Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006

1. Developing a Corporate Feedback System for Use in Curricular Reform The Use Process Stability Principles in the analysis of Engineering Curricula based on Cooperative Education Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006 Kettil Cedercreutz, Associate Provost and Director Cheryl Cates, Associate Director

2. Part One The UC FIPSE Project

3. Overview Co-op at UC

4. Progressive Learning Objectives Professional Contribution & Change Generation Exploration Foundation F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior

5. F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior Alternating Sections Section II 1 2 3 4 5/6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Section I

6. DAAP Engineering Applied Science Business Arts and Sciences 1,500 Companies One Stop Structure Professional Practice

7. 24 Faculty Academic Division Professional Practice

8. 6 5 Continuous Improvement 3 4 2 Other Feedback 1 Reporting Curriculum & Pedagogy Employer Feedback 1 2 3 4 5 6 F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior Feedback and Continuous Improvement

9. Gathering the Data

10. Assessment Instrument III Focus Groups Assessment Instrument II Assessment Instrument I Photo Courtesy of Nokia

11. Measured Parameters (AI I): Developed in Relation to ABET a…k

12. Measured Parameters (AI I): A COMMUNICATION: - Speaks with clarity and confidence - Writes clearly and concisely - Makes effective presentations - Exhibits good listening and questioning skills  B CONCEPTUAL/ANALYTICAL ABILITY: - Evaluates situations effectively - Solves problems/makes decisions - Demonstrates original and creative thinking - Identifies and suggests new ideas   C LEARNING/THEORY AND PRACTICE: - Learns new material quickly - Accesses and applies specialized knowledge - Applies classroom learning to work situations  

13. Measured Parameters (AI I): D PROFESSIONAL QUALITIES:- Assumes responsibility/accountable for actions - Exhibits self-confidence - Possesses honesty/integrity/personal ethics - Shows initiative/is self-motivated - Demonstrates a positive attitude toward change  E TEAMWORK: - Works effectively with others - Understands and contributes to the organization’s goals - Demonstrates flexibility/adaptability - Functions well on multidisciplinary team   F LEADERSHIP: - Gives direction, guidance and training - Motivates others to succeed - Manages conflict effectively 

14. Measured Parameters (AI I): G TECHNOLOGY: - - Uses technology, tools, instruments and information - Understands complex systems and their interrelationships - Understands the technology of the discipline   H WORK CULTURE:- Understands and works within the culture of the group - Respects diversity - Recognizes political and social implications of actions I ORGANIZATION/PLANNING: - Manages projects and/or other resources effectively - Sets goals and prioritizes - Manages several tasks at once - Allocates time to meetdeadlines J EVALUATION OF WORK HABITS:- -Professional attitude toward work assigned - Quality of work produced - Volume of work produced - Attendance - Punctuality

15. Assessment Instrument II Assessment Instrument I Photo Courtesy of Nokia

16. Assessment Instrument II Objectives: A Questions by discipline B Questions asked only for short period C Questions focused on curricular issues D Questions asked before and after curricular change

17. Assessment Instrument III Focus Groups Assessment Instrument II Assessment Instrument I Photo Courtesy of Nokia

18. Assessment Instrument III Objectives: A Focus Groups by discipline B Questions focused on curricular issues from AI II C AI II data provides focus group direction D Provides direction to departments

19. Embarking on a New Paradigm

20. Adaptive Cooperative Education Process Development Cycle Input Action Output Outcome Operational Cycle Input Action Output Outcome

21. Discussion Where are you on your campus?

22. Part Two Update on Results

23. Process Stability Analysis

24. Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor 5 Unsatisfactory 4 3 2 1 Acceptable Performance Indicate Problem Grading Scale

25. ResultsLost in Noise !!! Change ΔLearning F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior Low n Values⇒ 4 3 Section I

26. 2003/04 2007 2006 2005 2004 U F W S U F W S U F W S U F W S Coding of Data Acad. Year: Class of: Quarter:

27. 03/04 01/02 02/03 2006 2007 2005 2006 2004 2005 2005 2003 2004 2004 2003 2002 U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S Mean Stnd Dev 4.19 0.73 4.12 0.75 4.18 0.76 Process Stable Statistical Uncertainty ≈ ± 0.10 Three Year Stability / Major A / Engineering Means: 4.16 ± 0.04

28. 03/04 01/02 02/03 2005 2006 2007 2006 2004 2005 2003 2005 2004 2003 2004 2002 U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S U U U F F F W W W S S S MAJOR A / Engineering Three Year Rolling Average Mean 4.31 4.28 N: 612 n: 497 Ret: 81% Uncert: ≈ 0.10 4.03 3.97 88 191 148 70 = Filed Returns Sophm. PreJr. Jr. Sr.

29. Absolute Needs Relative Needs Stability Important Linearity Less Important Calibration & Linearity Important

30. Approach must not Focus on Minutia Approach must be Process Oriented Process Stability Analysis Approach must have Strategic Dimensions There is no short cut to Quality

31. Analysis Methodology

32. Process Stability Analysis Mean / Standard Deviation Matrix I d e a l !!!

33. Delta Mean Chi STDV Matrix Systematic Improvement Serendipitous Improvement Increased Mean Decreased STD Increased STD Systematic Deterioration Serendipitous Deterioration Decreased Mean

34. Preliminary Findings

35. MAJOR A / Engineering EXIT LEVEL Mean Integrity Attendance Works Effectively Punc- tuality Speaking Project Mgmnt Writing Sets Goals Guidance Of others Conflict Mgmnt Motiv. Others Standard Deviation [Chi]

36. Major 1 / Business EXIT LEVEL Mean Punc- tuality Initia- tive Conflict Mgmnt Standard Deviation [Chi]

37. Major A / Engineering EXIT LEVEL Mean Major A / Engineering Exit Profile Standard Deviation [Chi]

38. Major A Engineering Entry Mean Attendance Integrity Works Effectively Punc- tuality Initiative Speaking Task Mgmt Project Mgmnt Writing Sets Goals Conflict Mgmnt Guidance Of others Motiv. Others Standard Deviation [Chi]

39. Major A Engineering Entry / Exit Mean Major A / Engineering Exit Profile Major A/ Engineering Entry Profile Standard Deviation [Chi]

40. ExitProfiles Major 1 Business [Optional] Major A Engineering [Mandatory] Mean Mean STD STD More Homogeneous Population More Heterogeneous Population Specialized Curricular Focus General Curricular Focus

41. Major 1 / Engineering Change Increased Mean Decreased STD Increased STD

42. Major 1 / Engineering Change Sets Goals Curriculum Initiated Learning Student Initiated Learning New Ideas Writing Speaking Professi- onalism Conflict Mgmnt Learns Quickly

43. Summary: - All Parameters Go Up - Approach can be developed into Program Fingerprint - Apples and Oranges - Every “Set of Employers” has its specific value system - Instrument is Relative - Can be used to Map Best Practices

44. Discussion Where do we go from here?

46. Cincinnati April 23 – 26, 2005

47. Dean Herman Schneider 1872 -1939 University of Cincinnati FIPSE Symposium Cincinnati April 25 – 26, 2005 Teams By Invitation Only Some Funding Available

48. Developing a Corporate Feedback System for Use in Curricular Reform The Use Process Stability Principles in the analysis of Engineering Curricula based on Cooperative Education Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006 Kettil Cedercreutz, Associate Provost and Director Cheryl Cates, Associate Director