “yeah,”

and “OK” which do not convey much meaning but encourage the person to keep talking.

Minimal verbal messages sent by the listener usually imply that he or she is paying attention

and understands the speaker. These messages are often used in private conversation, although

they are also appropriate when a student is talking in class. If speakers often act as if they don’t

know whether you are listening, you may need to increase your use of minimal verbal

messages. However, faking minimal verbal messages when you aren’t listening will get you

into trouble fairly quickly.

Verbal messages are an important part of the active listening process. Probes are questions

or directives which ask the speaker to tell more. Probes can be nonspecific, “Elaborate on that”

or “Tell me more”; or quite specific, “What would one observe if the weld was bad?” or “You

are confused about the application of Kirchhoff’s laws in this situation.” Probes are often more

effective if they are open-ended questions or directives which cannot be answered with a

simple yes or no response. If you ask closed-ended questions and get yes or no responses, then

change the questions to make them open-ended.

Paraphrasing what the person has said in your own words is a useful method for letting him

or her know that you understand. With student questions it is useful to rephrase the question,

and with both paraphrasing and rephrasing it is appropriate to ask if your interpretation is

correct. Summarizing long statements in both classroom and private discussions is another

useful active listening technique: “What I heard you say is . . . .” Again, it is important to check

with the speaker that the summary is correct.

Silence is not golden if it does not encourage communication or becomes threatening. Use

silence to encourage communication, not to punish students. Professors usually do not pause

long enough after asking questions. A period of silence is necessary to allow students time to

respond. In class this will be less threatening if you do something useful during the period of

silence. For example, ask a question, clean off the blackboard, and then turn back to the

students for an answer. Silence, perhaps punctuated with a nonverbal response, is also an

appropriate response when a student is clearly processing information and is not ready for

more communication.

Silence can also be very useful when students are trying to manipulate the professor. A

common ploy is for a student to tell all the reasons why he or she will have trouble handing

in an assignment on time or taking a test when it is scheduled, but never make a direct request

for a postponement. Since no request has been made and no question has been asked, there

is no need to respond. Silence is an effective counterploy since it forces the student to be

honest about the request. An alternative response is to use a probe such as “Well, what are you

going to do about it?” There is a final use for silence. When a student breaks down and starts

crying in your office (yes, this can happen), one appropriate response is to offer a tissue and

be silent until he or she has regained control.

194

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Table 10-1 presents a brief comparison of listening and non-listening behavior. This can

serve as a useful checklist for monitoring your behavior or for helping students improve their

listening skills.

We are using an inclusive definition of tutoring to include helping students before and after

class, during office hours, in special help sessions, in the halls and on the telephone. We

rejected the idea of calling this section “Office Hours” since only a fraction of the students in

a class come to see a professor during office hours. A majority of students can receive

10.1.4. Comparison Between Listening and Nonlistening Behavior

10.2. TUTORING AND HELPING STUDENTS

Time limitations



Climate



Focus



Non-verbal 

behavior



Dialogue



Overall attitude

conveyed

Does not mention time limitations, 

but shows in obvious ways he/she 

is busy



Defensive—

1. Evaluates and judges

2. Tries to control speaker

3. Uses strategy

4. Is neutral and avoids feelings

5. Shows superiority

6. Is certain and dogmatic



1. Internal – self-conscious

2. External – on other work

3. Other – does not watch speaker

4. Interaction – on mechanics of the 

conversation



Non-attending – closed posture, 

expressionless face, faces away 

from speaker



No dialogue – either silent or 

monopolizes conversation



Not interested

Honest about time limitations



Open and Supportive—

1. Non-evaluative and non-judgmental

2. Problem-oriented

3. Is honest and spontaneous

4. Accepts and shows feelings

5. Sets up an equal environment

6. Tentative about conclusions



1. On speaker

2. On speaker's topic

3. Looks directly at speaker

4. On what is being communicated



Attending – open posture, shows

expression on face, looks at and 

leans toward speaker



Dialogue – reflects and summarizes 

what speaker has been saying, clarifies 

unclear points, asks relevant questions



Interested

Non-listening behavior Listening behavior

TABLE 10-1 COMPARISON OF LISTENING AND NON-LISTENING BEHAVIORS (WANKAT, 1979)

Reprinted with permission from

Chem. Eng

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

195

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

individual attention and at least minimal amounts of tutoring when the professor broadens her

or his availability.

Right before and right after class are the most efficient times for tutoring because many

students ask questions then but are not tempted to visit with the professor. Coming to class

early and staying late also shows accessibility and interest in the students. This technique is

one of the few methods which is efficient and effective for both students and professors, and

we strongly recommend that you try it. Since there are minimal barriers to the students, the

hall can also be an effective place for informal student contacts. Professors who are open, and

friendly and know the names of their students are often asked questions in the hall. Many of

these questions can be answered immediately. For questions requiring more time or the use

of a blackboard, you can make an appointment with the student or invite her or him into your

office immediately. Taking a student with you into your office is one way to encourage

students who otherwise would never come on their own.

Office hours are useful for the “regulars” who will use them. Unfortunately, many students,

particularly introverts, who could benefit from help do not take advantage of a professor’s

office hours. Encourage the whole class to visit both you and the TA during office hours. (Of

course, be sure that both you and the TA keep office hours.) Private notes on returned

homework and tests asking students to come in and see you or the TA can also be effective.

In lower division courses it may be appropriate to tell struggling students that they must come

in. This fits in with our general strategy of being more directive to beginning students. Some

professors require all students to stop in early in the semester as a way of getting to know them.

This also reduces the barrier to students’ coming to see you.

Telephones can also be used for long-distance tutoring. For television courses at remote

sites, telephone contact with students is indispensable. Usually, a specified time is set aside

when the professor will be available for phone calls about the course. Most students never use

this service, but the existence of the service is important psychologically. Similarly, set-aside

hours with the TA or the professor available to answer phone calls can be used for on-campus

students. This service is particularly valuable for commuters who might find it difficult to

come in for scheduled office hours.

Should you give your home telephone number to students and encourage them to call you

at home? This is your decision. Some professors do this and some do not. If you do, it is

appropriate to set limits on when they can call.

Tutoring and lecturing can fill complementary functions, as shown in Table 10-2, but they

also differ in their ability to satisfy some of the basic learning principles listed in Section 1.4.

10.2.2. Advantages and Disadvantages of Tutoring

10.2.1. Tutoring Locations

196

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

This comparison is shown in Table 10-3. A complete course package of lectures, tutoring,

homework, and tests can satisfy all the learning principles; however, it is a good idea to try to

satisfy as many of these as possible without the tutoring component since many students will

not come in for tutoring.

The definition of good tutoring depends upon the goals of tutoring. The professor’s goals

are often to make a student a better problem solver who can become independent of the

professor. Other possible goals include getting to know students better, receiving feedback

about what they understand and do not understand, having an opportunity to interact more with

them, motivating them to learn the material, stretching and challenging them, and minimizing

the time spent tutoring.

Purpose

Where done

Focus

Coverage of material

Emotions

Personal attention

Barriers to student use

Path

Information transfer

Efficiency: Professor

Student

Professor needs

Advantages

Transmit information

Lecture hall

Entire class

Broad – Use of material

may not be obvious to student

Not dealt with

Very little

None

Linear/sequential

Mainly one-way

High

Low

Basic knowledge

Ability to organize material

Presentation Skills

Good at transmitting information

Efficient use of Prof's. time

Troubleshooting

Anywhere

One student or small

group of students

Narrow – immediately useful

Can be dealt with

Lots

Hesitant to bother professor

Professor may not be receptive

Branched/multiple

Interactive

Low

High

Basic knowledge

Listening skills

Troubleshooting skills

Individualizes

Can work on problem solving

Lecture Listening behaviorItem

TABLE 10-2 COMPARISON OF LECTURING AND TUTORING

10.2.3. Goals of Tutoring

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

197

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Students often have a different perspective. Many want an answer to their current difficulty

and are not concerned about overall development as a problem solver. However, there are

students who are genuinely concerned about learning the course content and want to become

better problem solvers. Some students use tutoring as a short-cut to finding information that

they could clearly obtain on their own. Overly dependent students often want to check that they

are doing everything correctly. They want reassurance. Students with a high need for

affiliation may want to get to know the professor and use office hours for this purpose.

The dilemma for you is to satisfy your goals and at the same time satisfy enough of the

student’s goals. If none of the student’s goals are satisfied, he or she will not return. This

minimizes the time you spend tutoring but does not satisfy any learning objectives. Various

methods can be used to improve tutoring.

Tutoring is an art. A tutor must continually make decisions about what will be most helpful

for a student at a particular time. Sometimes only a short answer or a pat on the back is needed.

1. Active learner

2. Feedback

3. Knows objective

4. Motivate learner

5. Individualize

6. Important types of learning:

Concepts

Apply principles

Illustrate problem solving

7. Problem solving requirements:

Acquisition of knowledge

Practice

8. Structured hierarchy material

9. Thought-provoking questions

10. Professor enthusiastic

Often no

Usually no

Can transmit in lecture

Can happen –

often doesn't

Difficult

Yes

Sometimes

Can be

Yes

Usually no

Yes

Can do

Can show

Usually yes

Can include

Could check on –

but not usually done

Reinforces motivation

Yes

Can clarify

Yes

Can give practice

Can clarify

Yes

Can do

Can show

Lecture TutoringLearning Principles

TABLE 10-3 SATISFACTION OF LEARNING PRINCIPLES

10.2.4. Methods for Improving Tutoring

198

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

In other cases significantly more time is required. Most of the suggestions in this section apply

to these longer contacts.

One main advantage of tutoring is that a tutor can individualize the instruction for a

particular student. Since different students want and need different things, vary your approach

and responses. Observe and listen closely throughout the semester. When you meet these

wants, the student will be happy and motivated. Unfortunately, this may not satisfy the

student’s needs. For example, someone who has trouble generalizing solution methods wants

to see the solution method applied to all possible cases. What he or she needs is to learn to

generalize. Good tutoring may consist of showing one additional case to satisfy his or her

wants. Then the tutor can show how to generalize from the base case to the new case, and

follow this by making the student generalize to another new case.

Students also require different emotional responses. One student may respond to a

challenge, while another may require initial hand-holding and encouragement. Some students

respond well to the socratic approach; others become flustered and frustrated. What works

best also varies from day to day. Right after a hard test is not the time to offer another challenge.

By observing and listening to a student, you can get an idea of his or her emotional state. Then

respond accordingly.

One important way to improve tutoring is by improving listening skills (Section 10.1).

Remember to be nonjudgmental. It doesn’t help a student when he or she is yelled at and called

stupid. This requires patience. Without jumping to conclusions, try to find what the student’s

difficulties really are. Ask open-ended questions to help the student find her or his own

mistake. Whenever the problem is nontrivial, encourage the student to talk. Some focus on

emotions can be helpful. A very short comment such as “I see you’re really frustrated” can

have a remarkable effect. It frees up the student, helping her or him see you as human and to

feel that you understand.

Listening is particularly important when a student has subtle misconceptions. Conceptu-

alize what the student is thinking and compare his or her approach to possible correct

approaches. Since words may be confusing, the student should write down equations or draw

a figure. This can help you see what he or she is talking about.

Interest in helping students is another important ingredient in excellent tutoring. You have

to want to help students, although the reason why you want to help is probably not very

important. Interest is important because a student can sense it from many verbal and nonverbal

clues. Interest is also important as a motivating force for the professor. Tutoring can be hard,

frustrating work. Being interested in helping students provides the patience and energy needed

to be an effective tutor.

When a student comes in for tutoring, the passive lecture approach has failed. Make the

student do things. The student can explain an approach in detail, write equations on the board,

or solve problems on paper. Involve the student in the process instead of giving another

minilecture. After you explain something, don’t accept the polite but often meaningless

phrase, “I understand.” For example,

Professor: Do you see it now?

Student: Yeah, I understand.

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

199

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Professor: Good, now finish this problem on the board.

Student: You mean right now?

This forces the student to become actively involved. It also allows you to observe and

correct mistakes as they occur. Give minor help, and allow the student to work the problem

through to completion. This can provide confidence that he or she can solve the problems.

Another way to make the student be active is with probing questions which eventually lead

her or him to the desired solution. Unfortunately, in our experience this does not work with

all students. When it does work, it is a fine method for making the student reason his or her

way through a problem.

Another method is to have the student explain your answer in her or his own words.

Sometimes you’ll answer one student’s question and then have a second student come in and

ask the same question. Ask the first student to explain the answer to the second student. This

forces the first student to be active, gives you a chance to check on understanding, and fulfills

the learning principle of having students teach.

Students often know concepts but are unable to use them to solve problems. Since problem

solving is an art, the one-to-one contact of tutoring can help students improve their techniques.

Many students have no idea how they or anyone solves problems. When tutoring, use the

problem-solving strategy taught in your course. This may involve only one or two steps of the

strategy or may involve going step by step through an entire problem.

For example, when a student is having trouble getting started, going over the define and

explore steps is appropriate (See section 5.3).

Professor: O.K, Let’s define the problem.

Student: Well, it’s written down here.

Professor: Go to the board and draw me a figure.

Good, now label all knowns.

O.K., what are you asked to find?

Good, that defines the problem. What’s the next step?

Student: It’s to explore.

Professor: What does explore mean.

Student: Look for different possible approaches.

Professor: Right. Give me five different ways you might be able to solve this problem.

Student: Five?

Professor: Uh huh, if you only have one you’re not exploring.

Student: Well I could . . . .

Professor: Good, now let’s go on and work on the most likely approach.

Which approach is most likely to work?

Student: I think that the . . . .

Professor: Fine. Now let’s plan how you would do that.

This approach does not produce an experienced problem solver immediately. However, it

does guide the student toward improving.

200

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

When a student has put in considerable effort but is not converging on the right answer,

troubleshooting is called for. Knowledge of typical student mistakes is helpful. For example,

beginning students often have trouble with unit conversions or forget to convert units. A brief

study of tests and homework will show you what these typical errors are in your subject.

If the difficulty is not a typical mistake, then more subtle errors must be searched for. This

is where expert knowledge of the area becomes important. An expert can evaluate different

approaches and find subtle errors. Excellent tutors must be subject matter experts, but not all

subject matter experts are good tutors. How many times have you heard some variant of “He

really knows the material, but he can’t get it down to our level.” The other ways to improve

tutoring appear to be more important than becoming a subject matter expert. This is why

students often make good tutors.

Several little tricks can help in tutoring. The first of these is humor. Professors with a good

sense of humor are well liked even if they are hard taskmasters. Humor can aid the interaction

by defusing anxiety and making learning fun. Groups of students can often be tutored at the

same time. Since they often have similar difficulties, students can learn from others’

questions. The exception to this is the student who is totally lost and needs individual attention.

A final suggestion is to talk to your colleagues. Find out what works for them with particular

students.

Time is the number-one problem. How do you find enough time to prepare lectures, tutor,

do research, attend committee meetings, and do everything else which needs to be done?

Tutoring does require time, and so it helps to be efficient (see Chapter 2). One method which

can help you control your time is to set specific office hours for tutoring. Unfortunately, this

solution can generate a new problem. What do you do about students who come in at times

other than your office hours? One possibility is to respond, “I’ll help you this time, but in the

future please come during office hours.” If a particular student keeps ignoring this request,

he or she may be overly dependent.

The overly dependent student is another problem. To become an independent problem

solver the student needs to be weaned from the professors. The student is probably getting

what he or she wants, but not what he or she needs. One approach is to discuss dependence

with the student. This needs to be done in a nonjudgmental fashion. For example, tell the

student that employers expect their engineers to be relatively independent, and that you are

worried that he or she is not learning this skill. If the dependent behavior persists, you may

have to limit the student to a specified number of minutes per week. Fortunately, this extreme

behavior is rare.

The opposite problem is the extremely shy student who may not ask for help even when he

or she would benefit from it. Encourage the student. If this student does come in, force yourself

to listen even if you are very busy. One interpersonal mistake may drive a shy or sensitive

student away. For a shy student to go to a professor’s office is an act of courage. By being

too busy or locking your door you may destroy this courage.

10.2.5. Tutoring Problems

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

201

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Probably the most neglected area in engineering education is advising, and certainly this

is the area where students show the least satisfaction (Anonymous, 1986; Wankat, 1986).

Inadequate advising is a commonly cited deficiency during ABET accreditation visits. Eble

(1988) calls advising in college “a mess.” Hewitt and Seymour (1992) found that inadequate

advising was a frequent complaint of students who left enginering. Although there has been

an upsurge in interest in it, advising is still tremendously neglected as compared to teaching

or research. In this section we will first discuss academic advising and then personal

counseling. Professional counselors often draw a distinction between advising and counsel-

ing, but we will use these two terms interchangeably.

Advisors need to be trained to do academic advising (Eble, 1988; Vines, 1986; Wankat,

1980, 1986). This is true for professors, peer counselors, administrative assistants, and

professional counselors. Training is required for the specific information needed, in listening

skills, and in specific counseling skills.

Recent studies (e.g., Light, 1990) have found that there are significant gender differences

in what students want from their academic adviser. These differences are shown in Table 10-

4. To some extent they may mirror differences in the percent of men and women who are

feeling or thinking types according to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (see Chapter 13). The

implication for advising is that procedures which have worked for men may not satisfy women.

Tannen (1990) reports on the fascinating research on how men and women tend to differ in

their conversations. In general, men communicate facts and try to maintain independence,

whereas women search for rapport and connections. Within this general framework the

pattern of answers in Table 10-4 makes sense.

10.3. ADVISING AND COUNSELING

10.3.1. Academic Advising

1. Will take the time to know me personally

2. Shares my interests so we have something in common

3. Knows where to send me to get information

4. Knows the facts about courses

5. Makes concrete and directive suggestions

Men Women

TABLE 10-4 WHAT STUDENTS WANT FROM THEIR ACADEMIC ADVISOR.

Percent saying "very important" (Light, 1990).

202

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

First, an adviser’s information must be accurate and up-to-date as to the university’s

requirements for registration, prerequisites, dropping and adding courses, probation, transfer-

ring to a different school within the university, grade appeals, and so forth. The adviser needs

to be able to tell a student the consequences of doing or not doing something. If the adviser

does not know an answer, he or she needs to know whom to ask to find out. At large universities

keeping up-to-date is a nontrivial task since courses, graduation requirements, and rules are

continually changing. Advisers probably need to attend a meeting every semester to refresh

their memories and to learn about changes.

Each school has a slightly different philosophy about advising. We believe that the

responsibility for obtaining an education is the student’s. The adviser is there to help, provide

information, and explore alternatives with him or her, but the student must retain the ultimate

responsibility. Thus, part of the function of an adviser is to help students gradually become

more responsible in such things as checking for errors on a schedule, selecting a major and

selecting electives, getting to know a few professors well, and eventually deciding upon

graduate school or an industrial position.

Since we believe that the ultimate responsibility lies with the student, we recommend a

relatively nondirective approach. Listen to the student and let her or him do most of the talking,

empathize, probe, tell the student the probable consequences of a particular action, and then

let the student make the decision. Of course, there are certain actions such as taking a course

without the prerequisites which are not allowed, but if the action is allowed, the student should

make the final decision. The adviser’s expertise is important in explaining the consequences

of a particular action. For example, many students are unaware of the consequences of being

dropped from the university. Or, a student may not realize that dropping a particular required

course will delay graduation by one year.

Many lower-division students are not ready for the responsibility of conducting their own

affairs. A fairly proactive stance is appropriate for lower division students when there are signs

of problems, such as excessive absences, D and F grades, probation, failure to register on time,

and so forth. Phone calls, letters, and personal visits can help prevent a student from getting

into serious trouble. Students often just let things go because they do not understand the

probable consequences of their actions. A formal written contract with the student may be

appropriate (e.g., to get a tutor). Since such students are often irresponsible, it is important for

the adviser to keep notes on what has happened and what agreements have been made.

