Asee ciec conference phoenix az february 6 10 2013
Download
1 / 61

ASEE CIEC Conference Phoenix, AZ, February 6-10, 2013 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 123 Views
  • Uploaded on

Industry Involvement in Developing Soft Skills for Students in the College of Engineering at Cal Poly Pomona. ASEE CIEC Conference Phoenix, AZ, February 6-10, 2013. Dr. Norali Pernalete, Dr. Cordelia Ontiveros and Dr. Phil Rosenkrantz,

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' ASEE CIEC Conference Phoenix, AZ, February 6-10, 2013' - hafwen


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Asee ciec conference phoenix az february 6 10 2013

Industry Involvement in Developing Soft Skills for Students in the College of Engineering at Cal Poly Pomona

ASEE CIEC ConferencePhoenix, AZ, February 6-10, 2013

Dr. Norali Pernalete, Dr. Cordelia

Ontiveros and Dr. Phil Rosenkrantz,

California State Polytechnic University, PomonaThomas Cossio, The Boeing Company

Cal Poly Pomona


In memoriam tom cossio director quality integration the boeing company 1962 2013
In MemoriamTom CossioDirector, Quality IntegrationThe Boeing Company1962-2013

Cal Poly Pomona


Cal poly pomona
Cal Poly Pomona

One of the largest engineering programs in California

One of 24 California State University campuses

Over 5000 engineering students, seven departments, 11 undergraduate degrees, 5 masters degrees

Highly ranked among non-research universities

Tournament of Roses Parade float co-built each year with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

Cal Poly Pomona


Outline of presentation 1
Outline of Presentation - 1

  • Senior project symposium used for assessment

  • Added Symposium Survey in 2008 to get higher level assessment data

  • First Year Results

  • Three year initiative for

    • Communications

    • Teamwork

    • Problem Solving

Cal Poly Pomona


Outline of presentation 2
Outline of Presentation - 2

  • Second Year Results

  • Five Year Results and Trends

    • Overall

    • By department

    • By evaluator classification

  •  Conclusion and Future Plans:

    • What worked and what didn’t work

    • Future plans & Ideas

    • Broader Goals

Cal Poly Pomona


Projects symposium day

  • Each Spring approximately 75 industry friends attend Project Symposium Day and evaluate over 200 senior projects.

  • Historically each program uses their own rubrics and processes for evaluation and assessment.

  • In 2008 the College of Engineering Assessment Committee conducted a post-symposium survey of industry representatives to assess seven outcomes from a college-wide perspective.

  • Projects Symposium URL: http://www.csupomona.edu/~engineering/events/symposium/index.htm

Projects Symposium Day

Cal Poly Pomona


Excerpt from typical project presentation assessment rubric
Excerpt from Typical Project Presentation Assessment Rubric Symposium Day and evaluate over 200 senior projects.

Cal Poly Pomona


Project symposium survey
Project Symposium Survey Symposium Day and evaluate over 200 senior projects.

  • On-line survey sent via email to industry representatives that attended the symposium

    • 43 responses in 2008

    • 44 responses in 2009

    • 48 responses in 2010

    • 50 responses in 2011

    • 32 responses in 2012

  • Approximately a 2/3 response

Cal Poly Pomona


Surveymonkey survey designed and sent to symposium attendees
SurveyMonkey Symposium Day and evaluate over 200 senior projects. Survey Designed and Sent to Symposium Attendees

Cal Poly Pomona



Qualities rated on the survey
Qualities Rated on the Survey Department

Knowledge - Ability to apply knowledge of math, science, and engineering

Conduct Experiments - Ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

Design a System - Ability to design a system to meet desired needs

Multidisciplinary Teams - Ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams

Solve Engineering Problems - Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

Communications - Ability to communicate effectively

Use Engineering Tools - Ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

ABET a-e, g, k

Cal Poly Pomona


Average importance for engineering graduates 5 very important
Average importance for engineering graduates? Department(5 = very important)

Cal Poly Pomona



Gap analysis comparison gap effectiveness importance
Gap Analysis Comparison Department(gap = effectiveness – importance)

Cal Poly Pomona


Analysis

Analysis

Cal Poly Pomona


Three year college plan

Annual Themes Adopted in Fall 2008 improvement:

Three-Year College Plan

2008-2009: Communications

2009-2010: Multi-disciplinary Teamwork

2010-2011: Problem Solving

Cal Poly Pomona


2008 2009 communications
2008-2009: Communications improvement:

  • The ability to communicate orally, visually, and in written form

  • Includes critical thinking and comprehension skills as well as interpersonal communication skills

  • Leads up to the teamwork theme in 2009-2010.

