Short, Instructional Modules for Lifelong Learning,
Project Management, Teaming, and Time Management
Beth A. Todd1, Marcus Brown2, Russell Pimmel3, and James Richardson4
Abstract
Criteria 3 of ABET 2000 includes professional skills that have not traditionally been explicitly taught
in undergraduate engineering programs. In addition the criterion related to “modern engineering tools
necessary for engineering practice” provides for the instruction of a wide range of topics that are
useful for the young engineer. Engineering faculty have limited experience and resources on teaching
professional skills. Most engineering programs do not have the luxury of adding a professional skills
course to their already overcrowded curriculum. Therefore, a suite of modules has been developed for
the professional skills of lifelong learning, project management, teaming, and time management. Each
module has been designed to fit within three 50-minute class periods in a standard course and
includes bridge material to transition back to the original course. Each module was beta-tested by
another instructor with a multi-disciplinary group of student evaluators. The beta-testing was done
as a highly controlled stand-alone experience instead of part of a regular class. Many of these
modules have not yet been used in the traditional classroom. Overall, the students had a positive
reaction to each of the modules. Details of each of the modules and specific results of the beta-testing
are included in the paper. While the modules are still undergoing improvement, they are at a stage
where they can be used by other faculty.
Thus, the modules are available at
http://ece.ua.edu/faculty/rpimmel/public_html/ec2000-modules.
Introduction
With the evolution of ABET 2000 and the development of Criteria 3 (a)-(k), every engineering program
must demonstrate their graduates’ abilities in certain areas. (ABET, 2000) Some of the skills included
in these criteria have not traditionally been taught in undergraduate engineering curricula, and
faculty have limited experience and resources in trying to teach these skills. The mandate for
“modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice” leads to the need for exposure to
additional professional skills. In particular, professional skills such as lifelong learning, project
management, teaming, and time management are often difficult to demonstrate in our curricula.
Since most engineering programs do not have the luxury of adding an additional course on
professional skills, a short module on each of these topics has been developed. Each module has
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
2
Department of Computer Science, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
3
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa,
Alabama
4
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
1
been designed to fit in three 50-minute class periods in a standard course. So, for instance, the
module on time management could be included in the first engineering course. The module on
teaming could be included in the first course where team projects are assigned. The lifelong learning
module could be included in a junior year course, and the project management module could be used
in the first semester of the senior year. Although each of these modules would take about a week of
lecture away from a course, an improvement in the students’ abilities should be seen further along in
the curriculum that would justify the time spent.
Each module is organized to provide instruction on the skill and associated tools as well as an
opportunity to practice using the skill. This progressive development follows the format for teaching
skills suggested by Woods et al (1997), where a skill is introduced in a context-free environment and
then bridged and extended into the discipline material. Each module also provides for instruction
followed by practice with evaluation and feedback—an approach considered essential in teaching a
skill (Seat et al, 1999).
Each module contains a set of PowerPoint slides to be used or adapted for direct use in the classroom.
The classroom material incorporates active and cooperative learning exercises.
There is an
instructor’s guide with background information on the topic, suggested in-class and homework
assignments, and some suggestions for grading assignments on “soft” skills. Description of the
contents of each of the four modules is presented below.
Lifelong Learning
The lifelong learning module consists of three sets of PowerPoint slides and the instructor’s guide. The
introductory portion of the module has significantly more material than most instructors can cover in
three 50-minute class periods, so it is up to the instructor to select material at his or her own
discretion. This module assumes that the student has not had any previous instruction in the area of
lifelong learning. However, experience with using this material in the classroom has shown that older,
non-traditional students approach this material with additional wisdom than students in their early
20’s. Several example topics for homework assignments are included in the instructor’s guide, and
the instructor may want to consider the background of the students before making an assignment.
After discussion with other faculty and practicing engineers, we decided that there are two
fundamental aspects of lifelong learning: 1) knowing how to learn new material without taking a
formal course or earning another degree, and 2) understanding what types of continuing education are
available after graduation. The lifelong learning module was developed to focus on both of these
issues. After completing this module, students should be able to:
a. Explain the importance of lifelong learning in an engineering or computer science career
b. Describe a process for learning new material
c. Identify what they need to learn for a given situation
d. Find appropriate resources in the library and on the web
e. List sources for continuing education opportunities
f.
Assess their academic and professional development
g. Demonstrate that they can learn material on their own for a given assignment
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
2
The class-periods are organized such that objectives a, b, and d are covered the first day, objectives c,
e, and f are covered during the second and third days, and objective g is related to the bridge
assignment to take them back to their course material.