With freshmen and sophomores it is appropriate to discuss academic skills if students are

having problems. Engineering professors often assume that students know how to study and

understand the tricks of taking tests. Many students have not learned these skills. Study

methods, problem solving, test taking tricks, relaxation methods, and methods for budgeting

time can all be useful to such students. These academic survival skills can be covered

informally in small groups, and students can be encouraged to form study teams. Many

universities have these types of programs available through a counseling office or the

psychology department.

Upper-division students should be more mature, and with them a more laissez-faire

approach is appropriate. There are skills which these students probably have not learned which

will be useful. In particular, being interviewed and decision making are of considerable

interest to seniors. These can be taught in seminars or small groups. Individual attention with

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

203

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

a professor who is familiar with a given industry or with several graduate schools can be

extremely helpful to students. Although students want to hear the professor’s opinions, it is

still important to listen to them and let them make the decision.

Advisers often have to communicate with students. At large universities it is surprisingly

difficult to be sure that all or even most students understand what they are supposed to do for

registration, dropping classes, company interviews, and other official tasks. Try a variety of

different modes of communication. Seminars, announcements in class, bulletin board an-

nouncements, letters, catalogs, advertisements in the student newspaper, and individual

discussions are different modes each of which will reach a few students that the others won’t.

The failure of a student to know the rules is not an excuse, but try to reach as many students

as possible. Since this problem reoccurs every year, you must patiently keep trying to

communicate.

Advisers can spend a great deal of time on routine matters such as registration. There are

ways to make this and other routine matters more efficient. Records should be computerized

to remove this burden from the advisers. Registration can be handled efficiently by the

combination of a group seminar to provide information and individual sessions with the

counselor for final course selection. Individual sessions are important to avoid losing students

and to give the adviser an opportunity to question the student’s course selections (Grites,

1980). Some students sign up for completely inappropriate courses for a variety of reasons.

The adviser can catch this by asking questions.

Hiring a professional counselor, empathic administrative assistant, or peer adviser (an

upper-division student) can be a cost-effective way of reducing the burden on engineering

professors while simultaneously increasing the effectiveness of advising. The routine

bookkeeping, processing of forms, and enforcing of discipline do not have to be done by

professors. They can better spend their time advising students on professional decisions

involving the choice of electives, graduate school, or industrial jobs.

At large universities many students seldom have the opportunity to speak individually with

a professor—with the lone exception of engineering professors who serve as advisers. It is

important for advisers to be open and take advantage of this opportunity. Use of listening skills

and empathy may lead the conversation from a rather mundane presenting problem to more

serious concerns. The term “presenting problem” refers to a problem which is raised by the

student but which may conceal another problem—the one needing to be addressed. Oftentimes

an adviser is the only official person at the university who has really taken the time to listen

to the student. This illustration of caring can make a major difference in the student’s career,

and many times is what keeps a student in school. Doing this requires interest, time, and

counseling skills which are the subject of the next section.

Advising students on personal problems is not a major role of engineering professors, but

it is sometimes required. The procedures used for dealing with personal problems are often

useful for academic and career counseling. A simple crisis intervention model useful for short-

10.3.2. Counseling Skills for Personal Problems

204

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

term interventions will be presented (Edwards, 1979; Wankat, 1980). Professors should

always aim for short-term intervention with students with one or at most two sessions. If the

professor has a student in class, then great care should be taken in counseling him or her on

personal problems. The roles of teacher and personal counselor are in many ways incompat-

ible (Lowman, 1985). All professors should be aware of the resources on campus so that they

can refer students to additional help.

An ABCF model can be used to help students deal with a crisis (Edwards, 1979; Wankat,

1980). The four steps in this crisis intervention model are:

A. Acquire information and rapport. Students who come in to talk to an adviser very

often have a presenting problem which is the first thing they talk about. The presenting

problem is real and often is the only problem. However, there may be other problems hiding

behind the problem which the student would like to talk about if given the opportunity.

Advisers who are open and use listening skills give students the opportunity to discuss these

deeper problems. In addition, there are often other signs of serious problems which can

sometimes be noticed by casual observation: excessive absences, sudden plummeting of the

quality and quantity of work, the smell of alcohol on the person, slurred speech, and so forth

(Civiello, 1989).

Once it is clear that there is probably a problem, the adviser uses active listening skills to

acquire information and establish rapport with the student. Empathy, which may be crucial

for gaining rapport, involves knowing what it is like to walk in that person’s shoes. It can be

obtained by focusing on feelings since the feelings of sadness, anger, fear, happiness, and so

forth are universal. The adviser may not have been in a situation similar to the student’s, but

he or she will have felt similar feelings. With this focus on feelings some students may become

quite emotional and start crying. Signify that this is OK, give the student a tissue, and let him

or her cry. The short book by Mayeroff (1971) is useful for insights into empathy and caring.

Individuals often skirt subjects that are taboo, but they probably want to talk about these

issues. It is permissible to bring up issues such as death, AIDS, suicide, poverty, and broken

relationships. (Note that this can be difficult for the teacher because he or she usually has to

evaluate performance in class.) If you bring up a topic which is not the problem, the student

will correct you. Probe, but encourage the student to do 90 percent of the talking.

Often counseling should stop at the acquiring step. People, particularly women, may want

a confirmation of feelings, not problem solving (Tannen, 1990). This behavior is more likely

to occur with peers who are of equal status than with students who are in a subordinate position.

B. Boil the problem down. Sometimes the student knows what the problem is and

sometimes he or she has not accepted what the problem is. If it seems clear to you that the

student knows what the problem is, it is OK to ask, “What’s going on here?” Follow this with

silence to give the student time to collect her or his thoughts. When the problem is unclear,

an important function of a counselor is to help the student clearly state the problem. While in

the acquiring stage you can hypothesize about the problem. Then explore if this is a possible

problem by probing with open-ended questions. When there is sufficient evidence, you can

formulate a problem statement and check it with the student. Do this in a tentative fashion.

“It seems that the underlying problem is . . . .” If the student agrees or modifies the statement

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

205

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

slightly, then you are ready to move on to step C. If not, return to step A.

C. Coping—help the student cope. If we think of working with students on personal

problems as problem solving, then steps A and B are the define stage. Step C consists of the

explore and plan stages. The adviser helps the student devise a plan to cope with the problem.

Since it is the student’s problem, it is not helpful to give advice. Explore alternatives and try

to get the student to set up an action plan. This may be difficult.

There are problems in which the situation cannot be changed but must be accepted. For

example, a death in the family or a parent who is dying of cancer are not problems which are

amenable to action. However, there are actions which may help the student, such as joining

a support group, seeing a professional counselor, or taking incompletes in a few classes. These

possible actions can be all be explored.

As a counselor you can serve as a resource person during the coping step. Students often

do not know what resources are available on campus or in the community. They can be referred

to the university counseling center, the office of the dean of students, the student hospital, the

financial aid office, the local crisis center, or whatever else is appropriate. It may be helpful

to call the referral office and make an appointment for the student with her or his permission.

F. Follow-up. The student needs to go out and actually carry out the action plan. It is

sometimes appropriate to schedule one follow-up session to check on his or her progress and

offer encouragement. This follow-up can be suggested informally (“Stop in and see me when

you’ve gotten this resolved”) or formally (“Can you come in and see me at this time in two

weeks?”) Whether or not a follow-up is appropriate depends on your judgment.

One paradox of helping is that the more severe the crisis, the less training the adviser needs.

Natural caring and empathy are often sufficient for acute problems. Students with long-term

chronic problems and dysfunctional students require trained professional counselors, social

workers, or psychologists. Refer these students to the appropriate professionals.

An extremely important type of one-to-one teaching involves being a research adviser. This

role is closer to the tutoring role than that of an academic adviser or personal counselor,

although it has elements of all these roles. Research advisers have two major objectives: to

help students develop and become competent researchers, and to do research and publish the

results. Although usually complementary, there can be conflicts between these two objectives.

The resolution of these conflicts depends upon the relative importance each adviser places on

the two objectives.

10.4. RESEARCH ADVISERS

206

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

10.4.1. Undergraduate Research

10.4.2. Graduate Student Research

A research experience can be extremely valuable for undergraduates, and strong arguments

can be made that a senior thesis should be required (Prud’homme, 1981); or if classes are large

and resources limited, undergraduate research should be an encouraged option (Fricke, 1981).

Research can give students the opportunity to explore a particular topic in greater depth than

would be possible in class. The student can receive individual attention from one professor

and get to know this professor, “try out” research to see if graduate school should be

considered, or improve his or her efficiency, time management skills, and ability to schedule

complex projects. If teams are used, the student will learn how to function in a team.

Most undergraduate engineering students in the United States have little experience in

working independently on a large project. Thus, initial supervision needs to be fairly

structured. An undergraduate may need to be taught laboratory skills which professors

normally assume graduate students know. Ideally, the professor will have time to teach the

undergraduates the appropriate skills. If the professor is busy, an advanced graduate student

can be assigned the duty of helping them get started. Making a graduate student the supervisor

of an undergraduate provides for much of the day-by-day assistance to the undergraduate. In

addition, the experience at supervision is useful for the graduate student. With this arrange-

ment professors can meet with the team once a week and review progress and provide ideas.

The selection of projects for undergraduate research is critical. Real problems which push

the knowledge level of the student are appropriate. However, the project must be doable in a

finite amount of time. Team projects can be significantly more complex than individual

projects (Masih, 1989). Reporting of results in both written and oral form should be part of the

project requirements. If possible, it is very motivating to list the undergraduate as a coauthor

of any papers resulting from the research.

In most schools the major goal of research programs, particularly the Ph.D. program, is a

research project and the thesis which results. Then the role of the research adviser becomes

critical. This role really has no equivalent in undergraduate education, and in many ways it is

essentially unchanged from that of medieval tutors. At some schools the research adviser

essentially controls when the graduate student graduates, how long the graduate student is

funded, what the project is, whether or not the student goes to conferences and so forth. Once

the student signs on for a given project, he or she may lose many rights. Since there will always

be a few professors who will abuse such a powerful relationship, the department needs to

consider formal institutional controls. Since disgruntled students always know how other

students are being treated, it is helpful to have uniform policies which research advisers must

follow. New professors need mentoring in becoming research advisers since they have

probably had only their own adviser as a role model.

In engineering most graduate students doing research receive support. Policies on how

long the student will be supported to the M.S. and to the Ph.D. are useful to ensure uniformity.

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

207

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Such policies also help prevent advisers from keeping students too long and prevent students

from abusing the system because they enjoy graduate school. Some leniency in the cutoff date

is useful for exceptional cases, but the extra period of support should be limited.

The selection of a research adviser is probably the most important decision an individual

makes as a graduate student. Unfortunately, the process is often random and the student does

not ask the right questions (Amundson, 1987). A better approach would be to train students

in selection processes before they listen to faculty presentations and interview faculty

members. Such training could include a discussion of differences in personality type (see the

description of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Chapter 13). In addition, students could be

shown various decision methods and perhaps a list of generic questions considered important

by the faculty. Since mistakes are made in the selection of a research adviser, a uniform policy

on allowing students to switch advisors should be followed. Some schools require all students

to interview other potential advisers at some specified point such as on completion of the M.S.

Students who are satisfied with their current advisers attend these interviews in a cursory

fashion. This policy protects the students and removes any stigma from switching advisers.

Palmer (1983) lists the philosphical needs of students as openness, boundaries, and an air

of hospitality. Openness is a sense that there are few barriers to learning. Admit students to

the community of scholars and expect them to learn. Firm boundaries help create an open

space where students can choose interesting, meaningful research, but not so open that they

run wild. Research and learning can be very painful processes since they do not represent

linear paths. Therefore, the learning space must be hospitable. Both new ideas and failures

must be treated gently so that the student has permission to keep trying.

Masters students following a thesis option do research projects which in some ways are

longer versions of undergraduate research. The project must be doable in a finite amount of

time, which means that the professor probably needs to define most of the problem for the

student. Most masters students have just made the transition from being undergraduates.

Graduation does not suddenly make them mature, self-starting individuals. Many of these

students need the same initial structure as undergraduates; however, graduate students should

be made more independent fairly quickly. Thus, it is appropriate to define the problem for the

student but require her or him to control the execution of the project. Asking a senior graduate

student to train new graduate students in laboratory skills and safety practices is still a good

idea. But it is probably not a good idea to use an advanced graduate student as a research

supervisor. New graduate students deserve the attention of the professor.

New graduate students may not be very efficient, may not know how to do a scientific

literature survey, and probably do not know how to schedule a long project. All these things

need to be taught. Thus, there is a strong tutoring aspect to starting new graduate students. At

the beginning of the graduate student’s tenure as a student, it is useful to have regularly

scheduled meetings. Even though there may be no research as yet, there are many other things

to talk about. Shortly after being assigned an adviser, the student should be asked to develop

10.4.3. Masters' Research

208

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

a project plan for when he or she wants to graduate. This makes the student think about what

must be done to graduate. The plan can be revised on a regular basis as the student learns more

about the time demands of the project. The student also needs to learn to balance the work on

courses where there are immediate demands and research where there may be no immediate

demands. Research also requires accepting delayed gratification.

Some discussion with the student about background and goals is appropriate. This will help

develop rapport with the student. It is also useful to know where the student has come from

(figuratively speaking) and where he or she is going to help design methods to motivate the

student. Use active listening skills to get the student to talk about her or himself.

Regular meetings of the graduate and undergraduate students in a research group can help

foster a sense of belonging. A senior graduate student can be assigned to organize the

meetings. The presentation of research results to the group is a useful practice on a regular basis

and makes students more polished when they make formal presentations. New students can

be asked to make presentations on papers from the literature. Discussion of the presentations

should be critical yet friendly. The professor can ensure that this happens. New ideas should

be greeted with the PMI or another positive approach (see Section 5.6.3).

When they graduate, Ph.D.’s in engineering are expected to be independent researchers.

This means that they should be able to analyze a situation, define the problem, outline a plan

of attack, and then conduct the research. Many companies assume that a new Ph.D. can

supervise the work of technicians. In academia the new Ph.D. will be expected to generate new

research ideas, supervise the research of graduate students, write proposals, review papers,

teach, serve on committees, and publish. If the Ph.D. is to be able to do all these at graduation,

then he or she needs guided practice in doing these or similar things while a graduate student.

This need for practice guides our advising of Ph.D. students.

Since the professor usually has research money for a specific area, the general area for the

Ph.D. student’s research is usually set. However, within this broad area the student needs to

define the problem he or she will work on. This is a nontrivial task. The easy part involves

doing a literature search to see what others have done. The professor can help the student by

steering her or him to the appropriate tools in the library including computer searches. During

this period, attendance at a professional meeting can help the student see what the current hot

areas are.

The hard part for most students is the intellectual development often required to be in charge

of the research. Determining what is important and what research should be done requires that

he or she be relatively mature (see Chapter 14). Most students have always been told what to

do, and they find the freedom of Ph.D. research frustrating. The period of frustration can easily

last a year while they work to determine “What they want.” Duda (1984) notes that many

students have misconceptions about graduate research, not realizing that research is a

problem-solving method and that a straight, linear path seldom works. The backtracking,

deadends, and lack of obvious progress can be frustrating.

10.4.4. Ph.D. Research

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

209

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Amundson (1987) suggests meeting with students on a regular basis until it becomes

necessary to turn them loose. Then they need to be told to work on their own until they come

up with something that is new or surprising. It must be made clear to the student that the value

of a coefficient is not a surprise even if it is new, especially at the Ph.D. level. Most students

respond amazingly well to this ploy and develop independent ideas. A few start their graduate

programs already independent and appreciate and use the freedom to develop research on their

own. A few are unable to cope and probably should be encouraged to look outside the Ph.D.

program for career opportunities.

When a student does present a new idea, it needs to be accepted but with the challenge that

it be further developed. Ask the student to develop the idea and then prove it theoretically or

experimentally. Suggest that he or she develop twenty or fifty alternatives to the idea. Refuse

to judge the idea since the student needs to learn how to do this.

While conducting research, a student needs to learn to do a host of other tasks. These can

be paced over a long period so that he or she is not overwhelmed at any one time. And the

student needs plenty of freedom to learn to think; otherwise, he or she may escape from

thinking into mindless work on other tasks. Foremost among these tasks is learning to

communicate. Encourage the student to review the literature and then write a review article

with you. This is efficient since it accomplishes the necessary review process, helps the

student learn how to write, and earns the student a publication early in her or his graduate

student career. The review article can be completed before the student is challenged to become

independent. Communication includes oral presentations. Students can be required to make

oral presentations in group meetings and later at professional society meetings. These

presentations need to be evaluated to help the student improve. Videotaping some of the group

presentations is a good way to encourage growth. Students should be given the opportunity to

review papers and proposals. This should first be a supervised activity where the professor

also reviews the paper or proposal and the reviews are compared and contrasted. Then, the

student can review papers and proposals independently.

After a student has learned to conduct research independently, he or she can help to

supervise other students. This supervision itself should initially be supervised. That is, have

meetings with the Ph.D. student, both individually and with the undergraduate student, to

discuss the progress of the undergraduate student’s research. Your supervision can then be

slowly reduced.

After a graduate student has completed some research, he or she will want to write a

research paper. Ideally, the first paper should be written after the student’s M.S. thesis. Take

an active role in outlining this paper and in the necessary revisions to the paper. When the

reviews arrive, show them to the student. The reviews often provide for reality testing. The

student should then help with revisions of the paper on the basis of the reviewer’s comments.

Once the student has started doing independent research, he or she needs to become

independent in writing papers. After experiencing the first flush of success in publishing a

paper, the student may suddenly write several papers. If these are not well done, return them

with a note indicating that they are not up to professional standards, but do not provide detailed

comments. Rewriting is a necessary part of writing, and the student needs to master this art.

Although it may not be appropriate to place a student completely in charge of writing

proposals, he or she can certainly help prepare them. Let the student share the joys or

210

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

frustrations of submitting research proposals. Discuss with her or him the strategy you use for

obtaining research support.

Students who intend to follow an academic career need additional teaching experience

beyond being a TA. A course or self-study on teaching methods is useful. The chance to do

supervised teaching of a class or seminar is also an excellent experience which far too few

students receive.

The ways that a professor interacts with students in one-to-one situations obviously depend

heavily on the professor’s personality. Some suggestions have been provided which have been

found to be useful.

The section on being a research adviser is likely to be controversial. Many professors use

very different procedures as research advisers. Obviously, there is no one best way to advise

research students. We have clearly stated our value judgments and then suggested an advising

procedure which follows these value judgments. If readers do the same, then Section 10.4. will

have achieved its purpose.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Explain and use methods to improve listening.

• Improve tutoring of students and become more effective in helping them learn.

• Improve both academic and personal advising skills.

• Outline your personal value structure for advising research students, and then develop

procedures to improve your advising of these individuals.

1 Set up a role play to practice listening skills. This requires that you have a partner to take

the role of a student, and a facilitator to observe the interactions and record both their positive

and negative aspects. The observer needs to watch the climate, the focus, and the responses

(nonverbal, minimal verbal, and verbal). Several role plays should be done. They can

include the following situations.

a A student needing help after class.

b A student needing help during office hours.

10.5. CHAPTER COMMENTS

10.6. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

211

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

c A student needing academic advising.

d A student with a personal problem which is causing academic difficulty.

e A Ph.D. student who is having difficulty getting started on research.

2 List the rules and regulations for undergraduate students at your university as far as

registration for classes is concerned.

3 What is the purpose of Ph.D. education in your engineering field? Based on this purpose

discuss what the ideal thesis adviser would do. Then develop a program to make your own

advising more closely approach the techniques of your ideal adviser.

Amundson, N.R., “American university graduate work,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 21, 160 (Fall 1987).

Anonymous, “Engineering utilization study findings on engineering education,” Eng. Educ. News, (Jan.

1986).

Axtell, R. E., Gestures: The Do’s and Taboos of Body Language around the World, Wiley, New York,

1991.

Bolton, R., People Skills, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1979.

