Institutionalizing the curricular changes we plan requires that faculty and students involved accept new educational objectives and learn new approaches to teaching and learning. As Jack McGourty notes in another article in this issue, we must deliver seminars and workshops to students, faculty, and staff. With the emphasis on implementation and institutionalization, we expect most workshops will be for faculty and students at a single institution. That is, the workshop presenters will travel to the faculty and student location; this clearly saves faculty time. In addition to the workshops on assessment McGourty describes, several of the Gateway Partners have offered workshops for their faculty, staff, and students.

Over the past few months, several institutions have been involved in various faculty and institutional development seminars. The summaries below provide details on some of the topics discussed during these presentations.

On April 8, Professor John Morris held a seminar on New Technologies for the faculty at Drexel University. Emphasizing video conferencing, Morris discussed the different types of technology available in a computer-mediated technological environment. For example, desktop video conferencing allows for different pedagogical applications: 1) Synchronous conferencing allows students to utilize the WEB to access live lectures and threaded discussions. 2) Asynchronous conferencing provides a means for students to access a previously recorded lecture at their convenience.

Morris also discussed a future pilot program that would entail developing a graduate engineering degree completed via the Internet. This idea prompted discussion among the seminar participants about the differences between learning in the classroom and learning on-line. Morris emphasized the benefits of on-line courses, such as students� and faculty�s having more freedom to interact with each other outside of the traditional classroom environment. ¨

On June 25 and 26, the Institute hosted two seminars to promote its Freshman Engineering Design Program to engineering and science faculty from New Jersey community colleges. The goal of the seminars was to strengthen NJIT and community college relations so that students transferring to NJIT would experience a smoother transition. Encouraging community colleges to adopt NJIT�s active, integrated, and multidisciplinary approach helps transfer students acquire the framework of versatile learning skills already fostered in NJIT freshmen and sophomores.

In the morning session of June 25, NJIT engineering faculty presented overviews of specific course modules in their specialties. A common thread throughout all modules presented was that students are actively involved in a cooperative team effort fostering active involvement (rather than passive note-taking), communication skills, resourcefulness in research, and time management skills.

Specific topics covered during this time were

• developing projects that introduce students to "real world" engineering;
• ways a simple device, such as a lawn sprinkler, can be used in a project to demonstrate manufacturing in plastics, theory of flow, and mechanisms;
• use of communication tools such as word processing and PowerPoint for written and oral reports;
• critical thinking and research skills.

An afternoon roundtable period allowed the community college attendees to interact one-on-one with the morning�s NJIT presenters, obtaining more specific information on how modules similar to NJIT�s might be adapted to their facilities and resources. Attendees received handouts on specific modules, and NJIT offered additional assistance that would include on-site visits to the community colleges throughout the summer.

Having a more "macro" focus, the June 26 seminar centered on the program management logistics employed by NJIT to interface Engineering Design, Oral and Written Communication, and Computer skills into an integrated and multidisciplinary program. The goal was to create a learning environment that is more facilitative than lecture-oriented, where students actively collaborate in small groups, practice communication tasks, and research solutions to practical problems. Focuses included

• the role of computing in the freshman engineering curriculum, including using word processors, presentation software, and technical applications such as Excel, MathCAD, and C++;
• curriculum reform in introductory computing;
• integrating computer skills into engineering projects;
• program requirements in oral and written communication.

NJIT is committed to assisting interested community colleges in optimizing their pre-Engineering programs. It offers the

support of both its faculty and its facilities to disseminate a multidisciplinary approach to engineering education. ¨

For more information, contact:

The College of Engineering at USC hosted several seminars for faculty, staff, and graduate students. The topics included portfolio assessment, ethics and engineering education, and undergraduate engineering laboratories.

Barbara Olds from the Colorado School of Mines presented a one-hour overview of portfolio assessment. She introduced the concept of portfolios, discussed the Colorado School of Mines� 10-year experiment in portfolio assessment, presented some of the advantages and disadvantages of using portfolios, shared some lessons she has learned as a result of the program, and answered questions from the audience.

Olds also conducted a workshop, during which participants had an opportunity to design a sample portfolio by defining program objectives and competency levels. The participants also had a chance to develop a list of portfolio contents, discuss how to grade portfolios, and learn how to use assessment results to improve teaching and learning. The audience received a variety of handouts, including scoring rubrics, key articles on portfolio assessment, and sample portfolio materials.

Mark Shields, a sociologist of science and technology at the University of Virginia, presented a seminar about ways to integrate ethics into technical engineering education. He discussed the following issues:

• Defining engineering ethics,
• Ways ethics is important for professional development,
• Issues involved with teaching engineering ethics,
• Assessing the outcomes of teaching ethics, and
• Benefits for the professional development of engineers.

Drawing on the engineering ethics program developed by faculty in the Division of Technology, Culture, and Communication at the University of Virginia School of Engineering and Applied Science, Shields discussed how specific program elements might be implemented in undergraduate engineering education at USC.

Ed Ernst, Gateway Governing Board member from USC, gave a seminar on defining appropriate objectives for the undergraduate laboratory and determining their impact on the lab program. The discussion also focused on resolving varied concerns about this segment of engineering education.

During his presentation, Ernst set the context for engineering laboratories by discussing their history and problems that have developed, such as inadequate resources and student apathy. Then, he presented several objectives for discussion. Objectives for students included learning to do experimental work and understanding the real world of engineering. Faculty objectives entailed continuing professional development and strengthening instructional strategies.

Ernst raised other issues such as resources and costs required to maintain an effective laboratory and related these concerns to the laboratory sequence at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He provided examples from this program as a model. ¨