1 / 27

The Dismantling of the Engineering Education Pipeline

The Dismantling of the Engineering Education Pipeline. Amelito Enriquez Kate Disney Erik Dunmire. Community Colleges in California represent 33% of the Engineering Pipeline. CSU. 41%. 33%. CCC. 23%. UC. Estimates from CPEC data. But the pipeline is in peril.

fayola
Download Presentation

The Dismantling of the Engineering Education Pipeline

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Dismantling of the Engineering Education Pipeline Amelito Enriquez Kate Disney Erik Dunmire

  2. Community Colleges in California represent 33% of the Engineering Pipeline CSU 41% 33% CCC 23% UC Estimates from CPEC data.

  3. But the pipeline is in peril • Erosion of the lower division core curriculum is causing diminished viability of CC engineering programs • Damage to the Engineering Education Pipeline will in turn lead to a substantial reduction in the number and diversity of engineering graduates.

  4. Overview • Definition of the lower division Core • Inconsistency in transfer requirements • Impacts to CC Engineering Programs • Accessto engineering is now more limited • Attempted and Proposed Solutions

  5. The Core • The Core = A Common Set of Lower-Division Courses Required for Transfer to All Majors at All Institutions • Courses: Calculus I, II, III, Diff Eqns, Chem IA, IB, Physics IA, IB, IC Engineering: Intro, Graphics, Statics, Materials, Circuits Computer Programming • At one time, most institutions required most of the core for engineering students.

  6. Gradual Erosion of The Core • Increases in specialization • New disciplines added • Limits on the total units for a degree push discipline specific content into lower division • Need for institutional requirements and general education • Accreditation requirements allow for greater flexibility

  7. Diversity Among Majors (UCB) R = Recommended X = Required 1 choose one 2 choose two 3 choose three 4 specialized Civil Materials course only

  8. Diversity in Content (Programming) - Major not offered 0. No required course 1. C 2. C++ 3. Fortran 4. Java 5. Python 6. C/MATLAB 7. Excel/MATLAB 8. MATLAB problem-solving focus 9. MATLAB programming 10. Other

  9. Diversity Among Institutions (Civil) R = Recommended X = Required 1 choose one 2 combined course 3 Careers/soft skills 4 Design 5 specialized Intro to Civil only 6 specialized Civil Materials course only 7 microelectronic circuits

  10. Hypothetical Enrollment Scenario • Goal: Estimate Engineering Course Enrollments at an • Individual Community College • Assumptions: • 25 total transfer students per year • Students take all courses required or recommended for transfer • Distributions of majors & universities typical of SF Bay Area • Major Distribution: • 20% Civil • 15% Computer • 20% Electrical • 30% Mechanical • Institution Distribution • 20% UCB • 20% UCD • 20% SFSU • 40% SJSU

  11. Enrollment Scenario Analysis BUT…Required course content varies, so this is optimistic!

  12. CC Engr Course Enrollmentsfor Statics + Materials + Circuits06-07 Academic year

  13. Domino Effect of Cancelling Engineering Entire core is threatened • Calculus • Differential Equations • Linear Algebra • Physics

  14. More than half of students inCalc III, Diff. Eqns., Linear Algebra, Physics 1A, 1B, 1C are estimated to be Engineering Majors

  15. Size Distribution of CC Engr Programsin Terms of Annual Transfers to UC & CSU

  16. Collectively the CCs transfer a large number of students 2008 UC & CSU Bachelor Degrees 47% 56% 33% 41% 30% 23%

  17. Future Impacts • Given current trends, … • CCs will experience cancellation of courses and programs • CC students will experience greater obstacles and no • exposure to Engineering • Fewer opportunities for students to overcome a mediocre K-12 • education • UC & CSU Engineering programs will experience declines in: • Number of transfers • Success of transfers • Diversity of graduates

  18. Our Engineering Hopefuls

  19. Engineering courses occasionally cancelled due to low enrollments

  20. Few Engineering Courses offered at the CC

  21. More leave because there are not enough opportunities to make up for deficiencies in their high school preparation.

  22. More leave major because of increases in cost

  23. Engineering program discontinued

  24. Physics course-offerings decline, and the few hold-outs are gone.

  25. Possible Solutions • Program-to-Program articulation • Regional standardization • A redesigned engineering core • Add CC feedback into the accreditation process

  26. Afternoon Workshop • Bring your perspective • Ideas

More Related