Brammer, L.M., The Helping Relationship. Process and Skills, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,

NJ, 1985.

Civiello, C.L., “Identifying and assisting students with serious problems,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 915, 1989.

Duda, J.L., “Common misconceptions concerning graduate school,” Chem.Eng.Educ., 18, 156 (Fall

1984).

Duda, J.L., “Graduate Studies. The middle way,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 20, 164 (Fall 1986).

Eble, K.E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Edwards, R.V., Crisis Intervention and How It Works, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1979.

Fricke, A.L., “Undergraduate research: A necessary education option and its costs and benefits,” Chem.

Eng. Educ., 15, 122 (Summer 1981).

Grites, T.J., “Improving Academic Advising,” Idea Paper No 3, Center for Faculty Evaluation and

Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1980.

Hackney, H. and Nye, S., Counseling Strategies and Objectives, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,

1973.

Herrick, R. J. and Giordano, P., “EET counselor takes on student role,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 434, 1991.

Hewitt, N. M. and Seymour, E., “A long discouraging climb,” ASEE Prism, 1(6), 24 (Feb. 1992).

Katz, P. S., “Listening: The orphan of communication,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 955, 1986.

Light, R. J., The Harvard Assessment Seminars, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990.

Lowman, J., Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

Masih, R., “The importance of research projects for undergraduate students,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1165, 1989.

Mayeroff, M., On Caring, Harper and Row, New York, 1971.

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips, 8th ed., D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA, 1986.

Miller, P. W., “Nonverbal communication: How to say what you mean and know what they’re saying,”

REFERENCES

212

CHAPTER 10: ONE-TO-ONE TEACHING AND ADVISING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Eng. Educ., 71, 159 (Nov. 1980).

Palmer, P. J., To Know as We Are Known: A Spirituality of Education, Harper-Collins, San Francisco,

1983.

Prud’homme, R.K., “Senior thesis research at Princeton,” Chem. Eng. Educ., 15 , 130 (Summer 1981).

Root, G. and Scott, D., “The interpersonal dimensions of teaching,” Eng. Educ., 184 (Nov. 1975).

Stegman, L., “Listening pays dividends: Improve student learning through listening techniques,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1019, 1986.

Tannen, D., “You Just Don’t Understand,” Ballatine Books, New York, 1990.

Vines, D. L., “Mentors,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New

York, 326,1986.

Wankat, P. C., “Are you listening?,” Chem. Eng., 115 (Oct. 8, 1979).

Wankat, P. C., “The professor as counselor,” Eng. Educ., 153 (Nov. 1980).

Wankat, P. C., “Current advising practices and how to improve them,” Eng. Educ., 213 (Jan. 1986).

213

TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

CHAPTER 11

For many students, grades constitute the number-one academic priority. Tests, or any other

means professors use to determine grades, are the number-two priority. Because of this

concern about grades, tests and scoring of tests generate a great deal of anxiety which can

translate into anxiety for the professor. It is easy to deplore students’ excessive focus on

grades; however, this excessive focus is at least in part the fault of the professor. In addition,

a student’s focus on grades and tests can be used to help the student learn the material.

Testing and homework can help the professor design a course which satisfies the learning

principles discussed in Section 1.4. Homework and exams force the student to practice the

material actively and provide an opportunity for the professor to give feedback. With

graduated difficulty of problems, the professor can arrange the tests so that everyone has a

good chance to be successful at least initially. This helps the professor approach the course

with a positive attitude toward all the students, which in turn helps them succeed. The desire

to achieve good grades can help motivate students to learn the material, particularly if it is clear

that the tests follow the course objectives. Anxiety and excessive competition can be reduced

by using cooperative study groups. Thought-provoking questions can be used both in

homework and in exams to use the students’ natural curiosity as a motivator. Students can be

given some choice in what they do in course projects.

Although testing and homework can help the professor satisfy many learning principles,

they also can serve as a barrier between students and professors which inhibits learning. It is

difficult for students to truly use the professor as an ally to learn if they know he or she is

evaluating and grading them (Elbow, 1986). Perhaps the ideal situation would be to

completely separate the teaching and evaluation functions. One professor would teach, coach,

and tutor students so that they learn as much as possible. Then a second professor would test

and grade them anonymously. An alternate method with which to approach this ideal can be

obtained with mastery tests and contract grading (see Section 7.4). If these alternatives are not

TEACHING ENGINEERING

214

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

11.1. TESTING

11.1.1. Reasons for and Frequency of Testing

possible, there will always be tension between learning on the one hand and testing and grading

on the other. In the remainder of this chapter we will assume that you have resolved to live

with this tension.

Why does one test and how often does one test? What material should be included on the

test? What types of tests can be used? How does one administer a test, particularly in large

classes? These are the questions we’ll consider in this chapter. Then our focus will shift to

scoring tests and statistical manipulation of test scores. Homework and projects will be

explored. How much weight should be placed on homework? How does the professor limit

procrastination on projects? Finally, the professor’s least favorite activity, grading, will be

considered from several angles.

Testing requires careful thought. Fair tests which cover the material can increase student

motivation and satisfaction with a course. As long as a test is fair and is perceived as being

fairly graded, rapport with students will not be damaged even if the test is difficult. Unfair and

poorly graded exams cause student resentment, increase the likelihood of cheating, decrease

student motivation, and encourage aggressive student behavior.

There are many educational reasons for having students take tests. Tests motivate many

students to study harder. They also aid learning since they require students to be active, provide

practice in solving problems, and offer feedback. Tests also provide feedback for the professor

on how well students are learning various parts of the course.

Tests are stressful since they are so closely associated with grades. Stress and pressure are

part of engineering. Mild stress can actually increase student learning and performance on

tests, but excessive stress is detrimental to both learning and performance for students and

practicing engineers. In addition, exams can be stressful for the professor because they are so

tightly coupled with grades. What can be done to harvest the benefits of tests while

simultaneously reducing the stress they induce?

Give more tests!

Giving more tests reduces the stress of each one since each exam is less important in

deciding the student’s final grade. Courses with only a final or a comprehensive exam make

the test enormously important and thus very stressful. If there are four tests during the

semester, each one is significantly less important. If there are fifteen quizzes throughout the

semester, then each quiz has a modest amount of stress associated with it. Having frequent tests

or quizzes also allows professors to ignore an absence or discard the lowest quiz grade.

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

215

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Frequent testing spreads student work throughout the semester, which increases the total

amount of student effort and improves the retention of material. The more-frequent feedback

to the students and to the professor is beneficial. Both the students and the professor know

much earlier if the material is not being understood. The increased forced practice, repetition,

and reinforcement of material aids student learning. Because stress is reduced, frequent testing

serves as a better motivator for students. The net result is improved student performance

(Johnson, 1988). One of the advantages of PSI and mastery courses is that they require frequent

testing (see Chapter 7). Frequent exams also provide a more valid basis for a grade since one

bad day has much less of an effect.

Frequent tests do have negatives. The considerable amount of class time required may

reduce the amount of content that can be covered; however, the content that is covered will

probably be learned better. A considerable amount of time may also be required to prepare

and grade the frequent examinations. At least some of this time is available since less

homework needs to be assigned when there are frequent exams. Perhaps the most important

drawback of frequent tests in upper-division courses is that they do not encourage students to

become independent, internally motivated learners.

We have adopted the following compromise solution to the question of how frequently to

test. In graduate-level courses we give infrequent tests (two or three a semester) but usually

have a course project which represents a sizable portion of the grade. In senior courses we use

slightly more tests (three or four). In junior courses, despite the great deal of material to be

covered, we increase the number to six or seven during the semester. In sophomore courses

where there is often little new material to learn but students need to become expert at applying

it, we have gone as high as two quizzes per week (and no homework). For these courses one

quiz per week seems to work well. This frequency may also be appropriate for computer

programming courses. Frequent quizzes ensure that students are practicing the material and

are receiving frequent feedback.

What about finals? There are very mixed emotions about finals (for example, see Eble,

1988; Lowman, 1985; McKeachie, 1986). Finals do require students to review the entire

semester and to integrate all the material. They can also be useful for slow learners and for

those who initially have an inadequate background since they allow these students to show that

they have learned the material. Finals are also useful for assigning the course grade.

Unfortunately, they are very stressful for students and are almost universally disliked. In

addition, feedback to the professor is too late to do any good in the current semester. To the

students it is almost nonexistent. Many students look only at the final grade and do not study

their mistakes on the test.

A professor choosing to give a final has several interesting options which can reduce the

stress. If other tests have been reasonably frequent during the semester, students can be told

that the final can only increase but not decrease their grade. When this is done, it may make

sense to tell students their current earned grade and then make the final exam optional. In PSI

and mastery courses an optional final can be used as one way to improve students’ final grades

with no risk. Another option is to give a required final but tell students that their grades will

automatically be the higher of their composite grade for the entire course or their grade on the

final. The reasoning behind this strategy is that it makes sense to give high grades to students

who prove at the end of the semester that they have mastered the material, but having only a

216

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

final is too stressful. In this way you are also rewarding them for what they know at the end

of the term instead of penalizing them for deficiencies they may have had at the start of the

semester. Feedback can be made more meaningful by going over the final in a follow-up course

the next semester.

Many universities have a scheduled finals period. If the professor decides not to have a

final, this time may be used for other purposes. In a course with projects, the final examination

period is an excellent time for student oral reports on projects. This period can also be used

for a last hour examination which is not a final. One advantage of using the finals period for

an hour examination is that more time is usually allotted for the final, and students taking an

hour examination during this period have sufficient time to finish even if they work slowly.

One additional type of quiz is the unannounced, surprise, or “pop” quiz. Some professors

like to give several of these during the semester. After answering questions the professor

announces there will be a pop quiz. Once the students’ groans subside, a short quiz is

administered. The advantages of pop quizzes are that they help keep students current and they

reward attendance. The major disadvantage is that they increase stress. This increase in stress

can be controlled by:

1 Noting in the syllabus that there will be unannounced quizzes.

2 Making the quizzes a small fraction (2 to 3 percent) of the course grade.

3 Giving some points for the student’s name (i.e., rewarding attendance).

4 Throwing out the lowest quiz grade. This helps students who miss a class which happens

to have an unannounced quiz.

5 Making the quizzes short (five to ten minutes).

How does a professor decide what to put on a test? If objectives have been developed for

the course, the decision is relatively simple. The important objectives are tested. At what level

in Bloom’s taxonomy (see Chapter 4) should the test be? If at the higher levels, then the test

questions need to be evaluated for appropriateness.

An effective method for ensuring that the test covers the objectives appropriately is to

develop a grid (Svinicki, 1976) as illustrated in Figure 11-1. For each objective or topic, think

of a question or problem which allows you to test at appropriate levels of Bloom’s taxonomy.

It may not be necessary to have any problems which are solely at the knowledge or

comprehension levels since these levels are usually included in higher-level problems.

Once the preliminary grid has been developed, you can check it to see if the proposed test

satisfies your goals for a particular section of the course. Since not all objectives or topics can

be included at all levels of the taxonomy in a single test, you need to make some compromises.

Is the coverage of topics on the test a fair representation of the coverage during lectures and

of the homework? If not, the exam probably is not a fair test of the course objectives, and

students are likely to think it is unfair. Although not all topics can be covered, one should try

11.1.2. Coverage on Tests

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

217

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Objectives

or Topics Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation

Level

No problem for this objective

FIGURE 11-1 EXAMPLE GRID FOR TEST PREPARATION

11.1.3. Writing Test Problems and Questions

to have reasonably wide coverage. If a topic is discussed in two separate parts of the course,

it might be reasonable to include it in one test and not the other. The levels of the questions

also need to be considered. If higher-level activities are important, they need to be included

in homework and in tests. Without a conscious effort, it is highly likely that only the three

lowest levels will be used since questions at these levels are the easiest to write (Stice, 1976).

For the grid shown in Figure 11-1, the instructor has decided not to test for objective 4 or to

include any questions at the evaluation level on the test.

Should the test be open book or closed book? The argument in favor of open book tests

is that practicing engineers can use any book they want to solve a problem. Open book tests

also reduce stress. One argument against them is that too many students use the book as a

crutch and try to find the answer in the book instead of by thinking. Another opposing

argument involves logic. The practicing engineer argument relies on a false analogy because

the purpose of the open book is different: Unlike students, these engineers are not being tested

on their knowledge. One problem with closed book tests is that students may be forced to

memorize equations which they would always look up in practice. Closed book tests may

encourage memorization of all content and not just the equations.

Some compromise arrangements are between the extremes of open book and closed book

tests. The instructor can prepare a sheet of important equations for students to use during the

exam and hand this sheet out to them before the test so that they know what will be available

for the test. When the exam is administered, each student receives a clean set of equations.

The advantage of this compromise is that the professor has control over the information each

student has available during the test. Another compromise is to allow each student to bring

a key relations chart (see Section 15.1) on one piece of paper or an index card. The advantage

of this procedure is that students benefit from preparing the chart and often do not glance at

it during the test.

How does one write the problems or questions for tests? What style of questions is

appropriate? This section discusses some general rules for writing exams and then explores

specific formats for questions.

218

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

In writing examination questions, avoid trivial questions even when testing at the knowl-

edge level. Avoid trick questions also since they do not test for the student’s understanding

and ability in the course. Problems should be as unambiguous as possible unless you are

explicitly testing for the ability to do the define step of problem solving. To test for clarity have

another professor or your TA read the test and outline the solutions. The time required for the

exam can be estimated by taking the time you require to solve the problems and multiplying by

a factor of about 4. The number of points awarded for each problem should be clearly shown

on the test so that students can decide which problem to work on if time is short.

Solve the problems before handing out the test. This aids in grading and helps to prevent

the disaster which will occur if an unsolvable problem is on the exam. (If you want the students

to perform a degree of freedom analysis to determine if the problem is solvable, then it is

reasonable to have an unsolvable problem on the test. However, warn them ahead of time that

this may happen; otherwise, they will assume all problems are solvable.)

If tests are returned to students (which is a useful feedback mechanism), then you should

assume that files exist on campus for all old exams. Even if you require students to return tests

after they have seen their grades, you should assume that at least rudimentary files exist. Since

the purpose of a test is to determine how much a student has learned and not who has the best

files, you should write new tests. If exams are given frequently, this is a considerable amount

of work. Once a large number of questions, particularly of the multiple-choice variety, have

accumulated, you can recycle a few questions on each test. Old test questions do make good

homework problems, and students appreciate the opportunity to practice on real test problems.

Since some students have files, many professors provide files of old tests so that everyone has

equal access to information. Most university libraries place test files on reserve. Another more

drastic solution to the file problem is to periodically revise the curriculum and reorganize all

the courses.

Although it may sound contrary to the previous advice, we suggest that every once in a

while a homework problem should be put on a test. This rewards students who have diligently

solved problems on their own and is a clear signal to students that they should work on the

homework.

How does the professor generate interesting problems which test for the objectives at the

correct level but are not clones of textbook or homework problems? One way is to take an

existing problem and do permutations of which variables are dependent and which are

independent. Changing the independent variable often changes the solution method remark-

ably. Brainstorm possible novel problems. Use problems from other textbooks (but if this is

done consistently, some students will catch on). Set up an informal network with friends at

other universities to share test problems and solutions. As part of their homework assignments

have students write test problems. The occasional use of one of these will reward the student

who made it up. (In our class on teaching methods the second test is based entirely on student-

generated questions.) Don’t wait until the last minute to start generating problems. It is often

productive to generate ideas throughout the semester. Then, the details of the problem and the

solution can be worked out when the exam is made up.

Test problems usually fit into one of the following categories: short-answer, long-answer,

multiple-choice, true-false, and matching. Since true-false and matching have scant use in

engineering, they will not be considered here but are discussed elsewhere (Canelos and

Catchen, 1987; Eble, 1988; Lowman, 1985; McKeachie, 1986).

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

219

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Short-answer. Short-answer problems include problems requiring identification of a

principle, a brief essay, and short problems. In engineering, short problems are the most

common. As long as complete long problems are also employed, short problems are an

excellent way to determine if students have mastered certain principles. These problems are

set up so that three to five lines of calculation give the desired answer. The problem is tightly

defined so that the student is tested for application to a single principle.

Short-answer problems can also be used to develop students’ skills as problem solvers. The

problem focuses on one or two stages in the problem-solving strategy. For example, students

can be asked to define the problem clearly but not solve it. Or, they can be given a “solution”

to the problem and asked either to check the solution or to generalize it. Students need

instruction in doing this type of short answer problem since they always want to calculate.

Long-answer. Long-answer problems include essay and complete long problems. In

engineering, complete problems are probably the most common type of test problem. They are

necessary to determine if students can find a complete solution. Unfortunately, an exam

consisting entirely of a few long problems cannot test for all the objectives covered in the

course. Thus, a mix of both long- and short-answer problems is often appropriate. Long-

answer problems can also be difficult to score for partial credit (see Section 11.2.1).

Multiple-choice. With the regrettable but probably inevitable increase in class size at many

engineering schools, multiple-choice examinations will become increasingly popular. They

are easy to grade and, if properly constructed, can be as valid as short-answer questions

(Kessler, 1988). Unfortunately, proper construction of the classical type of multiple-choice

question is more time-consuming than constructing a short-answer question. Thus, the

professor transfers some of her or his time from grading to test construction. This trade makes

sense only with large classes.

General rules for constructing classical-style multiple-choice questions are given by Eble

(1988), Lowman (1985), and McKeachie (1986), while examples for particular engineering

courses are presented by Canelos and Catchen (1987) and Leuba (1986a,b). The stem, which

is the question itself without the choices, should be complete, unambiguous, and understand-

able without reading the choices. The correct answer and the incorrect answers (the distractors)

should be written as parallel as possible. Thus, all possible answers should be grammatically

correct and about the same length. There should be no “cues” which allow a good test taker

who is unfamiliar with the material to discard any of the distractors or to pick the right answer.

Most authors suggest a total of four choices, all of which should appear reasonable. The

instruction should ask the student to pick the “best” choice so that arguments with students can

be minimized.

In writing a multiple-choice question, the professor usually starts with a short-answer

problem. The correct answer is then obvious. Indicate that the answer is a number within a

given percentage (say, 1 percent). The challenge lies in choosing distractors. If a similar

short-answer question has been used in the past, look at the students’ solutions to find common

errors. Then construct the distractors so that the numerical answer follows from these common

student mistakes. Most authors suggest that “none of the above” is an improper distractor or

answer. Once the distractors have been written, randomly assign the answer and the distractors

as a, b, c, and d.

220

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

When questions have numerical answers, there is a clever alternate type of multiple-choice

question (Johnson, 1991). For each question, list ten numbers in numerically increasing order.

Tell the students to select the choice nearest to their calculated answer. If the calculated answer

is the average of two adjacent choices, tell them to select the higher choice. The effort in

writing distractors is thereby reduced. Now all you have to do is to pick choices over a feasible

range at reasonably narrow intervals. This procedure also reduces the probability of a guess

being correct. With the usual type of multiple-choice question the student who doesn’t get one

of the listed answers knows that he or she has made a mistake, but this procedure does not

provide this clue. In addition, if you initially make a mistake solving the problem or there is

a typographical error in the problem statement, all is not lost. As long as the problem is

solvable, one of the choices is correct.

One of the advantages or disadvantages of multiple-choice questions (depending upon your

viewpoint) is that there is no partial credit. Students who know how to do the problem but who

make an algebraic or numerical error will receive the same credit as students who have no idea

how to do the problem. Since numerical and algebraic errors cause loss of all credit, we suggest

that multiple-choice questions be used only to replace short-answer questions and not long

problems. Both multiple-choice and one long-answer problem can be included on a test. This

will significantly reduce the grading in a large class without significantly decreasing the

validity of the test.

Tests are stressful for students. This stress can be reduced by providing space on the

examination for student comments. Tell the students the purpose of this space and explain that

the comments will not affect their grades. Then, when you read a comment which says “This

problem stinks,” you will realize that the student is just letting off pressure.