The justification for the study of lifelong learning includes avoiding obsolescence (Marra et al, 1999;
SAE International, 2001), the need to adapt to a changing society, annual employment evaluations
(Wolff, 2000), employer surveys (Benefield et al, 1997), and ABET (ABET, 2000). This portion of the
PowerPoint slides becomes quite repetitive, and the instructor will probably want to use a subset of
the justification provided.
Following the justification and learning objectives, the first day’s class continues with the development
of the steps in the process of self-learning. Students are divided into teams for a cooperative learning
exercise where they brainstorm on what these steps might be. After several teams report back to the
class, a list of ‘expert’ steps in the process of self-learning is presented. The first class period ends
with a discussion of sources of information and places to find sources of information. We are defining
sources as things such as building codes, journal articles, newspaper articles, trade magazines,
vendor catalogs, etc. Students tend to think of sources of information as the Internet and the library.
It is crucial for the instructor to emphasize that 1) there are a wide variety of sources of information
that are useful to engineers and computer scientists, and 2) not all of the world’s knowledge is
contained on the Internet. The assignment at the end of the first class is a non-technical learning
assignment where students are required to describe the process that they go through to complete the
assignment and list the specific sources that they used as well as the location of those sources. Six
examples of non-technical learning assignments are included in the instructor’s guide and they
include “Finding an apartment in a new city” and “Investing a large sum of money”.
The second class period begins by discussing the results of the non-technical learning assignment and
reviewing the important points of the first class period. This is followed by a discussion of the process
for becoming a Professional Engineer, types of continuing education that are available following
graduation, and the importance of using technical societies as a source of continuing education. This
is followed by an active learning exercise where students are presented with a technical learning
problem in which they must determine what needs to be learned and what type of continuing
education can be used to learn that information. Six example topics are included in the instructor’s
guide, and these topics will vary by major and level of student. The topics include “automotive safety”
and “nuclear power generation”. Their homework assignment for the second day is to find specific
places for continuing education for the problem that they discussed in class. They are also asked to
bring copies of their resumes for the third class.
The third class period begins with a discussion of the last homework assignment and reviewing the
main points of the second class period. This is followed by a discussion of what employers look for
when hiring entry-level engineers. A couple of sample student resumes for John N. Gine and Sally R.
Tide are included with the module, so that students can compare what John or Sally have to offer with
what may be required in a position. An active learning exercise is given to plan for the types of
professional development John or Sally need to be more competitive in the job market. The students
are asked to go through a similar exercise with their own resume and begin to plan their own career
development.
The instructor’s guide concludes with a discussion of grading rubrics for in-class and homework
assignments. It is important when using in-class exercises that the students feel that this assignment
will impact their grade in some way so that the assignment is completed. There is also discussion on
assessing the impact of the lifelong learning module on the student’s appreciation of lifelong learning.
The instructor’s guide concludes with a listing of references that were used during module
development.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
3
Project Management
The project management module consists of a set of PowerPoint slides that can be divided into three
50-minute class periods and the instructor’s guide. This module assumes that the student has not
had any previous instruction in the area of project management, but having had a project assignment
in a previous class will give them some perspective on the skills that they are learning.
After completing this module, students should be able to:
a. Discuss the importance of project management techniques in modern industry
b. Define a project
c. Describe measures used to evaluate a project’s success, a project life-cycle, and the tools
used in planning and managing a project
d. Define, describe, and use work breakdown structures and linear responsibility charts
e. Define, describe, and use activity networks and Gantt charts
Justification for the study of project management skills comes from the needs of industry, as well as
the fact that many engineering courses contain projects. Although ABET does not explicitly require
our students to receive exposure to project management, it does require a capstone design experience,
which typically is given to students in the form of a project. Project management skills also fall under
the “ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice”.
In the first class, the instructor introduces students to project management, measures of project
success, the project life-cycle, and management tools. This material is introduced with a set of
PowerPoint slides and three in-class team exercises. Each of these team exercises will require about
ten minutes to complete. In the first exercise, students are asked to write a one-sentence definition of
a project. They are then presented with a variety of definitions as well as a list of project features.
The second exercise asks students to list several measures of a project’s success. Again, they are
presented with lists developed by professionals in project management. Following a mini-lecture on
life cycle and time and resource management, students are asked to list types of management tools for
planning and monitoring projects. They are then presented with a list of tools that will be discussed
during the second and third classes. Several suggested homework assignments for either individuals
or teams are included in the instructor’s guide.
Project management tools that are studied in the second class period are work breakdown structures
and linear responsibility charts. There are several PowerPoint slides that discuss each of these tools,
and students begin to use them in team exercises related to a hypothetical project. These advanced
project management tools require more in depth explanation, so it takes some time to cover these two
topics.