Cal Poly Pomona


2009 2010 multi disciplinary teamwork
2009-2010: Multi-disciplinary Teamwork improvement:

  • The ability to perform as an effective team leader or team member in multidisciplinary situations.

  • This theme could align very well with the teamwork approaches found throughout the business world today and embodied in various quality management systems and strategies (e.g., Six Sigma Quality, AS 9100, ISO 9001:2004, etc.).

  • There are several “High Performance Team” models that could be considered and adopted under this theme.

Cal Poly Pomona


2010 2011 problem solving
2010-2011: Problem Solving improvement:

  • Almost every engineer will need problem solving skills.

  • These skills include:

    • Problem identification

    • Prioritizing

    • Root cause analysis

    • Problem diagnosis

    • Creative and innovative problem solving

    • Implementation

Cal Poly Pomona


Communications program 2008 2009

  • “Professor for a Day” panel discussion plus class speakers.

  • Engineering Futures presentation on communications by ΤβΠNational Office

  • Liberal Arts and Science faculty attended Senior Project Presentations. STEM Committee formed to work on joint projects.

  • Three workshops for faculty led by invited experts from inside and outside the COE.

  • Pilot project requiring presenters to provide a one-page abstract usable for immediate assessment of writing skills .

  • Pilot project using English M.A. students to coach students preparing presentations.

Communications Program2008-2009

Cal Poly Pomona


Second assessment cycle 2009

Second Assessment Cycle 2009

Cal Poly Pomona



Average importance for engineering graduates 5 very important1
Average importance for engineering graduates? 2009(5 = very important)

Cal Poly Pomona


Analysis1

Analysis

Cal Poly Pomona



Analysis2

  • Averages dropped in four areas: 2009

    • Ability to design experiments and analyze data

    • Ability to design a system

    • Communications

    • Ability to use engineering tools

  • Averages increased in three areas:

    • Knowledge

    • Multi-disciplinary teams

    • Problem solving

Analysis

Communications dropped the most of all the outcomes assessed

Cal Poly Pomona


Gap analysis comparison
Gap Analysis Comparison 2009

Cal Poly Pomona


Analysis3

Analysis

Communications continues to be one of our areas in need of improvement

Cal Poly Pomona


Q6 how willing would you be to refer someone to the cal poly pomona college of engineering
Q6-How willing would you be to refer someone to the Cal Poly Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Question 6 implications
Question 6 Implications Pomona College of Engineering?

  • 9-10: Promoters – (-12%) People who are selling your programs through word-of-mouth

  • 7-8: Passives – (+10%) People who are satisfied, but have reservations about recommending the program to others. Usually not satisfied with one or more aspects.

  • 1-6: Detractors – (+2%) People who are probably saying negative things about the program.

Cal Poly Pomona


Analysis4

  • Slight decrease in scores using the scale given Pomona College of Engineering?

  • Written comments show strong support and confirm concerns about communications

  • Overall analysis

    • Communication skills are growing in importance

    • Valuable program but:

      • Did not reach enough students or faculty

      • Need to continue and expand

Analysis

Cal Poly Pomona


2009 2010 program multi disciplinary teamwork
2009-2010 Program Pomona College of Engineering?Multi-disciplinary Teamwork

Initial Observations

Team projects are used in many classes but very few teamwork skills are taught

Many students are learning negative teamwork skills as the result of being on dysfunctional teams and witnessing traits like slacking or dominating.

Lack of resources for instructors and students

Difficult to evaluate team member performance

FYE is not enough. More reinforcement at sophomore level.

Cal Poly Pomona


2009 2010 program multi disciplinary teamwork1
2009-2010 Program Pomona College of Engineering?Multi-disciplinary Teamwork

  • Develop a program with the following goals:

    • Develop resources for faculty such as on-line and face-to-face workshop and on-line resources that can be used in class

    • Provide resources for students

    • Collaboration with other colleges to help our students in GE and support courses

  • Results:

    • Held one workshop for faculty

    • One very well attended presentation by alumni

Cal Poly Pomona


2010 2011 program problem solving
2010-2011 Program Pomona College of Engineering?Problem Solving

  • Faculty were too busy preparing for ABET to put in proper effort on this program

  • Ultimate goal is to prepare resources for faculty and students

  • Held one very well attended panel discussion by alumni for students

  • Resources developed but deployed on a limited basis

Cal Poly Pomona


Five year overall results for importance
Five Year Overall Results for Importance Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Overall five year results for effectiveness
Overall Five Year Results for Effectiveness Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Overall gap analysis
Overall Gap Analysis Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Question 6 – Five Year Results Pomona College of Engineering?How willing would you be to refer someone to the Cal Poly Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Department level and position level results
Department Level and Position Level Results Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Industrial manufacturing engineering gap analysis
Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Gap Analysis Pomona College of Engineering?