The first part of administering a test occurs the class period before it is given. Discuss the

exam with the students. Clearly state the content coverage by telling them which book chapters

and which lecture periods will be covered. Explain the type of test and show a few old

problems as examples. Discuss the ground rules, such as staggered seating, closed book or

open book, time requirements, and so forth. Particularly for lower-division students, it is

helpful to give a few hints on studying and test taking.

Many instructors find optional help sessions useful. If you plan to have an optional help

session, set the rules for the session first. We hold help sessions in which students must ask

questions. When the student questions stop, the help session is over. If a student asks a

question which is very similar to a test problem, the best idea is to answer the question in

exactly the same manner as you answer other student questions.

McKeachie (1986) suggests making up about 10 percent extra exams. It is easy for the

secretary to miscount or to collate a few exams with blank pages. The extra copies allow you

to rectify these problems quickly. Take reasonable precautions to safeguard the test copies,

such as locking them up in a briefcase or desk in a locked office.

11.1.4. ADMINISTERING THE TEST

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

221

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

To students the exam is one of the most important parts of the class, so plan on being there

if it is at all possible. As the professor, only you can answer student questions properly and

help students understand what they are supposed to do. In addition, if a student finds a

typographical error, only you can make last-minute changes to correct the problem. Professors

usually have better control of the class than do TAs.

Come early and have the TAs come early. This gives you time to check the lighting,

straighten up the chairs, and start to arrange the students in alternate seats. Plan to pass out

the tests as quickly as possible to give everyone equal time. In very large classes put a cover

sheet on the exams and tell the students not to open them until given the signal to start. Have

them put their names on the test immediately. Then have them count the questions to be sure

they have a complete test.

If your school does not have an honor code, it is traditional to proctor the examination. It

is also helpful to have someone present to answer student questions. A circulating proctor can

do wonders in reducing the desire students might have to cheat. A TA standing discretely in

the back of the room can also be a major deterrent. It is much better to prevent cheating than

to deal with it after it has occurred (see Chapter 12).

Periodically write on the board the time remaining. Then state, “You have two minutes,

please finish your papers.” When the time is up, stop the class firmly and collect the papers.

It is best to give tests where there is effectively no time limit, but this is often difficult to

schedule.

As soon as the examination is over, count the tests. Then check them in against the student

roster. It is best to know immediately if a student has not handed in a test or was not present.

Students have been known to occasionally complain that their test was lost.

We will draw a distinction between scoring tests, which has a feedback function essential

for the student’s learning, and grading, which is a communication at the end of the semester

of how well the student has done in the course. Grading will be discussed in Section 11.5.

Unfortunately, both of these activities are often called grading.

Extra effort taken while preparing an examination is recovered when the tests are scored.

Multiple-choice tests can be machine-scored or with a homemade stencil. In fact, the

attractiveness of multiple-choice tests for large classes lies in the ease of scoring.

For other tests an answer sheet and a detailed scoring sheet should be prepared by you as

the professor. Evaluation is difficult, and a professor can do a better job than a TA in preparing

both the answer sheet and deciding the breakdown of points. The scoring sheet should be

developed for the “standard solution.” The TA should be instructed to show you unique

11.2. SCORING

11.2.1. Scoring Tests

222

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

solution paths. Occasionally, a student develops a creative solution path but makes a

numerical error and gets the wrong answer. To avoid dampening creativity, it is important that

you carefully consider these alternate solutions.

Whoever scores the test should do so without looking at the name. Students should receive

the score that they earn, not the score that the grader thinks they should earn. Extremely

important tests such as qualifying examinations should probably use a code letter for every

student instead of a name. It is best to grade every test for one problem before grading a second

problem. This procedure helps to ensure that grading is uniform. For a series of short-answer

questions it might be feasible and faster to grade the entire sequence on each test paper before

proceeding to the next. After one problem has been graded on all tests, review the scoring,

particularly of the first few tests that were graded. Be sure that the scoring is uniform.

For long problems it is often useful to look at a few sample tests before grading everything or

before giving the tests to the grader. The sample tests may show a common mistake that will require

adjustment of the grading scheme, or they may indicate a second correct solution path. If a grader

is available, sit down with him or her for a few minutes and go over both the solution and the scoring

sheet. Indicate the type of feedback you want put on the tests. Give the TA or the grader a reasonable

deadline for return of the exams as well as some hints on how to grade that type of test. Tell the

TA to bring in any nonstandard solutions so that you can check them over.

We believe in awarding partial credit for long problems. Crittenden (1984) presents the

opposite viewpoint that partial credit should either be given sparingly or not at all. Our reason

in favor is that students can often demonstrate understanding of how to solve a problem and

not have the correct solution because of a relatively small error in technique, an algebraic error,

or a numerical error. On the other hand, students also need to realize that engineers must be

accurate. Problems without partial credit can be given as short-answer or multiple-choice

questions.

If partial credit is to be awarded, develop the scoring sheet for the standard solution. Do

this in advance and then adjust it after looking at a few tests. You can determine partial credit

by awarding points for parts of the solution that are correct or by subtracting points for parts

that are wrong or missing. In long problems these two approaches often result in different

scores, and if a scoring sheet is not used will certainly result in different scores. For the highest

reliability use a scoring sheet and calculate a score by adding positive items and subtracting

negative ones. Discrepancies in the results obtained are a signal that the scoring needs to be

reconsidered.

In addition to scoring the exam, provide written feedback and marks on the test or instruct

the TA to do so. Correct parts of the test can be indicated quickly with check marks, while

incorrect parts can be crossed out. Be sure that there is some mark on each page, including

empty pages, so that the student will be sure that every page has been seen. Both positive and

negative comments should be written on the test. Comments which explicitly correct the

student’s work are much more useful than writing “wrong” or “incorrect” without explaining

why. Positive comments such as “good” or “clever derivation” serve as motivators.

To be effective, feedback must be prompt. Ideally, feedback would be given immediately

after the student has finished the test. This procedure is used in some PSI classes (see Section

7.4). In large classes it takes longer to grade tests, but there is no excuse for taking a month

or longer to return tests. If possible, hand them back the next class period. If that is not possible,

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

223

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

be sure to return them within one week. Tell the TAs in advance which weeks there will be

tests so that they can arrange to have sufficient time to grade the exams quickly. Ericksen

(1984, p. 119) believes “this business of immediate feedback is overdone.” He suggests taking

more time to do detailed critiques and evaluations.

If it is to be useful, students must pay attention to the feedback. There are several methods

that can be used to ensure that this happens.

1 Hand back the test and discuss it in class. A variant of this is to have small groups discuss

the exam. This procedure is useful since it can reduce student aggression.

2 Before discussing the solution, assign one of the test problems as a homework.

3 Give one or more of the problems on a second test.

4 Ask students who obviously do not understand the material to see you privately. Student

scores on exams are private, privileged information. Write the score on the inside or fold the

test over when returning the test papers. If grades are posted, use student numbers or code

letters instead of names.

After the test fix up any problems which are not quite perfect for later use as homework or

in that book you will write someday. Correct any typographical errors on all copies of the test

you keep and in your computer files. If some students misinterpreted the problem, reword it

so that this will be less likely to occur in the future. Perhaps one of the misinterpretations will

give you an idea for an alternate test problem which can be used next year. Write the idea down

and put it into your test file for future use.

It is easy to determine if an exam problem discriminates between students who do well on

the test and those who do poorly. Johnson (1988) suggests a simple procedure for doing this.

Separate out the tests of the ten (or fifteen in large classes) students with the highest scores on

the test and of the ten (or fifteen) students with the lowest scores. For problems where no partial

credit is given, let H = number of top ten students who got the problem correct, and L = number

of bottom ten students who got the problem correct.

The test has positive discrimination if H — L > 0, and negative discrimination if H — L <

0. If a problem has negative discrimination, the better students are having more difficulty.

These problems need to be rewritten. The sum of correct scores, H + L, can also be looked at.

Johnson (1988) suggests that this figure should be between 7 and 17 (except in mastery courses

where 20 may be reasonable). If partial credit is given, the discrimination of each item can be

determined by looking at the sum of scores for the ten best and for the ten worst students.

In large classes (more than twenty students), standard scores can be useful for comparing

student scores on different tests and for deciding final grades (Cheshier, 1975). Calculate the

mean test score

for each student ( N = number of students, x

= test score),

x =

∑

(1)

11.2.2. Data Manipulation and Critiquing the Test

224

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

and the standard deviation s,

s =

N Σ x

- Σx

(2)

Then the z

score is

- x

(3)

The z

score is a normalized score for each student which has a mean of zero and a standard

deviation of 1. The z scores can be converted to T scores where the T score has a mean of 50

and a standard deviation of 10.

= 10 z

+ 50

(4)

The standardized scores are easily calculated with a calculator or computer. If the class

follows a normal distribution, which does not always happen, then the z and T scores are shown

in Figure 11-2. The z or T scores for each student can be averaged and then compared to other

students’ scores. Doing this for raw scores is not statistically valid since both the means and the

standard deviations vary from test to test. A very simple example may help to clarify the use of

standard scores. Consider Debbie who has the following scores on three tests: 60, 40, 80. Her

corresponding z scores are 0, +1, and —1, while the T scores are 50, 60, and 40. Compared to

the class, her lowest grade is the last one which looks highest on the basis of raw scores.

There can be problems with the use of standard scores. First, in small classes they are not

statistically valid and should not be used. Second, scores of 100 or 0 do not remain 100 or 0

when translated to T scores. Extreme scores can become negative or greater than 100. Thus,

T scores can be misleading for these extreme scores. Third, the usual interpretation of the

meaning of one standard deviation is valid only for normal distributions. T and z scores can

still be used but must be interpreted with care. Cheshier (1975) highly recommends the use of

standard scores, but McKeachie (1986) does not think they are worth the effort. You get to

choose. If you do use standard scores, it is important to spend a few minutes explaining them

to the class. Of course, in a class which uses statistics or discusses error analysis, the use of

standard scores can be a useful part of the course objectives.

Allow regrades! If handled properly, regrades make the professor seem fair, reduce student

aggression, force some students to reexamine the test problems, and do not take much time.

In small classes regrades can be handled informally by discussions between the students

and the professor. In large classes a more formal procedure is necessary (Wankat, 1983).

Regardless of the method used, the regrade procedure should be discussed with the class when

the first test is returned. Students are ready to listen at that time.

If the scoring error the student wishes to correct is the incorrect addition of points, then we

encourage the student to see the professor immediately following the class. In large classes

11.2.3. REGRADES

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

225

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

there will be several students clustered around the professor at this time. Thus, it is a good idea

to collect the tests to allow time to check the addition.

The second type of scoring error is a mistake in the scoring where the student believes he

or she deserves more points. In large classes we require a written regrade request. Students

are told to make no additional marks on their tests. On a separate sheet of paper the student

is asked to logically explain why he or she deserves more points. The emphasis here is on

“logical,” not the plea “I deserve more points.” For example, a student who uses a different

solution path than the standard solution may claim that his or her path was correct but that the

answer was incorrect because of an algebraic or numerical error. The student can then rework

the problem by using his or her path and show that the correct solution is obtained. Based on

this type of argument, we have occasionally given a student a large increase in a test score.

Quite often while trying this procedure the student finds that the path really does not work, and

no regrade is requested.

Students are told that there may be an increase, no change, or a decrease in their test score.

We ask for the entire test back but seldom regrade the entire exam. The advantage of getting

the entire test back is that the professor can tell if extra pages have been inserted since the

original pages will have additional staple holes in them. Some professors regrade the entire test

(Evett, 1980), but this policy seems designed to prevent students from asking for regrades

instead of being for the educational benefit of the student.

Give students a deadline (one week is sufficient) for regrade requests. This prevents last

minute “grade grubbing” by students. Once the regrade requests have all been collected, sit

-1

-2

-3

0+1+2

50 60 70

z scores

T scores

FIGURE 11-2 DISTRIBUTION OF T AND Z SCORES FOR NORMAL DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES

226

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

down with the TA and discuss them. The purpose of this is to ensure that grading is uniform.

It is poor policy to give complainers higher scores just because they complain. Chronic

complainers can be controlled if the professor carefully checks the TAs scoring before

returning the tests.

What is the purpose of assigning homework? To keep students off the street and out of

trouble? Or to help them learn the material? While doing homework the students are active

and have a chance to practice the skills being taught in the course. A modest amount of drill

can be useful since students learn how to perform certain operations quickly and accurately.

Of course, the value of this practice depends on the timeliness of the feedback about the

homework. To be effective, this feedback should consist of both positive and negative

comments. Homework problems also provide students with a fair chance for success, yet some

should also be challenging since both success and curiosity are motivating. The use of study

groups should be encouraged since these groups are beneficial for extroverts and field-

sensitive students. Homework is beneficial since there is a strong correlation between effort

on the homework and test scores (Yokomoto and Ware, 1991).

Homework problems should cover all levels of Bloom’s taxonomy and all levels of the

problem-solving taxonomy (see Chapters 4 and 5). A gradation of problems, from easy to

difficult, to cover many different aspects should be used. At least some of the homework

problems should be at the same level of difficulty as the tests. Homework problems can focus

on various aspects of the problem-solving strategy such as defining the problem, brainstorm-

ing possible solutions, and checking with an independent solution method. Other dimensions

Simple

Linear solution

Short

Answer given

Very clearly defined

Data given

Self Contained

Forward solution

Hand calculation

Written

Logical

Numerical

Complex

Simultaneous solution

Trial-and-error

Long

Answer not given

Slightly ambiguous

Need literature data

Build on previous material

Backward solution

Computer

Visual

Brainstorm

Symbolic

Concrete Abstract

TABLE 11-1 RANGE OF HOMEWORK PROBLEMS (Adapted from Yokomoto, 1988)

11.3. HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

227

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

which need to be considered are discussed by Yokomoto (1988) and are shown in Table 11-

1. Computer problems should emphasize the use of software tools.

How often should homework be assigned and how many problems should be given?

Students need an activity for every week whether it is a test, homework, or a project. These

activities should be due on different days. By working around your test schedule, you can

determine when homework needs to be done. With a large number of tests or quizzes students

do less homework. The number of problems obviously depends upon length. Following the

need for a range of problems as shown in Table 11-1, the professor can make some assignments

consisting of five small problems and other assignments consisting of a single long problem.

However, assigning a significant amount of homework involves scoring the homework and

providing adequate feedback. This is particularly significant if the professor does not have a

TA. One solution is to score only selected problems. Tell the students ahead of time that not

all problems will be scored. If the problems to be scored are randomly selected, the final

homework grade will be proportional to the total amount of homework the student does during

the semester. Students need to have solutions available for problems which are not scored.

An alternative is to score the homework in class by having students score someone else’s

homework (Mafi, 1989). With a large number of quizzes it is not necessary to have students

hand in homework. They will soon come to believe the professor when he or she tells them

that students who do the homework do better on the quizzes. This realization comes quickly

if a homework problem is occasionally used on a quiz.

What percentage of the course grade should be based on the homework? If the percentage

is low, students will tend to ignore the homework unless a special effort is made to illustrate

the correlation between homework effort and test results. If the percentage is high, many

students will be encouraged to copy others’ work or to cheat in other ways. A reasonable

compromise seems to be 10 to 15 percent. This is low enough that you can encourage students

to work in groups, but require each to hand in an individual homework paper.

Late submissions can be a difficulty. In industry, late work is accepted grudgingly and does

not earn promotions or handsome raises. We suggest telling students this and then following

industrial practice. Accept late work grudgingly and take off some percentage based on how

late it is. We accept no homework after the solution has been posted.

Reading assignments pose somewhat different problems. Students will read the assign-

ments if they see that reading leads to success in homework and tests. The professor’s task

is to ensure that the reading contributes directly to the student’s success. And if the reading

does not help the student achieve success, why is it assigned? Be sure that a good textbook

or other readings have been selected. Skip certain material in lecture but make it clear to the

students that it is material they are expected to learn from the readings. Refer to this material

in the lecture, but do not cover it. Ask questions in class based on the readings. Reiterate to

the class that it is important material. Then assign homework based on the material and include

test problems based on it. It doesn’t hurt if one of the homework problems is a clone of an

example in the textbook.

228

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Design and laboratory reports can be considered special types of project reports; however,

since they were discussed in Chapter 9, they will not be considered further here. Projects are

most common in smaller classes such as senior electives and graduate courses. Long projects

are not appropriate for first-year students since they are not ready to pick topics of special

interest and need the discipline of more frequent assignments (Erickson and Strommer, 1991).

Projects can fulfill some educational objectives which are diffiuclt to fulfill with lectures

and tests. A project can allow a student to explore in depth a topic of her or his choice. This

choice of project gives the student some control over her or his education which is often

missing from other courses. Consequently, students sometimes become very strongly

motivated and continue the project long after the class is over. Projects also provide an

opportunity for students to work on communication skills through written and oral progress

and final reports. In the ideal case, through the project the professor empowers the student to

work on an area in which he or she is intensely interested, and the professor encourages the

student to develop a meaningful project. Our experience in requiring graduate students to do

projects is that approximately 20 percent comes close to this ideal.

Projects must have a deliverable. In a library research project the deliverable is a paper. In

engineering it is often preferable to require the student to produce “something” such as a

computer program, an integrated circuit, a teaching module, a laboratory experiment, a novel

solution to a mathematical problem, and so forth. Then the deliverables are a short report

describing the something in addition to that something. The more choices the student has on

what to deliver, the more likely he or she is to become excited about the project.

Students naturally want to know what the professor wants. Explaining what is desired (i.e.,

the objectives for the project) can be surprisingly difficult. However, at some point the

professor does decide what he or she wants and grades accordingly. Waiting until the projects

are graded to decide what one wants leaves the professor open to student complaints: “Oh, so

he does know what he wants; he just won’t say until it’s too late” (Starling, 1987). As a

professor you need to explain what it is that you really want. If you can’t, then analyze the

projects from the last time you taught the course to determine what you wanted when you

graded them.

How big should a project be? If it is only 5 percent of the grade, students will treat it as a

homework project. If it is 50 percent of the grade, students will feel very anxious about it.

Projects that are about 25 percent of the grade have worked well for us.

Procrastination is the biggest problem involved in student projects. To limit but not

eliminate procrastination, set up a series of deadlines. First, introduce the project in lecture

relatively early in the semester. Describe the project and the evaluation procedure as clearly

as possible. List the dates of all intermediate and final deadlines. In a small class, both written

and oral progress reports are useful since they allow for early feedback and make students do

at least some work throughout the semester. Individual meetings with each student can also

help prevent procrastination.

Evaluation of projects is time-consuming, which is one reason they are most commonly

used in small classes. If communication skills are included in course objectives, then projects

should be evaluated on organization and writing ability. Professors who are very serious about

11.4. PROJECTS

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

229

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

this can correct about a third of the report and have the student correct the entire report before

it is evaluated for a grade. The written report should also be graded for content, including

correctness, depth, and creativity. Although projects are usually turned in late in the semester,

many students seriously study the feedback because they have become involved with the

material. The best feedback method for oral reports is a videotape of the student presentations.

Since the project represents a sizable portion of the course grade, instructors should use their

discretion in accepting late reports.

The best advice we can give before a professor decides on the final course grades is to go

into an empty room and repeat out loud, “I can’t satisfy everyone. I can’t satisfy everyone.

I can’t satisfy everyone.” This will help create the proper frame of mind for awarding final

course grades.

There are very diverse views in the literature about the purposes and suitability of the

typical grading methods used in colleges. These range from grades being indispensable to

worthy of being abolished. The writers who defend grades, at least moderately, include

McKeachie (1976, 1986), Johnson (1988), and Lowman (1985). The purposes they note for

grades include:

1 Reward or penalty for student accomplishment.

2 Communication to others about what the student has accomplished.

3 Predictor of future performance.

Grades certainly do serve as rewards or penalties, but for feedback purposes they come

much too late in the semester to provide any motivation. As rewards, grades are often used

to determine who will receive honors, scholarships, and so forth. As penalties, they are used

to place students on probation and to drop students.