The third class period continues with the study of activity networks and Gantt charts. Several
PowerPoint slides contain a description of each of these tools along with a team exercise on each.
Once again it takes some time to explore each of these advanced tools in depth.
The instructor’s guide concludes with a discussion of grading rubrics for in-class and homework
assignments.
Students will take the in-class exercises much more seriously if individual
accountability is built into the activity. Randomly selecting a few students to report the result of their
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
4
team’s deliberations to the entire class is a simple approach for providing individual accountability.
There is also discussion on assessing the impact of the project management module. The instructor’s
guide concludes with a listing of web sites that were used during module development.
Teaming
The teaming module contains the same type of information as the other three modules, but it is
organized somewhat differently. It contains an instructor’s guide, a set of student handouts, and a
lesson plan and set of PowerPoint slides for each of the three class periods. The three class periods
are arranged around the topics of 1) Why Learn Team Skills?, 2) work styles, and 3) team norms. The
main purpose of these three class periods is to train the students to work in teams. The instructor’s
guide provides additional material to assist the instructor with the challenges of teaching teams of
students.
After completing the module, the students should be able to
a. Explain why it’s important to learn team skills
b. Discuss the advantages of people with diverse abilities and work styles working together
c. Explain that i) people have different work styles and ii) team members with different work
styles may miscommunicate and clash initially
d. Discuss potential conflicts that may occur due to different work styles
e. Describe several strategies for avoiding or controlling these conflicts
f.
Explain what team norms are and what they do
g. List several typical team norms
h. Develop explicit team norms for their team
The class-periods are organized such that objectives a and b are covered the first day, objectives c-e
are covered on the second day, and objectives f-h are covered on the third day.
The justification for team skills is demonstrated to the students through an exercise. The first class
begins with a mini-lecture on why engineers need team skills and attributes of effective and ineffective
teams. The class is then given the “Lost on the Moon” exercise to complete first as individuals and
then in teams. (A copy of the “Lost on the Moon” exercise is included in the module.) The class
concludes with a discussion of why the teams scored better than the individuals on this exercise. The
assignment for the second class includes readings on work styles and active listening, the MyersBriggs personality inventory, and the Work Style Questionnaire, which are included with the module.
The second class begins by the instructor collecting the homework and showing the class the diversity
of personality types among the students. It is important that the instructor use this as an opportunity
to emphasize the importance of having diverse personalities on a team so that no one feels that their
personality is inferior or inappropriate for engineering. This includes a mini-lecture on the meaning of
the personality indicators. The class is divided into eight teams (assuming that there are enough
students), one for each of the eight personality types. The teams are each asked to list what they like
about the personality type represented by their team and what they don’t like about the opposite type.
Then the teams are asked to develop strategies for dealing with conflicts between these personality
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
5
types. Each team then makes a two-minute presentation on their strategy for dealing with conflict.
The assignment for the third class includes readings on Meetings, Structure your Meetings, and
Resolve Conflicts.
The third class begins with a mini-lecture on developing team norms. Students are then asked to
imagine that they have been assigned a three-week project in class and to list the characteristics of
their “dream team”. An example of such a characteristic is “My team begins and ends meetings on
time”. Then students are asked to list the team member characteristics that support the team
characteristics on their list. For instance, “staying focused on meeting tasks” would support the team
characteristic mentioned previously. After listing these characteristics, students share them with
others in the class.
Time Management
The time management module consists of three sets of PowerPoint slides. This module assumes that
the student has not had any formal instruction in time management. The module consists of a series
of exercises on scheduling and goal setting. To be most effective, the module should not be taught in
three consecutive class periods. This will give students the opportunity to reflect on how they manage
their time as they go about the business of their regular coursework.
After completing this module, students should be able to:
a. Set long term and short term goals
b. Know how they are spending their time
c. Arrange typical tasks according to priorities
d. Distinguish between ‘urgent’ and ‘important’ tasks using 4 quadrants
e. Recognize the need to schedule blocks of time
f.
Monitor and evaluate their time usage
g. Apply these skills to typical student time demands
The first assignment in this module is given before the first class. In this assignment, students are
asked to track their usage of time for two days on 15-minute intervals. It is important that this
assignment be given so that their record is for two consecutive week days. Then they are asked to
categorize these small blocks of time so that they can see how they use their time for certain aspects
of their life.
In one class, students learn about goal setting. There is a mini-lecture on the characteristics of good
goals. For homework, they are asked to develop a list of their own goals according to the criteria that
they learned about in class. Then they are to look at their time diary and see if the way that they
spend their time is consistent in meeting their goals.