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of industrial manufacturing engineering results

  • Gap analysis was presented to the IME Department Industrial Advisory Council Members in November 2012.

  • They were asked if the result were valid. The unanimous response was that the results were loud and clear…

  • Communications and teamwork are important for industrial and manufacturing engineers and we need to do a better job.

Interpretation of Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Aerospace engineering gap analysis
Aerospace Engineering Gap Analysis Advisory Council

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of aerospace engineering results

  • Aerospace Engineering Presentations were not traditional senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

  • No noticeable improvement over time

  • Communications had the largest overall gap

  • First three outcomes were large gaps compared to other majors

Interpretation of Aerospace Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Chemical engineering gap analysis
Chemical Engineering Gap Analysis senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of chemical engineering results

Interpretation of Chemical Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Civil engineering gap analysis
Civil Engineering Gap Analysis senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of civil engineering results

  • Based on Large Team Projects senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

  • Communications showed the biggest gap

  • 2011 was an anomaly compared to other years

  • No real trends in the gap results over time

  • Civil was very proactive in improving communications -- need to question effectiveness of efforts

Interpretation of Civil Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Electrical computer engineering gap analysis
Electrical & Computer Engineering Gap Analysis senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of electrical computer engineering results

  • Communications was the largest gap category senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

  • Program had some of the smallest gaps in the college

  • Mixed as to improving or regressing – two categories showed improvement over time and the rest were scattered

Interpretation of Electrical & Computer Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Mechanical engineering gap analysis
Mechanical Engineering Gap Analysis senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of mechanical engineering results

  • Communications the largest gap area senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

  • Some areas seem to have small gaps

  • 2012 showed gaps in areas that had been mostly even or free of gaps

Interpretation of Mechanical Engineering Results

Cal Poly Pomona


Engineering technology gap analysis
Engineering Technology Gap Analysis senior projects—rather were class design projects which probably confounded the results

Cal Poly Pomona


Interpretation of engineering technology results

Interpretation of Engineering Technology Results

Cal Poly Pomona



Interpretation of results by position

  • Engineers were about half of the respondents overall and showed gaps in all areas with communications, problem solving and teamwork being the largest three

  • Supervisors were distinctly different than all other categories showing no gaps

  • Gaps became progressively larger as the position of the management evaluator went up in rank

  • Expectations vary based on perspective…this is worthy of interpretation by various stakeholders

Interpretation of Results by Position

Cal Poly Pomona


What worked

  • Obtained data that was otherwise being ignored showed gaps in all areas with communications, problem solving and teamwork being the largest three

  • Data was useful at the college and department level

  • Some Assessment Coordinators used the feedback to guide department improvement efforts for outcomes

  • Communicated with the College of Letters, Arts & Social Sciences (CLASS) at a meaningful level

  • Showcase and Alumni Presentations were very effective

What Worked

Cal Poly Pomona


What didn t work

  • Results did not reach faculty as effectively as needed for buy-in and continuous improvement

  • Low participation among faculty in communications workshops

  • We did not follow through effectively with CLASS faculty to sustain interaction and effect changes

  • Most departments did not review results with Department Advisory Councils to interpret the results and plan for action

What Didn’t Work

Cal Poly Pomona


Future plans
Future Plans buy-in and continuous improvement

  • Continue assessment program.

  • Keep providing resources for three focus areas that will attract faculty buy-in. Expand reach of programs for both faculty and students with on-line resources that are reusable.

  • Tie into First Year Experience (FYE) programs

  • Strengthen collaboration with Liberal Arts and Science departments

  • Take a long view and be persistent

Cal Poly Pomona


Ideas for improving communications program
Ideas for Improving Communications Program buy-in and continuous improvement

  • Expand and increase seminars for faculty

  • Adopt a default “style guide” to use throughout the COE (Default guide would be used unless instructor or department specifies otherwise).

  • College-wide student competition judged by industry with prizes for the best presentation, written report, and research paper.

  • Expanded used of the Showcase in FYE courses.

Cal Poly Pomona


Other ideas
Other Ideas buy-in and continuous improvement

Choose a book about communications to use throughout the curriculum (at the college or department level). Use in engineering classes to help make it real to the students.

Cal Poly Pomona


Broader goals
Broader Goals buy-in and continuous improvement

  • Establish communications, teamwork, problem solving, and other “soft skill” outcomes threads across undergraduate curriculum:

    • Multi-year

    • Interdepartmental—across the college of engineering

    • Cross-disciplinary—across the campus

  • Requires collaboration with general education suppliers

Cal Poly Pomona


ad