Using grades as a communication tool is often confusing since there is no generally agreed-

upon definition of what a grade means. Professors who arbitrarily change the meaning of

grades are not communicating well because those who see the grade interpret it differently.

However, some communication exists since there is general agreement that an A or a B means

the student has learned more than a student who receives a D or an F.

Grades are also used as predictors. Students use grades as a predictors of how well they will

do in the rest of their college careers, and in this sense good grades may motivate a student to

11.5. GRADING

11.5.1. Purpose of Grades

230

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

continue. Professors also use grades to predict who will do well in later courses and who might

do well in graduate school. Since grades are reasonably good at predicting grades in future

courses (Stice, 1979), this use of grades is somewhat reasonable. Even in this case grades can

be misused since they do not predict who will be good at research, which is a major part of many

graduate school programs.

The most controversial use of grades is as predictors of success in life after school. Many

employers use grades as part of their selection procedures. Unfortunately, many studies agree

that there does not seem to be any correlation between grades and success after school (Eble,

1988; Stice, 1979). This is true regardless of how one defines success. What this means is that

engineers who graduate are good enough in whatever it is that grades are measuring to be a

success, and that other variables become important. These other variables can include drive,

motivation, inherited wealth, common sense, communication skills, interpersonal skills, who

the person knows, and luck. The supporters of grades note that since grades are part of the

selection criteria, one cannot expect them to be a major predictor of success since the sample

is already fairly homogeneous (McKeachie, 1986).

Some intelligent and thoughtful people state that one should select a grading method that

subverts the grading system (Eble, 1988; Elbow, 1986; Smith, 1986). The Keller plan for PSI

is an example (see Chapter 7). We will assume that, being new to teaching, you are not ready

or willing to subvert the system (yet). Thus, the remainder of this chapter will be on grading

hints and methods.

Regardless of the grading method used, the more scores you have, the easier it is to give

grades. When there are many scores, and the students know what these scores indicate, there

are fewer conflicts with students when grades are awarded. If a student does complain about

a grade, it is appropriate to listen to what he or she has to say. But unless a grading error has

been made, it is unwise to change grades. Once a grade is changed, the word gets around and

many students want their grades changed.

11.5.2. Grading Methods

Letter

Grade

Poor

Students

Average

Students

Exceptional

Students

Graduate

Students

69 and above

59 - 68

49 - 58

39 - 48

38 and below

63 and above

53 - 62

43 - 52

33 - 42

32 and below

57 and above

47 - 56

37 - 46

27 - 36

26 and below

55 and above

45 - 54

35 - 44

25 - 34

24 and below

Class Made Up Primarily of

TABLE 11-2 TYPICAL GRADING SCALES FOR DIFFERENT CLASS COMPOSITION

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

231

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The most appealing grading method uses an absolute standard. Although appealing, this

is often difficult. Contract or mastery grading is another way to use a standard, but this method

has its detractors since the grade no longer means what most people think it means

(communication), and the grade is no longer a good predictor of grades in a “standard” class.

However, Eble (1988), who is not fond of grading, states that the predictive capabilities of

grades should not be taken too seriously.

Travers (1950) originally suggested a standard grading scheme which has been echoed by

McKeachie (1986) and Johnson (1988). The major and minor objectives of the course are

clearly defined. Then the grade is a communication to the student and to others of what fraction

of the course objectives has been achieved. The meaning of the grades can be defined in a

manner similar to the following:

A: achieved all major and minor objectives

–

: achieved all major and most minor objectives

: achieved most major and most minor objectives

B: achieved most major objectives and many minor objectives

–

: achieved most major objectives and some minor objectives

C: acceptable performance

D: student is not prepared for advanced work requiring this material

F: failed

Even with a system like this the professor needs to decide if the student meets an objective,

and subjective decisions will have to be made. Normative grading, commonly known as

grading on a curve, is often used because the professor does not have to develop and correctly

test for absolute standards. Instead, students are compared to each other and the grade curve

is broken up into A, B, C, D, and F. This has the unhealthy effect of increasing competition.

In addition, a student performance which earns an A in one class may earn a C in another class

merely because student competition is better. Because of this effect of class quality, a

professor should never force grades into predetermined percentages.

Many professors grade on a curve but slant the curve to take into account student quality.

Cheshier (1975) suggests the grading scales shown in Table 11-2, where the grades listed are

the average T score for each student. The professor needs to decide what the average quality

of the class is and then use these ranges as a guide. Since a T score of 50 is the average, Cheshier

is suggesting that the average student in a poor class receive a low C while the average student

in a good class or a graduate-level class receive a B.

An alternate procedure is to list all the students’ total scores or average scores for the

semester. Then decide first where the average grade in the course should be. Many professors

believe that the average grade in upper-division courses should be higher than in freshmen

courses since the poorest students have dropped or transferred out of engineering. Thus the

average student might receive a B or a B

—

. Then look at the distribution and decide upon cutoff

points. One method for assigning the cut point for F’s is to see what the score of a good but

not exceptionally brilliant student is (usually the second or third best student in the class). Then

any student who receives less than half this number of points fails the course. If no one is that

232

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

low, then everyone passes. With the grade of the average student chosen and the F’s chosen,

the other grades can be selected. It is convenient to look for natural gaps in the grade

distribution and put the A-B and B-C, boundaries there. When this has been done, look at the

grades that are on the edges. Should they be moved up or down? Many professors prefer to give

students the benefit of a doubt if their scores have been increasing throughout the semester.

This can also be accomplished by giving greater weight to later tests. Try to apply wisdom

at the boundaries. We have seldom been wrong when we have found reasons to be generous.

Much more could be said about testing. Tests can be analyzed for validity and reliability

by statistical methods. Multiple-choice tests in particular are easy to analyze. We do not think

that this type of analysis is particularly valuable in engineering education and doubt that many

engineering educators would use these procedures. In any case, most large universities have

a testing service which machine-scores multiple-choice tests and calculates the appropriate

statistics.

Students usually consider exams to be the most important part of a course since they are

the main determiner of their grades. Professors can lament the students’ values, but these

values are difficult to change. Complaints about tests can be decreased by making them as fair

as possible and by having enough tests so that one test will not completely determine a

student’s grade. Because they consider exams to be so crucial, some students will be tempted

to cheat, and cheating is another fact of life which must be faced (see Chapter 12).

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different types of test questions. Write test

questions using each of the major test question styles.

• Develop a grid to determine the course material to be covered on a test.

• Explain to a TA how to score a test fairly. Score a test fairly.

• Determine the discrimination of test questions and calculate z and T scores for students.

• Develop a scheme for using homework and projects as part of a course which satisfies

learning principles.

• Develop a personal value system for giving course grades.

11.6. CHAPTER COMMENTS

11.7. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

233

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1 Assume you will write a test for this chapter.

a Develop a test grid to decide on the coverage of the test.

b Write at least two long-answer questions, two short-answer questions, and two multiple-

choice questions for the test.

c Select the questions for the test so that it can be given in a regular fifty-minute class period.

d Write the solutions and the grading scheme for this test.

2 Do a project on teaching engineering material. The project must involve both content

(engineering subject matter) and teaching method. You must have a deliverable such as a

videotape, CAI, a self-paced module, a laboratory experiment, a National Science Founda-

tion proposal for curriculum development, a student handbook for commercial software, or

course demonstrations.

Canelos, J., and Catchen, G. L., “Test preparation and engineering content,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1624, 1987.

Cheshier, S. R., “Assigning grades more fairly,” Eng. Educ., 343 (Jan. 1975).

Crittenden, J. B., “Partial credit: Not a God-given right,” Eng. Educ., 288 (Feb. 1984).

Eble, K. E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Elbow, P., Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching, Oxford University Press,

New York, 1986.

Ericksen, S. C., The Essence of Good Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1984.

Erickson, B. L. and Strommer, D. W., Teaching College Freshmen, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1991.

Evett, J. B., “Cozenage: A challenge to engineering instruction,” Eng. Educ., 434 (Feb. 1980).

Johnson, B. R., “A new scheme for multiple-choice tests in lower-division mathematics,” Amer. Math.

Mon., 427 (May 1991).

Johnson, G. R., Taking Teaching Seriously: A Faculty Handbook, Texas A&M University, Center for

Teaching Excellence, College Station, TX, 1988.

Kessler, D. P., “Machine-scored versus grader-scored quizzes—An experiment,” Eng. Educ., 705 (April

1988)

Leuba, R. J., “Machine scored testing, Part I: Purposes, principles and practices,” Eng. Educ., 89 (Nov.

1986a).

Leuba, R. J., “Machine scored testing, Part II: Creativity and item analysis,” Eng. Educ., 181 (Dec.

1986b).

Lowman, J., Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.

Mafi, M., “Involving students in a time-saving solution to the homework problem,” Eng. Educ., 444

(April 1989).

Masih, R. Y., “Perfecting the engineering education and its exams,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 200, 1987.

McKeachie, W. J., “College grades: A rationale and mild defense,” AAUP Bull., 320 (Autumn 1976).

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

234

CHAPTER 11: TESTING, HOMEWORK, AND GRADING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

McKeachie, W. J., Teaching Tips, 8th ed., D.C., Heath, Lexington, MA, 1986.

Smith, K. A., “Grading and distributive justice,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference, IEEE, New York, 421, 1986.

Starling, R., “Professor as student: The view from the other side,” Coll. Teach., 35 (1), 3 (1987).

Stice, J. E., “A first step toward improved teaching,” Eng. Educ., 394 (Feb. 1976).

Stice, J. E., “Grades and test scores: Do they predict adult achievement?” Eng. Educ., 390 (Feb. 1979).

Svinicki, M. D., “The test: Uses, construction and evaluation,” Eng. Educ., 408 (Feb 1976).

Travers, R. M. W., “Appraisal of the teaching of the college faculty,” J. Higher Educ., 21, 41 (1950).

Wankat, P. C., “Regarding tests: A chance for students to learn,” Eng. Educ., 746 (April 1983).

Yokomoto, C. F., “Writing homework assignments to evoke intellectual processes,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 579, 1988.

Yokomoto, C. F. and Ware, R., “The seven practices—Persuading students to do their homework,”

Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 1767, 1991.

STUDENT CHEATING,

DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

235

CHAPTER 12

In universities, as in society in general, cheating is a fact of life, but as a new instructor you

can drastically reduce the incidence of cheating in your classes by taking simple precautions.

The aim of this chapter is to help you prevent incidents of cheating. Related issues about ethics

and student discipline are also considered.

Most engineering professors agree with Gregg (1989) that cheating “must not be tolerated

in any form.” Despite this, many graduates admit that they have cheated sometime during their

college career. In one study 56 percent of a graduating class of engineering students admitted

to having cheated (Todd-Mancillas and Sisson, 1986). It is much better to prevent cheating

than to have to deal with it after the fact.

The best method for reducing large scale cheating is to create an atmosphere which is not

conducive to cheating (Eble, 1988; Kibler et al., 1988). When good rapport exists between

students and professor and among students themselves, cheating is drastically reduced. It is

much easier to cheat when a professor is cold and aloof. A student who feels like a number

and knows that the professor does not know her or his name finds it easier to cheat than a

student who is known to the professor by name. Students cheat significantly less in a class with

12.1. CHEATING

12.1.1. Prevention of Cheating

TEACHING ENGINEERING

236

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

shared objectives, and where there is an obvious excitement in learning. Any class where

students feel that the professor is a partner in learning will have a low incidence of cheating.

Professors who develop a reputation of writing fair tests and of grading fairly will have less

cheating on their tests than professors with a reputation of writing unfair tests or of being

“superhard” graders. Students must be challenged, not overwhelmed.

It is important to discuss the rules of cheating and plagiarism with students (Evett, 1980;

Walworth, 1989). Just as different cultures define the act of sharing answers with a friend in

different ways, professors need to share their definitions and rationale with the class. Many

students simply do not know the rules about plagiarism, so this discussion is particularly

important. To make the discussion positive, present it in a positive form by including it in a

larger discussion on the importance of engineering ethics (see Section 12.3). The appropriate

time for this discussion is immediately before the first test or the first assignment which is to

be done independently. A little bit of humor can help get the point across and make the

discussion less threatening for the students.

Reducing anxiety on tests also decreases cheating (Kibler et al., 1988). The pressure of any

one test can be reduced by giving numerous quizzes or tests. Equal access to test files reduces

the urge to cheat on the part of those without access. Access to the professor or to TAs for help

and a help session immediately before the test make the course seem fairer and help reduce

pressure. Open book exams or tests with equation handouts or key relations charts help to

reduce pressure and eliminate the use of illegal cheat sheets.

Before a test is administered, some commonsense security measures can reduce the

temptation to cheat. You may want to adopt some of the following suggestions to help prevent

both casual cheating and the deliberate stealing of tests. Make up a new test shortly before the

test date. Have a secretary, not a work-study student, do any typing and make the copies. Any

waste copies should not be thrown away (students have been known to search waste baskets)

but should be kept with the other tests and discarded after the test. Any computer files which

are not secured by a password should be cleared or the disk should be locked up. Test copies

should be locked up, taken home, or craftily hidden. Even a normally honest student will be

sorely tempted if a copy of the test is sitting out in plain view on a desk. Make up extra copies

of the test, but number the copies so that you will know exactly how many have been

distributed.

The most common forms of cheating occur during the administration of a test. Long-

answer tests with many calculations are the most difficult to cheat on. Multiple-choice

problems are the easiest to cheat on, and if other precautions are not taken may invite cheating.

Short-answer problems are intermediate in cheatability.

In large classes both the professor and the TAs should proctor the test. Proctoring has a

major deterrent effect on cheating (Kibler et al., 1988). The proctoring can be done in such

a way that it is clear that the proctors are alert so that they can help students with questions.

Stationing a TA at the back of the room is an effective deterrent in large lecture halls since

students cannot easily keep track of the proctor’s location.

If at all possible, have the students sit in alternate seats since this drastically reduces

cheating of the wandering eyes variety (Evett, 1980). If a large enough room is not available,

consider using two rooms simultaneously. Assign students to each room in advance and have

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

237

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

each room proctored. Another possibility is to use alternative test forms which have either the

questions or the answers in different order, or to use different values in calculations.

Before the exam starts have students place books underneath their desks unless the test is

open book. Since many calculators can now store significant amounts of alphanumeric data,

the calculator has become a possible cheat sheet. The temptation to use it in this way can be

reduced if you stroll about the room while looking for students who need help. Students should

not be allowed to share calculators unless a TA clears the calculator first. The significance of

cheat sheets is eliminated if every student is allowed to bring one in or if the test is open book.

Since the purpose is prevention not proof of cheating, take action as soon as something

suspicious happens. Standing near the student (while waiting to answer the questions of other

students) may be a sufficient deterrent. Asking the student if he or she has a question is a subtle

way of letting the student know that you are watching. If the situation persists, ask the student

to move to a less crowded spot. If the student prefers to stay put, suggest that you prefer that

he or she move. Some professors announce to the class that students should not look around

the room. This can be effective, particularly if the professor looks at the suspicious student,

but it is a bit distracting for the class.

In very large classes where the professor does not know each student by name and may not

even recognize some faces, it is fairly common to use picture IDs to prevent “ringers” from

taking the examination for someone else. The IDs can be placed on the corner of the desk or

they can be shown to the TA as the student turns in the test.

The chaos of test turn-in time also invites cheating (Felder, 1985). Students see someone

else’s solution or the professor’s solution and then quickly change their answers. This can be

prevented by making everyone stop writing at a particular time. The professor’s solution can

be guarded until after all tests have been turned in. The professor can have the TAs collect the

test while watching for suspicious activity.

As soon as the tests have been collected, log them in. In this way you know immediately

who did not take the test. Tests need to be kept secure after the exam is over. Students have

been known to steal a large number of tests so that the exam cannot be graded. Both the

professor and the TAs need to be careful not to lose any tests. Losing a student’s test creates

major difficulties.

Be sure that the graders make a mark on every page of the test so that students cannot claim

that the grader did not see a page. It is best to use bound examination books so that pages cannot

be inserted after the test has been returned. If a stapled test is used, carefully staple all the pages

together when the test is returned. It is extremely difficult to add a page without making an

extra staple hole in the other pages.

Any students who are suspected of being dishonest should receive extra care in grading.

You can spend a little extra time going through their tests in detail to be sure that the grading

is correct. Make a copy of the suspect’s test before it is returned. Who is a suspect? Any

student who has been caught cheating previously, who has been suspected of cheating, or who

has received significant points by having a previous test regraded. It is best to handle these

cases quietly without the help of the TAs since the student may well be innocent.

Procedures for homework, projects, and take-home tests are similar, but it may be harder

to catch cheaters. Making any of these assignments a large part of the grade, particularly in

238

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

a class where there is no rapport between the professor and the students, is asking for trouble.

If a take-home assignment is to be done independently, this needs to be discussed in class and

it needs to be stated in writing on the top of the assignment. Despite this, collaboration on take-

home assignments is very high (Todd-Mancillas and Sisson, 1986). Even graduate students

collaborate on take-home tests. The rules for plagiarism of papers need to be clearly spelled

out. A student who believes that he or she will receive more credit by properly citing sources

is less likely to plagiarize. The easiest way to decrease cheating on take-home assignments

is to make them a small percentage of the course grade and then encourage students to

collaborate (Felder, 1985).

Once cheating has been detected, resolving the situation can be very painful and time

consuming. Cheating must be fully documented. If possible, have someone witness your

proof. If there is reasonable doubt that cheating has occurred, the best course is to put the

student on your suspicious list and be more vigilant the next time.

If the proof of cheating is clear, then obtain a copy of your university’s regulations and read

them very carefully. Courts have upheld the principle that some form of due process must be

followed in academic discipline cases [see Kibler et al. (1988) for citation of the court cases].

Follow your university’s regulations. Most universities have developed regulations that

provide students with appropriate due process. If you make allegations of cheating in good

faith and follow your university’s regulations, then you will be well protected from personal

liability even if the student is found not guilty (Kibler et al., 1988). However, you will be liable

if the student is found not guilty and you impose penalties anyway.

Some universities allow the professor to discuss the case with the student, and if the student

confesses, the professor can decide the penalty. This can range from a zero on the test to a lower

grade in the course. Kibler et al. (1988) suggest that this informal procedure without reporting

the case is somewhat dangerous. If the student later recants and claims that he or she was

coerced into confessing, then the professor may be liable even though the student signed a

confession. It is safer to go through the formal university channels. The university committee

also has access to records which may show that the student is a chronic cheater, which will

result in a more severe penalty. Some professors lower the student’s grade without discussing

the allegations with the student. This is unwise since due process has clearly been denied the

student and the professor may be liable. We repeat, it is much better to prevent cheating than

try to deal with it once it has occurred.

Although cheating is the most prevalent discipline problem, there are other discipline

problems which the professor must learn to deal with. Once again, prevention is the best policy.

12.1.2. The Cure for Cheating

12.2. OTHER DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

239

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Some professors have fewer problems with students than do others. These are the professors

who develop rapport with students, are fair and accessible, are excited about the material they

are teaching, and try to function as an ally to the student in learning the material. In addition,

these professors know where to draw the line. Students are similar to children in that they test

the professor. Just as a parent must know when to stop this testing, the professor must be able

to tell students that their request is unreasonable. This can be achieved if the professor is

friendly but keeps a certain professional distance (see Chapter 17).

Discipline problems can occur in class. They include talking, reading newspapers, and

wearing headphones. State both the rules and the reasons for the rules during the first class

period. Talking and newspaper reading disturb other students, and a student wearing

headphones cannot, even by accident, pick up anything of value from the lecture. Offenders

can be asked politely to stop. If the activity continues, the offender can be called on to

contribute to the class. If the offense still continues, the student can be called in for a private

discussion.

Late arrivals are mildly disruptive. And a latecomer who then asks questions about material

which has already been covered can be quite disruptive. Some professors lock the door when

the bell sounds. This approach seems extreme. Talk to a student who is chronically late but

do so in a nonthreatening manner (see Chapter 10). Perhaps there is a good reason for the

tardiness, and some sort of special arrangement may be appropriate, such as transferring the

student to another section. At the least you can request that the latecomer save questions about

material which has already been covered until after class.

Hostile students are another problem. Hostility is most prevalent following a test, but some

students start the semester hostile. Hostility following a test can usually be deflected by having

a fair regrading procedure and by asking the student to talk to you after class. Since this type

of hostility usually decays rapidly, a good strategy is to give the student time to cool off and

then listen to her or him. A chronically hostile student is a different matter. Look at the

student’s file and talk to professors who have had him or her previously. This information may

give a hint of how to proceed. If there is no hint, you can call the student in for a chat. Try

to be nondefensive and listen to her or him. Don’t expect miracles but see if an accommodation

can be worked out for the semester.

Students with excessive absences cause problems since they skew the curve downward on

tests, are usually late with or don’t turn in homework, and often complain about the course.

In some courses such as laboratories and seminars, it is appropriate to require attendance and

reduce the student’s grade accordingly for absences. Many students, and some professors,

think that attendance in lecture courses should be optional and what the student learns should

determine his or her grade. Keep track of attendance and point out the excellent correlation

between attendance and learning. Refusing to grade on a curve prevents excessively absent

students from skewing the grading. If you want to grade on a curve, one solution is to plot the

scores of students who have attended at least some minimum number of classes and use this

curve to set the course grades. Then on the basis of this curve, students with excessive absences

receive whatever grade they have earned. If you do this, be sure to explain the grading

procedure clearly in advance.

Students do procrastinate and assignments are often turned in late. Accepting late

assignments at full credit does not seem fair to students who have done the work on time, and

240

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

it rewards students turning assignments in late for bad behavior. On the other hand, following

a policy of never accepting late assignments seems overly rigid. We accept overdue

assignments but penalize students a given percentage for each day the assignment is late.

Students sometimes miss tests, with excuses ranging from oversleeping (probably true) to

being sick (maybe true) to the death of a grandmother (doubtful). The easiest policy for dealing

with absences is to automatically discard the lowest test score (preferably based on the T score)

that the student receives during the semester. A test missed for any reason becomes a zero and

is discarded. A student who protests can be offered an opportunity to take the test for practice.

A second policy that some professors use is to allow makeups only for illness with a signed

form from a medical doctor. A third possible policy is to write a makeup test. The procedure

to use is up to you.

Students argue about grades after each test and at the end of the semester. A formal regrade

policy (see Section 11.2.3) is useful. For arguments at the end of the semester, students should

be shown the courtesy of being listened to. At some universities this is also the first step in

a formal grade appeal procedure. Changing student grades unless a mistake has been made

in recording the grade or in adding points will drastically increase the number of complaints

the professor gets in the future.

On rare occasions one hears stories of students trying to buy grades with money, gifts, or

sexual favors: “Professor, I’d do anything for a B in this class.” Since the offers are usually

not explicit, the best response is to act as if nothing unethical was intended: “Here’s a study

schedule with ten hours a week on this course plus an hour a week of tutoring with the TA. If

you follow this you will be sure to improve your current grade.”

A different type of student discipline problem involves the graduate student who does not

appear to be working or performing any research. Unfortunately, it can be difficult to tell if

the student is working or performing. Help the student set realistic goals. Sometimes graduate

students stop working because they do not have a job lined up after graduation. If this is the

case, you may be able to help with a postdoctoral position. If the student is supported by

research funds, no work—no pay is a realistic policy. Often the student can continue to be paid

if he or she continues working on research and just delays turning in the thesis. In extreme

cases stopping payment is appropriate.

Teaching students to become ethical engineers is important. This subject is particularly

appropriate for this chapter because part of becoming an ethical engineer consists of behaving

ethically as a student. It is improbable that students who cheat their way through school will

suddenly become ethical engineers upon graduation. A general discussion on ethics is a good

way to start a discussion on cheating since the students are less likely to feel accused.

Professors cannot assume that students are automatically ethical. Ethics must be instilled

in students (Walworth, 1989)—most effectively by including the subject throughout the

curriculum instead of adding an ethics course or lecture at the very end of the student’s career.

12.3. TEACHING ETHICS

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

241

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Ethics can be introduced in a “just-in-time” format in every engineering class. When the

ethical issue comes up, discuss the ethics involved.

A variety of methods can be used to instill ethical behavior. A few of these methods are:

1 Model ethical behavior at all times. The ethics of being an engineering professor are

discussed in Chapter 17.

2 Before the first test in every course discuss the need for ethical behavior in engineers.

Note that you expect students to start practicing that ethical behavior right away. Then discuss

the rules for honesty in taking a test.

3 Seminar classes on professionalism should have at least one session on ethics. The

appropriate code of ethics should be distributed to all students and then discussed. A simple

code is the one shown in Table 12-1 which is the ABET code of ethics and part of the codes

of many engineering societies. The new IEEE code is discussed by Singleton (1991).

Unfortunately, it is easy for students to read any code without thinking about its ramifications.

4 In discussions of ethics the professor can usefully play the role of devil’s advocate.

Florman (1987) presents an interesting hypothesis that laws have taken the place of self-

policed ethical codes and thus most of the codes are obsolete. He recommends a commonsense

approach to ethics. His first postulate is:

Don’t break the law.

Since most engineering failures are due to human error or sloppiness, Florman’s second

postulate is:

Fundamental Principles

Engineers shall uphold and advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the engineering profession by:

1. using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare;

2. being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity the public, their employers, and clients; and

3. striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession.

4. supporting the professional and technical societies of their disciplines.

Fundamental Canons

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public in the performance of

their professional duties.

2. Engineers shall perform services only in areas of their competence.

3. Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.

4. Engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees,

and shall avoid conflicts of interest.

5. Engineers shall build their professional reputations on the merits of their services.

6. Engineers shall act in such a manner as to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity, and dignity of

the engineering profession.

7. Engineers shall continue their professional development throughout their careers, and shall provide

opportunities for the professional development of those engineers under their supervision.

TABLE 12-1 CODE OF ETHICS

Reprinted with permission of Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc.

242

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Be conscientious, that is, careful, hardworking, dedicated, and innovative.

Florman notes that whistle blowing is usually unnecessary. He suggests:

Try to influence events without becoming excessively disruptive. Work within the system.

5 Case studies with class discussion or a class debate are excellent for involving students

in a discussion of ethics, either as part of a regular class or as part of seminar classes. For

example, in a senior design class the ethics of environmental problems can lead to a lively hour

of discussion. Or the students can discuss or debate whether an engineer working on offensive

weapons in the defense industry is satisfying fundamental principle 1 of the code of ethics.

Students in a senior seminar can become very involved in a discussion of the ethics of interview

trip expenses and accepting a job. The explosion of the space shuttle Challenger serves as an

interesting case study for any engineer (Florman, 1987; Singleton, 1991). Cooley et al. (1991)

present a case study which includes the results of a trial in which they had the students role play

different roles.

Ethics is a dry subject only if the professor makes it a dry subject. A little creativity can

make the ethics portion of a class lively and interesting.

In a class on teaching, the material in this chapter can be fun to teach. Every student and

professor knows stories about the zany things students have done to cheat or to escape doing

work. A little humor can make this interesting and counter the seriousness of the topic. As

for cheating, we cannot emphasize too much that prevention is better than a cure. One

additional method, which is outside the scope of this chapter, is to develop a student-run honor

code. Schools with well-functioning honor codes have a significantly lower incidence of

cheating.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Define methods to prevent cheating.

• Discuss the appropriate methods to handle cheating at your university.

• Develop methods to handle other disciplinary issues.

• Introduce ethics into your engineering course in short segments at the appropriate time.

12.4. CHAPTER COMMENTS

12.5. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

CHAPTER 12: STUDENT CHEATING, DISCIPLINE, AND ETHICS

243

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

1 Obtain a copy of the regulations for handling cheating at your university. Compare the

policies of your university to the more general discussion in this chapter.

2 From newspapers or professional publications find a current news item which involves

ethical issues. Develop a five-minute presentation to include this issue in an engineering

class. Develop a plan for student discussion based on Table 12-1.

3 List additional cheating methods and how to handle them.

Cooely, W. L., Klinkhackorn, P., McConnell, R. L., and Middleton, N. T., “Developing professionalism

in the electrical engineering classroom,” IEEE Trans. Educ., 34, 149 (May 1991).

Eble, K. E., The Craft of Teaching, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1988.

Evett, J. B., “Cozenage: A challenge to engineering instruction,” Eng. Educ., 434 (Feb. 1980).

Felder, R. M., “Cheating—An ounce of prevention . . . or the tragic tale of the dying grandmother,” Chem.

Eng. Educ., 12, (Winter 1985).

Florman, S. C., The Civilized Engineer, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1987.

Gregg, N. D., “Ethics in the teaching profession,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE,

Washington, DC, 341, 1989.

Kibler, W. L., Nuss, E. M., Paterson, B. G., and Pavela, G., Academic Integrity and Student Develop-

ment: Legal Issues. Policy Perspectives, College Administration Publications, Asheville, NC, 1988.

Singleton, M., “The need for engineering ethics education,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 145, 1991.

Todd-Mancillas, W. R. and Sisson, E., “Cheating among engineering students: Some suggested

solutions,” Eng. Educ., 757 (May 1986).

Walworth, M. E., “Professionalism and cheating in the classroom,” Proceedings ASEE Annual

Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 316, 1989.

HOMEWORK

REFERENCES

244

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

CHAPTER 13

PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

244

How do individuals learn? What can teachers do to aid learning? Why do different teaching

methods have different effects on individuals (or why doesn’t everyone learn the same way

I do?). Complete answers to these and related questions are not known despite years of

intensive research; however, what is known can be helpful to professors in understanding the

learning and teaching processes. Chapters 13 through 15 explore these questions and suggest

ways of incorporating them in engineering education. Chapter 14 examines two theories of

cognitive development, Piaget’s and Perry’s, and offers implications for engineering educa-

tion. Piaget’s theory leads to the learning theory known as constructivism, which is dealt with

in Chapter 15, along with Kolb’s learning cycle and, finally, motivation.

This chapter focuses on the natural differences among students that need to be considered

in the planning of instruction and for handling interpersonal relationships. By accounting for

such differences we can not only retain the students we have, but also attract the nontraditional

groups that are underrepresented in engineering. As Sections 13.2 through 13.4 show, the

personality instrument discussed in this chapter, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI),

has proven to be a successful tool in engineering education for recognizing and accommodat-

ing these differences.

The essence of the theory behind the MBTI is that “much seemingly random variation in

behavior is actually quite orderly and consistent, being due to basic differences in the way

individuals prefer to use their perception and judgment” (Myers and McCaulley, 1985, p. 1).

“Perception” refers to the ways that we process information or become aware of the world

around us. “Judgment” has to do with the ways we make decisions on the basis of what has

been perceived. These ideas are based on the theories of the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung

(1971) and their application and extension by Katherine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. The

MBTI has been used in education and industry as well as career and marriage counseling to

help identify personality types in order to improve communication and open the possibilities

for learning. Such knowledge is very important for professors and beneficial for students.

TEACHING ENGINEERING

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

245

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

An indicator, not a test, the MBTI is a self-reporting instrument which offers a forced-

choice format between equally valuable alternatives. In answering the questions or respond-

ing to certain word-pairs, we can discover our preferred way of dealing with, and living in, the

world. Intrinsic preferences, though possibly inborn, aren’t always available to our conscious

minds. The way we are raised and the situations we confront may force us to react in ways

opposed to our inherent preferences. The MBTI allows us to arrive at a “reported” type and

then examine the conclusion in light of our experiences, beliefs and feelings, all the time being

free to accept or reject the result. Over the years, the MBTI has become the most widely used

personality measure for non-psychiatric populations (Myers and Myers, 1980). What the

MBTI does not do, however, is merely classify people. Type does not refer to something that

is fixed, permanent. Each type has its own ways of reacting to situations, but no one is true

to type all the time. As McCaulley et al. (1983) point out, good type development often

involves responding in ways that one does not spontaneously prefer. “The word type as used

here refers to a dynamic system with interacting parts and forces. The characteristics and

attitudes that result from the interactions of these forces do differ, but the basic components

are the same in every human being” (p. 397).

The seminal work on type theory was done by Carl Gustav Jung, the Swiss psychologist

and contemporary of Sigmund Freud. His study Psychological Types was published in 1921

after almost twenty years’ work in treating individuals and discussing problems and solutions

with colleagues, as well as “from a critique of [his] own psychological peculiarity” (Jung,

1971, p. xi). In his difficult yet eminently readable book, Jung looks at the problem of type in

the history of classical and medieval thought as well as in biography, poetry, philosophy, and

psychopathology.

An excellent biography of Katherine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers,

is Frances Saunders’ book (1991); and Gifts Differing (Myers and Myers, 1980) gives an

excellent discussion of their theory. Katherine Cook Briggs was a lifelong student of the

differences among individuals and how they relate to the way in which one functions in the

world. In part her interest in personal differences grew out of her desire to be a writer and create

fictional characters, and for this reason she was particularly interested in Jung’s treatment of

biography in his book.

Discovering Jung’s work in the English translation in 1923, Briggs is alleged to have said,

“This is it” (Saunders, 1991, p. 59). Unfortunately, she was so impressed with Jung’s work and

terminology that she burned her own notes and adopted the latter’s terminology. She shared

this interest in personality with her daughter Isabel (later Isabel Briggs Myers) who continued

studying type. With the onset of World War II, Myers desired “to do something that might help

people understand each other and avoid destructive conflicts” (Lawrence, 1980). She decided

to find a way to put the theory to practical use and from this came the idea for a “type indicator.”

Her first task was to develop an item pool that would reflect the feelings and attitudes of the

differing personality types as she and her mother had come to understand them. The first

13.1. FROM JUNG TO THE MBTI

246

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

period of development involved item validation with friends and family and then collecting

data on 5000 high school students and 5000 medical students. The second period began in 1956

when the Educational Testing Service (ETS) became the publisher. After the 1962 publication

of the MBTI manual and form F, the popularity and use of the MBTI began to grow slowly.

In 1975, Consulting Psychologists Press took over publication, and since then the use of the

instrument has expanded greatly. It has now been translated into Japanese and Spanish, and

is also being used in England and Australia. According to McCaulley (1976), the fact “that

similar career choices by the same types occur in disparate cultures suggests that Jung’s theory

taps some fundamentally important human functions that cut across cultural teaching.”

In Psychological Types, Jung postulated that everyone has a basic orientation to the world

which indicates the directions in which energies or interests flow: to the outer world of people

and events (extroversion, E) or to the inner world of ideas (introversion, I). He referred to this

as an attitude toward the world. Either type, in the conscious aspects of life, processes

information either through the senses (S) or by intuition (N) and makes decisions on the basis

of this information either by logical, impersonal analysis (thinking,T), or on the basis of

personal, subjective values (feeling, F). Jung regarded both thinking and feeling to be rational

processes and so the term “feeling” here does not carry the common connotations associated

with emotions. As to why there are four functions (S, N, T, F), not more or less, Jung (1971,

pp. 540–41) says he arrived at that number on purely empirical grounds. Through sensation

we establish what is present, with its meaning determined through thinking. Feeling tells us

its value, with possibilities delineated by intuition. The jungian dichotomies are as follows:

Direction of energy/interest: E or I

Perceiving functions: S or N

Judging (decision-making) functions: T or F

To these three Jungian pairs, Katherine Briggs added a fourth: a judging (J) or perceptive

(P) orientation to the world. In her research she discovered that individuals tend to function

primarily in either the perceiving or the judging mode. That is, some people (P) like to gather

more and more information and adapt to situations as they arise; others (J) prefer to lead a more

structured, ordered existence, making lists, and trying to control events.

A person’s preferences are indicated by these dichotomies, but each person is free to use

sensing or intuition, and, similarly, thinking or feeling. As with handwriting, anyone can write

a signature using either the left or the right hand; however, most have a preference for one over

the other and tend to develop the skill in one more than in the other. The four dichotomies (EI,

SN, TF, JP) can be arranged in a four by four table or matrix, giving sixteen personality types

from interactions. Table 13-1 summarizes the attitudes and functions, and Figure 13-1 gives

an example of the matrix, with breakdowns of percentages for engineering disciplines. Then

13.2. PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE: ATTITUDES AND FUNCTIONS

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

247

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

brief general characteristics of each type will be given (Myers and McCaulley, 1985; see also

Singer, 1972). McCaulley, Macdaid, and Kainz (1985) discuss ways of estimating type

frequencies among the general population.

Orientation to Life: Extroversion (E) and Introversion (I). The first pair, extroversion

and introversion, focuses on how one approaches the world. Ever since Jung first posited these

descriptors of behavior, the terms have become part of the language and as used here they carry

the standard psychological connotations. The outer-directed extrovert enjoys social contact

and depends on interaction with others for personal satisfaction. The inward-looking introvert,

on the other hand, tends to withdraw from such interactions, preferring quiet for concentration

rather than the quick action of the extrovert. The easy communication of the extrovert is a

problem for the introvert, who, preferring ideas, may have trouble communicating. In

problem-solving, the extrovert tends to place greater weight on the situation and other people’s

views, whereas the introvert tends to focus more on the conceptual framework of the problem

(McCaulley, 1987). No one is purely extroverted or introverted, though some individuals

clearly may represent extremes of each type. Instead, the terms refer to preferred orientations.

Anyone can exhibit both introverted and extroverted behavior. For example, an introverted

teacher may approach a class with some fretfulness, mustering up all of his or her energy to

begin the class, but once settled into the course, may feel comfortable and act the complete

extrovert—within the confines of the class. Yet, the preferred orientation is that of a cautious

introvert. Each person carries the capability of developing both orientations but by preference

(Outer world of people)

(Inner world of ideas and actions)

Extroversion

Introversion

Direction of energy or interests

(Immediate and practical experience)

(Possibilities and meanings of

aspects of experiences)

Sensing

Intuition

Preference of perception

(Logical, objective)

(Subjective, personal, value-based)

Thinking

Feeling

Preferences for decision making

(Ordered, planned)

(Spontaneous, adaptive)

Judgment

Perception

Orientation to outside world

TABLE 13-1 THE FOUR MBTI PREFERENCES

248

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

tends to develop one of them. The same is true of the other three function pairs. This is an

important point to remember while reading about the MBTI. Myers and McCaulley (1985,

p. 5) caution that the Indicator is no substitute for good judgment and that the proper way to

use it is as a stimulus to the user’s insight.

Extrovert (E). (roughly 70 percent of the general population; about 33 percent of the

engineering student population)

• Likes people.

• Likes action.

• Acts quickly.

• Communicates easily.

• Is applications-oriented.

• Feels energized by interaction with others.

Introvert (I). (30 percent of the general population; about 67 percent of the engineering

student population)

• Prefers quiet for concentration.

• Likes ideas and concepts.

• Has trouble communicating.

• Relies on inner illumination.

• Prefers to work alone and is energized by doing so.

Perception or Becoming Aware: Sensing (S) and Intuition (N). The second pair,

sensing (S) and intuition (N), characterizes the perceptive function, or how one becomes aware

of, or perceives, the world. The sensing person leans toward working with known facts rather

than looking for possibilities and relationships as the intuitive person often prefers to do. He

or she also tends toward step-by-step analysis and prefers to work by established methods.

Intuitives favor inspiration and may work in bursts, quickly jumping to conclusions or

solutions. Unlike sensing individuals, they are impatient with routine and may appear to be

more imprecise. Using their imaginations, they see possibilities, whereas sensing individuals

use their senses and work through the powers of observation. To a sensing type, soundness,

common sense, and accuracy characterize real intelligence, which for an intuitive is shown by

flashes of imagination and insight in grasping complexities. Attitudes characteristically

developed from the preference for intuition include a reliance on sudden insight, an interest

in the new, and a preference for learning through an intuitive grasp of meanings (McCaulley,

1978). A synopsis of the two types shows the following.

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

249

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Sensing (S). (70 percent of the general population; 53 percent of engineering student

population)

• Uses senses and powers of observation.

• Works through step-by-step analysis.

• Likes precision.

• Prefers established methods.

• Is patient with routine.

• Works steadily.

Intuition (N). (30 percent of the general population; 47 percent of the engineering student

population)

• Is imaginative, sees possibilities.

• Relies on inspiration.

• May be imprecise.

• Jumps to solutions (is quick).

• Works in bursts.

• Dislikes routine.

Decision Making: Thinking (T) and Feeling (F). Once all the data are in, whether by

sensing or by intuition, one must then decide how to process the information and come to a

decision. A person who prefers to be logical and analytical, weighing facts impersonally and

objectively, shows a preference for thinking (T) as the mode of decision making; someone

who bases decisions on subjective, personal values and standards uses feeling (F). Both poles

are accessible to everyone, and often most individuals move freely between them; however,

each person has a preferred mode.

Thinking (T). (60 percent male/40 female in general population; 74 percent of engineering

students: 77 percent male/61percent female)

• Is objectively analytical.

• Works through cause and effect.

• Tends to be logical.

• Tends to be tough-minded.

• Tends to be impartial.

Feeling (F). (40 percent male/60 percent female in general population; 26 percent of

engineering students: 23 percent male and 39 percent female)

250

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

• Understands people.

• Desires harmony.

• Stresses interpersonal skills.

Living in the World: Judgment (J) and Perception (P). The fourth preference pair is

used to identify the way an individual functions in the world. The previous sections considered

the attitudes (E and I) and the functions (S, N, T, and F) which Jung used to categorize

conscious mental processes. In an elaboration of Jung’s ideas, Briggs and Myers added a

further dimension: the attitude a person takes toward the world. This attitude is based on the

person’s relationship to or preference for the functions of perceiving and judging. An

individual who prefers to use a perceiving function (S or N) to run his or her life tends toward

being open to new perceptions, adapting to situations, and in general taking in information.

This flexibility often leads to minimal planning and organization. For someone who uses a

judging function (T or F) to conduct his or her outer life, the impetus is toward planning,

organization, and closure. Thus, the JP preference indicates how an individual prefers to live

in the outer world. If you are curious as to which of these applies to you, just think about the

way you plan a vacation. Are you content to fly somewhere and then to take it from there,

making plans as you go (P)? Or are you appalled by the thought of such a trip, preferring to

schedule hotels, routes, stopovers, and so forth, well beforehand (J)? Do you find yourself

taking in more and more information before finally writing that report—often at the eleventh

hour (P)? Or do you plan it and work on it section by section, day by day (J)? As with all the

pairs, both ways of living in the world are of course accessible to the individual. And even

someone given to doing jobs at the last minute may find him- or herself having to be very much

the schedule maker and planner in structuring family plans. So both choices are available. The

dynamic interplay of all of the preferences (EI, SN, TF, JP) leads to sixteen combinations or

types (see Figure 13-1).

Judging (J). (50 percent of the general population; 61 percent of engineering students)

• Prefers to live in a planned, orderly way.

• Likes to regulate and control events.

Perceptive (P). (50 percent of the general population; 39 percent of engineering students)

• Prefers to be flexible, spontaneous.

• Likes to understand and adapt to events.

Dominant and Auxiliary Processes. According to type theory, children are born with

a predisposed preference for some functions over others (Myers and McCaulley, 1985). Lynch

(1987) maintains that the dominant function is usually reflected by kindergarten age. In

engineering terms, they are hardwired for a given type. This preference leads to fuller

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

251

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

development of the preferred function and greater competence in it. A preference for sensing,

for example, leads to the development of characteristics commonly seen in a practical-minded

sensing individual. At the same time, the opposite pole of the preference tends to be ignored;

in the above example a sensing child gives less priority to intuition and thus develops along

quite different lines from another child who prefers intuition. It is apparent then that

environment (“software programming”) plays a key role in one’s development, either

reinforcing or demotivating development along certain lines. This “falsification” of type can

lead one to develop a less preferred function but overall still not feel in control or confident

in his or her abilities. In good type development each person uses all four processes, but one

process becomes the leading or dominant.

In the literature about type, the roles of the dominant and the auxiliary are often compared

to those of a general and an aide. In an extrovert, the general (dominant function) is at the

forefront making decisions and taking the lead, for all the world to see. As a result, we say that

for an extrovert, “What you see is what you get.” For an introvert, however, the aide (auxiliary

function) stands as an intermediary with the outside world while the general makes plans

inside a tent. The introvert, who focuses on the inner world, is difficult to know until one gets

close enough to the individual. The dominant function remains hidden, which is why

introverts are often misunderstood.

To see how the dominant and auxiliary functions are determined, consider an INFP and an

ENFP. For the ENFP, the fourth pair (that is, the choice between judment and perception which

indicates how the person lives in the world), here the P, indicates that this person prefers to

conduct his or her outer life in the perceptive mode. So we only have to look back to the

perceiving slot (the second letter, here N, intuition) to find the function used by this person in

the outer world. If asked to characterize this individual’s type, another person would see the

intuitive aspects. Now, by definition, extroverts show the world their strongest function;

therefore, the N in this case is the dominant function. For the ENFP the dominant is extroverted

intuition; the auxiliary is a balancing introverted feeling (F) (introverted because the auxiliary

always balances the dominant, which here is extroverted), with thinking as the third and

sensing as the fourth or least developed. So for an ENFP:

Dominant: N

Auxiliary: F

Third: T

Fourth: S

For an INFP the P indicates the person extroverts his or her perceptive function. Thus a

judging function is dominant since an introvert's strength is within. The other perceptive

function is third, and the fourth, or least developed, function, is judging (T). Thus,

Dominant: F (introverted feeling)

Auxiliary: N (extroverted intuition—what world sees)

Third: S (sensing)

Fourth: T (thinking—least developed function)

252

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

These individuals trust introverted feeling the most and use it the most in directing their

lives, with intuition in support of the thinking. To the world, they appear intuitive. Like most

introverts they are easily misunderstood because their strength is inside, not as open to the

world as the strength of an extrovert.

Good type development. Type development is seen as a lifelong process of increasing

mastery or command over the functions of perception and judgment that one prefers, and

corresponding but lesser development of the less interesting but essential processes. Myers

and McCaulley summarize the process (1985):

• Development of excellence in the favorite, dominant process.

• Adequate but not equal development of the auxiliary for balance.

• Eventual admission of the least developed processes to conscious, purposeful use in the

service of the dominant process, even though this use may require the dominant and auxiliary

to temporarily relinquish control in consciousness so that the third or fourth function can

become more conscious.

• Use of each of the functions for the tasks for which they are best fitted.

The differences described by type theory are familiar parts of everyday life, and so the

theory can be used for a wide range of applications: education, counseling, career guidance,

situations involving teamwork issues, and communication. Any university counseling or

psychological center can provide the necessary testing services, or individuals can be certified

through the training sessions such as those offered by the Association for Psychological Type

(APT), the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT), or the Consulting

Psychologists Press (see Section 13.6 for addresses). Thomas (1989) offers some preliminary

results on “rapid MBTI self-classification.”

Jensen and DiTiberio (1989) extensively examine its relevance in the teaching of writing.

Provost and Anchors (1987) discuss the uses of the MBTI in higher education. McCaulley et

al. (1983) consider the results of the ASEE-MBTI Engineering Consortium of eight univer-

sities (see Figure 13-1). Their results are summarized later in this section. In the MBTI manual

Myers and McCaulley (1985) give numerous rankings of students and colleges by means of

various preferences. Schurr, Ruble, and Henriksen (1989) look at the effects of different

admissions practices on the MBTI and gender types. Several authors discuss the MBTI and

problem solving, with McCaulley (1987) offering a jungian model. Yokomoto et al. (1987)

discuss improvement of problem-solving performance and also consider student attitudes

toward ethical dilemmas (1987). Three ethical dilemmas were presented to students, who were

required to make a decision on what further action, if any, might be taken to resolve them.

Analysis of the results showed several biases arising from personality differences, with feeling

types recommending action more strongly than thinking types in one situation. Campbell and

Kain (1990) investigated whether some types prefer certain forms of information presentation

in problem solving. They found that the most time-efficient types (N and J) were also the least

13.3. APPLICATIONS OF THE MBTI IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

253

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

accurate, similarly for NT’s and NF’s. S, P, SF, and ST types tended to be more accurate but

took longer to achieve their accuracy. Campbell and Kain conclude that type plays a small role

in a person’s preference for presentation form, but a larger role in the accuracy and time

efficiency of problem solving.

Teaching Methods. Lawrence (1984) synthesizes learning style research involving the

MBTI. The MBTI can be used to develop teaching methods to meet the needs of different

types, especially on the sensing-intuition dichotomy. As McCaulley (1987) points out, S and

N types approach problems from opposite directions: S moves from the specific to the general;

N from the “grand design to the details.” She then makes a telling point: “In fields with

relatively equal numbers of S and N students, such as engineering, the faculty have more of

a challenge maintaining student interest than in fields, such as counseling, where students and

faculty are more similar” (p. 47). Smith, Irey, and McCaulley (1973) found that personality

traits influence student attitude and performance in self-paced instruction. They further note

that a major weakness in college teaching appears to arise from a teacher’s and student’s lack

of recognition of each other’s differences, which gives rise to the need for different learning

activities. Self-paced instruction, according to the authors, can be made more effective if

instructional modules or packages are designed which fit different styles of student perception

and judgment. Provost, Carson, and Beidler (1987) studied a sample of professor of the year

finalists to see how outstanding teachers use their type preferences. This limited study doesn’t

conclude that most outstanding teachers will have a certain preference or be a certain type;

however, it does show that type affects teaching style, assumptions one might make about

teaching, and attitudes about what aspects of teaching are seen as rewarding. These teachers

have been able to relate to other types and to appreciate the inherent diversity. From the

students’ standpoint, Rodman et al. (1985, 1986) looked at the self-perception of engineering

students’ preferred learning style and related it to the MBTI. Among other conclusions, their

work shows that in engineering education major differences among types occur in the sensing

and intuition classifications.

The sensing-intuition (SN) dichotomy is perhaps the most important one for an engineering

educator, both from the standpoint of the instructor and from that of the students (especially

as sensing relates to mastering a body of knowledge and the corresponding skills central to a

field of practice). Intuition has to do with the ability to think complexly and contextually. The

percentages of type in the general and university populations alone tell a significant tale.

Sensing types predominate in the general population; intuitives, in a university environment.

More college professors are intuitive types than sensing types, and they tend to write exams

that more frequently fit their own type (Lynch, 1987). If memorization and recall are

important, sensing and judging types will perform better; if hypothesizing and essay tests are

required, intuitive students will have an advantage. Aptitude tests are also designed to measure

knowledge in the domain of introverted intuitives (IN). The data show that introverts

consistently score higher than extroverts on the SAT-Verbal. Intuitives also consistently score

higher than sensing types. The sensing-intuition differences, according to Myers and McCaulley

(1985), are greater than the extroversion-introversion differences.

In the classroom, the thinking-feeling (TF) preference appears to have less importance than

the others, but it can be argued that a predominance of thinking types in a class could “freeze

out” the few feeling types. Is it possible that feeling types self-select out of engineering

254

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

because of the more impersonal emphasis of the predominant thinking types in engineering?

One colleague has suggested that it might be easier to teach ethics if students were more

interested in human motivations (feeling types), rather than being concerned with building the

best device (ST) or developing the most elegant theory (NT). Finally, it is important to

remember that type theory does not make judgments on intelligence: All types can succeed

in any area, and all types are represented in every area. What is important is that every type

can learn to survive in the academic world. Paying attention to type differences and taking

them into account in teaching goes a long way toward promoting such success. The fact that

certain types predominate in certain careers says more about a type’s attraction to the field than

whether he or she will succeed in it. Once an individual has gotten past the educational barriers

to a given field, being different from the prevailing type can be an advantage since he or she

will see things that others miss.

Motivation. The MBTI can also be used to help students if the instructor understands the

ways that different types are motivated. An instructor can help students gain control over their

own learning and thereby reach more students. Even something as simple as a phrasing can

be important. For example, feeling types respond better to a question that is phrased “How do

you feel about . . . ?” whereas the thinking type prefers “What do you think . . . ?” Also, the

quickness of the N types may discourage an S type, and in a classroom the quicker student is

often more praised and honored; the “slower” student quickly forms an impression that he or

she is lacking what the “best” students have. We use quotation marks to indicate that

intelligence is not the consideration here. In the long run, the “slower” but more thorough and

accurate S may be more correct and/or successful. And if not demotivated by the instructor,

such a student may be a valuable addition to the class.

Curriculum and Materials. The MBTI can be used to analyze curricula, methods, media,

and materials in light of the needs of different types. This should be done in conjunction with

the other aspects of learning theories, such as that of Kolb (see Chapter 15). And it can be used

to provide extracurricular activities that will meet the needs of all types

Interpersonal Relationships. The MBTI can also be used to help teachers and adminis-

trators work together more constructively. Type data from one sample show that administra-

tors tend to be heavily J types [86 percent in Lawrence’s (1984) sample]. As in other areas,

such as personnel cases in industry, awareness of type differences can lead to a more

harmonious working environment. On a personal level, knowledge of type can be very helpful

in counseling (Provost and Anchors, 1987). Carey, Hamilton, and Shanklin (1985) use type

theory to look at the relationship between communication style and roommate satisfaction.

The differences between judging types and perceptive types can often lead to conflicts. What

a perceptive sees as a strength in the desire to have complete information or knowledge before

proceeding, a judging person often sees as procrastination. And what a judging type sees as

decisive action, a perceptive may see as close-minded and precipative behavior. Differences

on the extroversion-introversion and thinking-feeling dichotomies can also lead to problems.

From type theory, interpersonal competence is related to extroversion and feeling (Myers and

McCaulley, 1985). The focus of extroverts is on people and the external world; that of feeling

types is on the effects of their actions and decisions on themselves and others.

In engineering, a great deal of work is done in teams. Clearly, it’s important that the

members work together harmoniously. A good preparation for this takes place in undergradu-

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

255

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

ate laboratories. Accounting for type differences and making students aware of each other’s

different strengths can go a long way toward easing the tension that arises when, say, a

perceptive can’t put an end to a literature search which his or her judging partner needs for the

next day’s oral report. Giving and receiving criticism in these situations can also depend on

the individual’s preferred way of functioning.

Student Retention. Retention and attrition are complex issues which every college or

university must face. Godleski (1987) considers use of the MBTI to increase retention of

underachieving college students. His preliminary results showed that there was no difference

in extroversion or introversion, but a significantly larger number of sensing over intuitive

types and perceptive over judging types who were in academic difficulty. Provost (1991)

found type patterns among freshmen experiencing first-year difficulties, with analyses

showing overrepresentation of TP combinations. Schurr and Ruble (1988) found that high

school performance and the judging preference (J) were the best predictors of college

performance. This report was a follow-up to their 1986 study which followed an entire

entering college class. McCaulley (1976) describes a study at the Fenn College of Engineering

at Cleveland State University comparing freshman who wanted to become engineers and

seniors who successfully completed the program. The types in the four corners (the TJ or

logical, decisive types) of Figure 13-1 increased their percentage from 45 percent as freshmen

to 55 percent as seniors. The group showing the greatest loss, from 17.3 percent as freshmen to

9.2 percent as seniors, was the types sharing intuition and feeling (more frequently found in the

behavioral sciences and communication). McCaulley offers some reasons for this pattern (p. 397):

1 People learn in different ways. If the faculty teaches one way, they will favor some types

over others.

2 Faculty members serve as role models for students, but there appear to be no data to

indicate that engineering faculty are appropriate models for engineers in industry. Students

may not realize this.

3 Choice of textbooks (and programmed learning courses) can favor the learning pattern

of some types and cause difficulties for others.

Staiger (1989) also uses type to identify subsets of electrical engineering students who need

special attention from the point of view of retention and maintains that curriculum redesign

should include teaching styles that will accommodate diverse learning styles, including

guided design, cooperative learning, and developmental instruction. Kalsbeek (1987) offers

a conceptual model for understanding student attrition. His comment offers an appropriate

close to this section: By relating type data to student attrition, educators can consider how

different types of students interact with types of academic environments and thereby respond

appropriately to the challenges posed.

Distributions of Types in Engineering As Figure 13-1 indicates, all sixteen types are

represented in all areas of engineering; however, even the quickest glance reveals that certain

types self-select into and are retained very markedly in engineering. For example, the corners

of the table are strongly over-represented—what has come to be called the “tough-minded”

256

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

INFJISTJ ISFJ INTJ

Male

Female

Aerospace

Chemical

Civil

Computer

Electrical

Geological

Mechanical

Petroleum

17.39

12.22

20.18

17.53

22.87

11.82

19.10

10.78

16.80

16.30

4.19

6.48

4.39

4.04

5.04

4.93

3.64

2.94

4.44

3.26

2.58

3.53

3.51

3.37

1.55

1.97

2.33

4.90

1.93

0.54

9.95

7.07

20.18

9.89

3.88

7.88

12.54

11.27

10.62

7.07

INFPISTP ISFP INTP

Male

Female

Aerospace

Chemical

Civil

Computer

Electrical

Geological

Mechanical

Petroleum

6.83

3.24

2.63

5.17

5.81

3.94

5.54

7.84

9.46

4.89

2.45

3.39

0.88

1.35

4.65

1.48

1.60

2.45

2.32

2.17

3.90

4.12

1.75

4.49

2.33

6.40

3.79

9.31

2.12

5.43

9.24

4.86

7.89

7.64

4.65

6.90

10.20

10.78

6.76

9.24

ENFPESTP ESFP ENTP

Male

Female

Aerospace

Chemical

Civil

Computer

Electrical

Geological

Mechanical

Petroleum

4.57

2.21

0.88

2.25

4.26

3.45

3.79

2.45

5.02

6.52

2.16

3.24

1.75

2.70

1.94

2.46

1.75

0.98

2.32

2.17

3.16

6.48

3.51

4.04

5.43

3.45

2.04

2.94

1.54

6.52

7.47

7.22

6.14

8.54

2.71

8.37

5.83

11.76

6.37

7.61

ENFJESTJ ESFJ ENTJ

Male

Female

Aerospace

Chemical

Civil

Computer

Electrical

Geological

Mechanical

Petroleum

12.56

13.55

8.77

11.01

20.93

16.26

15.01

7.35

15.25

10.87

2.80

7.22

0.88

3.37

3.88

7.88

2.33

3.43

3.67

4.89

1.71

3.98

1.75

1.57

2.71

1.97

2.19

3.92

1.35

3.26

9.05

11.19

14.91

13.03

7.36

10.84

8.31

6.86

10.04

9.24

FIGURE 13-1 DISTRIBUTION OF THE 16 MBTI TYPES AMONG ASEE-MBTI ENGINEERING STUDENTS

Note: Numbers preceding bar graphs represent the percent of the sample falling in that type. In bar graphs one inch represents

20% of sample. If percentage exceeds 20%, a + follows the bar.

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

257

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

TJ types; what is missing, relatively, is participation by the feeling types (the two inner

columns in the type table). McCaulley (1990) raises the question “Are engineering schools

preparing their students adequately for the ‘people complexities’ of the profession?” That

feeling types are in such a minority may indicate that the answer is no. It is these groups which

tend to drop or transfer out of engineering. One speculation worth exploring is whether

underrepresented groups in engineering, such as minorities and women, tend to fall into type

categories that are only slightly present in Figure 13-1. If it is true, as the data to date indicate,

that women classify more as being F than T, it could be that they view the heavy T orientation

of engineering as cold and unfriendly. If the ranks of engineering are to be filled in the future,

and clearly the standard pool of potential engineering candidates of the past is dwindling, it

is these groups that educators will have to look to and encourage.

The report of McCaulley et al. (1983) with the ASEE-MBTI Engineering Consortium

provides data showing the breakdown of engineering students by type preference. Among

their results were the following.

1 Engineering students markedly prefer thinking (74 percent) and judging (61 percent),

with the stereotypical engineer falling into the TJ group. In the consortium data, this group

accounted for almost half of the sample (males, 49 percent; females, 44 percent; with the males

more often introverted, 56 percent). One would expect all majors to have the same proportion

of each type (with 25 percent in each group if the distribution was equal); the fact that the

opposite is true gives evidence to the usefulness of the theory.

2 Engineering students differ from other college students. Compared with a sample group

of college freshmen, engineering students are more often introvert, thinking, and judging

types. Only on the SN scale were they similar to their peers.

3 Male engineering students differ in type from female engineering students. In engineer-

ing, 77 percent of the males were T, whereas 61 percent of the females were T. The proportions

of S and N were about the same.

4 Engineering disciplines attract different types of students. Figure 13-1 bears this out as

well. The fields with the highest proportion of extroverts were industrial (56 percent),

computer (55 percent), petroleum (51 percent) and mineral (51 percent). Introverts were more

frequent in aerospace (61 percent), geological (60 percent) and electrical (59 percent)

engineering. The fields with the highest proportion of the practical sensing types were civil (69

percent), industrial (61 percent), mechanical (61 percent), and mining (60 percent). Intuitives

were frequent in geological (62 percent), aerospace (60 percent) and metallurgical (54

percent). As noted above, all fields had a majority of T types, with the highest proportions in

aerospace (82 percent), electrical (80 percent), mechanical (80 percent) and physics (76

percent). The fields with the lowest proportion of T types were undecided students (68

percent), geological (69 percent), computer (69 percent) and general (70 percent) engineering.

5 All types survived to year two, but atypical types had lower retention rates. Judging types

were slightly, but significantly, more likely to be retained (entering students were 63 percent

J, retained were 65 percent J, p < 0.01). The practical SJ types were 34 percent of entering

students but were 40 percent of those remaining. Note that there were no differences in

retention between male and female, and feeling types were as likely to persist as their more

analytical T counterparts.

258

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Implications of consortium study The implications drawn from the consortium study

merit serious consideration (McCaulley et al., 1983).

1 Clearly, and one might say expectedly, many logical, analytical, and decisive types of

students are drawn to engineering; however, overemphasis on these characteristics tends to

result in an underemphasis on skills related to listening, understanding, and getting things done

through people. Since a great part of engineering work depends on communication and

teamwork, it is important that faculty stress the importance of these skills and even teach them

specifically (which of course will be appreciated by the extroverted, feeling, and intuitive

types).

2 Less typical engineering students, extroverts and feeling types, learn better if given

frequent feedback and appreciation; unfortunately, the types which are attracted to the field

are the least likely to give such feedback. So it is up to the faculty to teach and model such

behavior, which in turn will encourage students to do the same in their own work. Type

knowledge can also help in identifying behavioral patterns and needs that may be beneficial

in advising students (see also Lynch, 1987).

3 Since the numbers of sensing (S) and intuitive (N) types are roughly equal, the

implication, though debatable, is that half of the students learn best deductively, and about

half, inductively. The sensing types benefit from clear instructions, starting with their

practical experiences, and with new material presented with a step-by-step approach. Intuitives,

on the other hand, prefer theoretical principles first, followed by mastery of details through

problem solving. In order to reach the greatest number of students effectively, instructors must

keep these differences in mind. Tests and other measures of evaluation should also be varied

so that different types are given a fair chance.

The MBTI is prone to the same kinds of problems that plague any psychological test:

1 A student may not understand a question because of phrasing or vocabulary. Though not

likely applicable for an engineering student population, the MBTI requires at least eighth

grade language skills (for children, the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator is used for grades

two through eight).

2 The wrong box may accidentally be marked.

3 Students may mark what they feel they “ought” to think or may try to “psych-out” the

tester. Unconscious biases may also affect the results (Hammer, 1985).

4 Current environmental stress may change one’s answers temporarily.

5 Results may be misinterpreted. With the MBTI a little learning can be a dangerous thing,

for it’s easy to turn the occasion into a parlor game and make it little more than a horoscope

reading. Accurate interpretation is assured if a qualified tester is present such as a psycholo-

13.4. DIFFICULTIES WITH PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

259

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

gist, a counselor, or someone certified to administer the MBTI.

6 Reliability. The MBTI is reliable, but people can change. Times of stress may lead to

differing results, and over a period of years growth may be reflected in a change of type.

However, such changes are expected and predicted within type theory. For example, as one

enters middle age, it’s common for compensatory development to occur in the less preferred

functions (Myers and McCaulley, 1985). Although one’s type doesn’t change, the way it is

experienced and reported may change and give different MBTI results. Seventy-five percent

of people who have retaken the MBTI after one to six years have not changed or have done

so in only one category. More information can be found in the reliability studies reported in

Chapter 10 of the manual by Myers and McCaulley (1985). Hammer and Yeakley (1987)

conducted a study to investigate the relationship between “true” type and reported type.

7 Validity. The MBTI has good face validity. The results seem true to the test taker. Does

the MBTI measure what it is trying to measure? This is a problem with all psychological tests:

What they try to measure is usually based on a psychological theory. Thus, is the underlying

theory valid? If it is, does the test accurately measure this? Chapter 11 in the manual discusses

more than 100 studies relating to validity. There is also high face validity when one person

types another person whom they know well (Carlson, 1989).

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator offers engineering educators a workable instrument with

which to meet the changing needs of engineering education. Measuring preferences as

indicated by the students themselves, it is not meant to measure the strength of a trait, as other

psychological instruments do. Consequently, it is fairly simple to implement and interpret

without requiring a staff psychologist within an engineering department. Attention to

differences also makes tremendous common sense as the diverse needs of a new population

of students must be met before they can succeed in engineering. We can increase participation

in the field as well as increase productivity. Quite possibly, as McCaulley (1990) points out,

use of the indicator may help move students toward greater maturity of cognitive development

in Perry’s model (see Chapter 14). Finally, to stress that engineering educators must

acknowledge that students learn differently, Staiger (1989) concludes: “It would help to have

the phrase ‘equal opportunity for learning’ included in all university admission statements as

a constant reminder” (p. 143).

There is much to consider in the areas of student types, development, and learning theory.

And all interact, thereby further complicating an already difficult equation. In such a complex

area, each theory looks only at a small part. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator offers an

13.5. CONCLUSIONS

13.6. CHAPTER COMMENTS

260

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

excellent starting point for looking at the differences between and among students. More

information on the MBTI can be obtained through the organizations primarily involved in its

development and dissemination.

Association for Psychological Type

9140 Ward Parkway

Kansas City, MO 64114

Center for Applications of Psychological Type

2720 N.W. 6th St.

Gainesville, FL 32609

Consulting Psychologists Press

3803 East Bayshore Road

P.O. Box 10096

Palo Alto, CA 94303

After reading this chapter you should be able meet the following objectives.

1 Describe briefly the background of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and its development

from the ideas of Carl Jung.

2 Discuss the attitudes and functions of conscious thought and how the four preferences

interrelate to form the matrix of sixteen personality types.

3 Consider your own preferences in terms of the descriptions for each attitude and function,

arriving at a rough estimate of your own type.

4 Explain the importance of considering type differences among engineering students in the

development of instructional materials, tests, and evaluations.

1 Consider the process of selecting an adviser for graduate work.

a How close a match between student and adviser is necessary?

b Which are more important: EI, SN, TF, JP?

c How can you figure out the professor’s type?

2 Think back to your undergraduate courses. Recall a particular teacher who wasn’t fully

effective because of a preference for one type over another in his or her approach to teaching.

What could this person have done to improve his or her teaching?

3 Determine the dominant, auxiliary, third, and fourth functions for the following types:

a ESFJ

b ISFJ

13.7. SUMMARY AND OBJECTIVES

HOMEWORK

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

261

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

REFERENCES

Campbell, D. E. and Kain, J. M., “Personality type and mode of information presentation: Preference,

accuracy and efficiency in problem solving,” J. Psychol. Type, 20, 47 (1990).

Carey, J. C., Hamilton, D. L., and Shanklin, G., “Psychological type and interpersonal compatibility:

Evidence for a relationship between communication style preference and relationship satisfaction in

college roommmates,” J. Psychol. Type, 10, 36 (1985).

Carlson, J. G., “Affirmative: In support of researching the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,” J. Couns.

Develop., 67, 484 (April 1989).

von Franz, M.-L. and J. Hillman, Jung’s Typology, Spring Publications, Dallas, TX, 1971.

Godleski, E. S., “Learning style compatibility of engineering students and faculty,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, Philadelphia, PA, 1984.

Godleski, E. S., “Using the MBTI to increase retention of engineering students,” Proceedings ASEE

Annual Conference, ASEE, Washington, DC, 333,1987.

Hammer, A.L., “Typing or stereotyping? Unconscious bias in applications of psychological type

theory,” J. Psychol. Type, 10, 14 (1985).

Hammer, A.L., and Yeakley, F. R., Jr., “The relationship between ‘true type’ and reported type,” J.

Psychol. Type, 13, 52 (1987).

Harrisberger, L., “Capstoning with the MBTI,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Wash-

ington, DC, 330, 1987.

Jensen, G. H., and DiTiberio, J. K., Personality and the Teaching of Composition, Ablex Publishing,

Norwood, NJ, 1989.

Jung, C. G., Memories, Dreams, Reflections, rev. ed. (recorded and edited by Aniela Jaffe, translated

from the German by Richard and Clara Winston), Pantheon Books, New York, 1961.

Jung, C. G., Psychological Types, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1971 (originally published

in 1921).

Kalsbeek, D., “Campus retention: The MBTI in institutional self-studies,” in Provost, J., and S. Anchors

(Eds.), Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Higher Education, Consulting Psycholo-

gists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1987, pp. 31-63.

Lawrence, G., People Types and Tiger Stripes: A Practical Guide to Learning Styles, 2nd ed., Center

for Applications of Psychological Type, Gainesville, FL, 1982.

Lawrence, G., “A synthesis of learning style research involving MBTI,” J. Psychol. Type, 8, 2 (1984).

Lynch, A. Q., “Type development and student development,” in Provost, J., and S. Anchors (Eds.),

Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Higher Education, Consulting Psychologists

Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1987, pp. 5–29.

McCaulley, M., “Psychological types in engineering: Implications for teaching,” Eng. Educ., 66, 729

(April 1976).

McCaulley, M., Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to Medicine and Other Health

Professions, Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Gainesville, FL, 1978.

McCaulley, M. H., Godleski, E. S., Yokomoto, C. F., Harrisberger, L., and Sloan, E. D., “Applications

of psychological type in engineering education,” Eng. Educ., 394 (Feb. 1983).

McCaulley, M. H., Macdaid, G. P., and Kainz, R. I., “Estimated frequencies of the MBTI types,” J.

Psychol. Type, 9, 3 (1985).

McCaulley, M., “The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: A jungian model for problem solving,” in Stice, J.

(Ed.), Developing Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Abilities, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA,

1987.

McCaulley, M., “The MBTI and individual pathways in engineering design,” Eng. Educ., 537 (July/

Aug. 1990).

262

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

Myers, I. B. and P. B. Myers, Gifts Differing, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1980.

Myers, I. B. and McCaulley, M. H., Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1985.

Myers, I. B., Introduction to Type, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1991.

Provost, J., and S. Anchors (Eds.), Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in

Higher Education, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1987.

Provost, J. A., Carson, B. H., and Beidler, P. G., “Teaching excellence and type,” J. Psychol. Type, 13,

23 (1987).

Provost, J., “Tracking freshman difficulties in the class of 1993,” J. Psychol. Type, 21, 35 (1991).

Rodman, S. and Dean, R. K., “Personality type as it relates to problem-solving skills,” Proceedings

ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, NY, 36, 1983.

Rodman, S. and Dean, R. K. and Rosati, P. A., “Learning styles among engineering students: Self report

vs. classification by MBTI,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE,

New York, 48, 1985.

Rodman, S. and Dean, R. K. and Rosati, P. A., “Self -perception of engineering students’ preferred

learning style related to MBTI type,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference,

IEEE, New York, 1303, 1986.

Saunders, F. W., Katherine and Isabel: Mother’s Light, Daughter’s Journey, Consulting Psychologist’s

Press, Palo Alto, CA, 1991.

Schmeck, R. and Lockhart, D., “Introverts and extraverts require different learning environments,”

Educ. Leadership, 54–55 (Feb. 1983).

Schurr, K. T. and Ruble, V., The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and first year college achievement: A

look beyond aptitude test results, J. Psychol. Type, 12, 25 (1986).

Schurr, K. T. and Ruble, V., “Psychological type and the second year of college achievement: Survival

and the gravitation toward appropriate and manageable major fields,” J. Psychol. Type, 14, 57 (1988).

Schurr, K. T., Ruble, V., and Henriksen, L. W., “Effects of different university admission practices on

the MBTI and gender composition of a student body, graduation rate, and enrollment in different

departments,” J. Psychol. Type, 18, 24 (1989).

Singer, J., Boundaries of the Soul: The Practice of Jung’s Psychology, Doubleday, New York, 1972.

Smith, A. B., Irey, R. K., and McCaulley, M. H., “Self-paced instruction and college student personali-

ties,” Eng. Educ., 436 (March 1973).

Staiger, E. H., “Curriculum redesign: Psychological factors worth considering,” Proceedings ASEE/

IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, NY, 140, 1989.

Thomas, C. R., “Rapid MBTI self-classification,” Proceedings ASEE Anual Conference Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 1074, 1989.

Yokomoto, C., “How the MBTI has influenced how I teach,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference,

ASEE, Washington, DC, 324, 1987.

Yokomoto, C. F., Buchanan, W., and Ware, R., “A preliminary study of student attitudes toward ethical

dilemmas,” Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE, New York, 154,1987.

Yokomoto, C., “Personality models/styles,” Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Washing-

ton, DC, 986, 1989.

CHAPTER 13: PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE AND LEARNING

263

Teaching Engineering - Wankat & Oreovicz

The goals in using the MBTI model of problem solving are to improve the problem solving

skills of students and to help them gain respect for others whose minds work differently from

their own. The following is a brief and simplified overview of Myers’ problem-solving model

(Myers, 1991; McCaulley, 1987).

The strategy is to use one process at a time and to use it in its own area. Don’t, for example,

use sensing for seeking new possibilities or feeling to analyze an equipment problem.

1 Use sensing (S) to face the facts, to be realistic, to find what the situation is, to see your actions,

and to see other people’s actions. Do not let wishful thinking or sentiment blind you to the realities.

2 Use intuition (N) to discover all the possibilities, to see how you might change the situation,

to see how you might handle the situation differently, and to see how other people’s attitudes

might change. Try not to assume that you have been doing the only obviously right thing.

3 Use thinking (T) to make an impersonal analysis of the problem; to look at causes and their

effects; to look at all the consequences, both pleasant and unpleasant; to count the full costs of

possible solutions; and to examine misgivings you may have been suppressing because of your

loyalties to others or because you don’t like to admit you may have been wrong.

4 Use feeling (F) to weigh how deeply you care about what your choice will gain or lose; to put

more weight on permanent than on temporary effects, even if the temporary effects are more

attractive right now; to consider how other people will feel, even if you think they are unreasonable;

and to weigh other people’s feelings and your own feelings in deciding which solution will work.

It is likely, and natural, that the individual will choose a solution that appeals to his or her

favorite process, but such a solution will be more effective or successful if the facts,

possibilities, consequences, and human values are considered. What can go wrong if any of

these are ignored? Intuitives may base a decision on some possibility without discovering facts

which may preclude the conclusion. Sensing types may settle for a faulty solution because

they assume none better is possible. Thinking types may ignore human values. Feeling types

may ignore consequences. Thus, what can make the process difficult is that the problem solver

is asked to use strengths opposite to his or her own.

Using the attitudes:

1 Use extroversion (E) to see events in the environment that may influence the problem,

to seek people who may have information about the problem, and to talk out loud about the

problem as a way of clarifying the ideas.

2 Use introversion (I) to consider ideas that may have a bearing on the problem, to look for deeper

truths that may be obscured by current fads, to take time to think alone deeply about the problem.

3 Use judgment (J) to stay on track and not be diverted, to plan ahead, and to push yourself

and others toward a solution.

4 Use perception (P) to ensure that you have looked at all aspects of the problem, to keep your

eyes open to new developments, and to avoid jumping to conclusions before all the facts are in.

APPENDIX 13A. MBTI MODEL FOR PROBLEM SOLVING

The differences described by type theory are familiar parts of everyday life,

and so the theory can be used for a wide range of applications: education,

counseling, career guidance, situations involving teamwork issues, and com-

munication.

. Three ethical dilemmas were presented to students, who were required to

make a decision on what further action, if any, might be taken to resolve them.

Analysis of the results showed several biases arising from personality differ-

ences, with feeling types recommending action more strongly than thinking

types in one situation. Campbell and Kain (1990) investigated whether some

types prefer certain forms of information presentation in problem solving.

They found that the most time-efficient types (N and J) were also the least

APPLICATIONS OF TYPE THEORY

accurate, similarly for NT’s and NF’s. S, P, SF, and ST types tended to be more accurate

but took longer to achieve their accuracy. Campbell and Kain conclude that type plays a small

role in a person’s preference for presentation form, but a larger role in the accuracy and time

efficiency of problem solving.

Teaching Methods. The MBTI can be used to develop teaching methods to meet the needs

of different types, especially on the sensing-intuition dichotomy. S and N types approach

problems from opposite directions: S moves from the specific to the general; N from the

“grand design to the details.” “In fields with relatively equal numbers of S and N

students, such as engineering, the faculty have more of a challenge maintaining student

interest than in fields, such as counseling, where students and faculty are more similar”

(p. 47). Personality traits influence student attitude and performance in self-paced instruction.

A major weakness in college teaching appears to arise from a teacher’s and student’s lack of

recognition of each other’s differences, which gives rise to the need for different learning

activities. Self-paced instruction can be made more effective if instructional modules or

packages are designed which fit different styles of student perception and judgment. Provost,

Carson, and Beidler (1987) studied a sample of professor of the year finalists to see how

outstanding teachers use their type preferences. This limited study doesn’t conclude that most

outstanding teachers will have a certain preference or be a certain type; however, it does show

that type affects teaching style, assumptions one might make about teaching, and attitudes

about what aspects of teaching are seen as rewarding. These teachers have been able to relate

to other types and to appreciate the inherent diversity. From the students’ standpoint, Rodman

et al. (1985, 1986) looked at the self-perception of engineering students’ preferred learning

style and related it to the MBTI. Among other conclusions, their work shows that in

engineering education major differences among types occur in the sensing and intuition

classifications.

The sensing-intuition (SN) dichotomy is perhaps the most important one for an

engineering educator, both from the standpoint of the instructor and from that of the

students (especially as sensing relates to mastering a body of knowledge and the

corresponding skills central to a field of practice). Intuition has to do with the ability to

think complexly and contextually. The percentages of type in the general and university

populations alone tell a significant tale. Sensing types predominate in the general

population; intuitives, in a university environment. More college professors are intuitive

types than sensing types, and they tend to write exams that more frequently fit their own

type (Lynch, 1987). If memorization and recall are important, sensing and judging types

will perform better; if hypothesizing and essay tests are required, intuitive students will

have an advantage. Aptitude tests are also designed to measure knowledge in the domain

of introverted intuitives (IN). The data show that introverts consistently score higher

than extroverts on the SAT-Verbal. Intuitives also consistently score higher than sensing

types. The sensing-intuition differences, according to Myers and McCaulley (1985), are

greater than the extroversion-introversion differences.

In the classroom, the thinking-feeling (TF) preference appears to have less impor-

tance than the others, but it can be argued that a predominance of thinking types in a

because of the more impersonal emphasis of the predominant thinking types in engineer-

ing? One colleague has suggested that it might be easier to teach ethics if students were more