In another class period, students’ goals are categorized according to urgency and importance. They
spend time discussing in which of these categories they spend the greatest amount of their time. The
third class period is completed with a discussion of scheduling, prioritizing, and to do lists.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
6
Module Testing
A testing program was created for these modules. In this program, each module was taught by an
instructor who did not develop the module. A group of engineering students in the sophomore
through senior level with a range of GPAs and a variety of majors was hired to be the evaluators of the
module. Six to 12 students took each of the modules. In addition the module developer and another
faculty evaluator sat quietly in the back of the room and evaluated the module. Students and
evaluators were given a series questionnaires for the particular module that they were working on.
Some evaluators were given a series of questionnaires for a different module so that they would act as
a control group. Many of the questions were rated on a 5-point strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree
(5) scale. Results from the evaluation are presented below.
As we evaluated these and other modules, a series of pre-module and post-module questionnaires
were developed based on the learning objectives of the module. Primarily students were asked about
their confidence in performing each of the objectives and whether or not they thought that these
objectives were important in the practice of engineering. The lifelong learning module and project
management module were the first modules evaluated. At this point in time, we had not considered
the importance of having a pre-module questionnaire. Therefore only post-module and control group
results are available for these two modules.
The student evaluations for all of the objectives were averaged and plotted in Figure 1 to show the
overall results.
Students clearly felt more confident about the module objectives following
participation in the project management, time management, and teaming modules. For the lifelong
learning module, there is practically no difference between the results of the control and post-module
groups. However, note that the post-module groups for all of the modules are above 4. Students do
believe that they have a level of competence related to these professional skills after completing the
modules.
project
management
time
management
pre
control
post
teaming
lifelong learning
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Figure 1. Overall evaluation of the professional skills modules.
Results from the project management module are shown in Figure 2. The objectives from this module
have been placed into three categories—each from one of the class days of the module. Students who
took the module show much more confidence in using the project management tools than the control
group students. Twelve students completed the module, and ten students were in the control group.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
7
Material from the project management module has been used in the Electrical and Computer
Engineering Capstone Design course. The material made an important contribution to the students’
development in enabling them to better manage their semester-long project. In particular, it helped in
the identification of subtask sequences and in estimation of the time and effort needed to complete the
subtasks.
project definitions
post
work breakdown schedule and
linear responsibility chart
control
activity network and Gantt chart
0
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 2. Student evaluations of their confidence to perform the project management module
objectives.
Results from the time management module are shown in Figure 3. The objectives from this module
have been placed into three categories. The greatest increase in confidence in this module was with
the objectives related to goal setting. Seven students completed this module, and six were in the
control group.
monitor time
usage
post
pre
set goals
control
apply skills to
student
schedule
0
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 3. Student evaluations of their confidence to perform the time management module objectives.
Results from the teaming module are shown in Figure 4. The objectives from this module have been
placed into three categories--each from one of the class days of the module. The greatest increase in
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
8
confidence in this module was with the understanding of the value of working in a team.
students completed this module, and ten were in the control group.
Nine
Material from the teaming module has been used in the Electrical and Computer Engineering
Capstone Design course as well as a senior level course in computer architecture. The projects in
these courses progressed better with the team training than in earlier semesters when it was not
done.
importance of
team skills
post
exploring work
styles
pre
control
developing team
norms
0
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 4. Student evaluations of their confidence to perform the teaming module objectives.
Results from the lifelong learning module are shown in Figure 5. The objectives from this module
have been placed into three categories. In ‘demonstrating the learning process’ and ‘determining what
they needed to learn’, the post-module students were slightly more confident than the control group.
However, the control group was more confident in its ability to find resources for learning new
information. Note that both groups are in the ‘Agree’ to ‘Strongly agree’ range when describing their
ability to meet these objectives. This figure may be showing that the traditional engineering
curriculum is already fulfilling the needs of the students to appreciate and engage in lifelong learning.
Ten students completed this module, and twelve were in the control group.
Material from the lifelong learning module has been used for four semesters in Mechanical
Engineering Design I, and it was used once in Dynamic Machine Components, both senior level
courses in mechanical engineering. It has also been used at least two semesters in Foundations of
Engineering I, an introductory multi-disciplinary engineering course.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
9
describe/demonstrate
learning process
post-module
determine what is to
be learned
control
find learning
resources
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 5. Student evaluations of their confidence to perform the lifelong learning module objectives.
Conclusion
Modules to be used in three class periods in a standard course have been created on the topics of
lifelong learning, project management, teaming, and time management. Each module contains a set
of PowerPoint slides, an instructor’s guide, suggested homework assignments, and additional
materials for a faculty member who would be interested in using the modules. A preliminary draft of
each of the modules except for time management is available for use by other faculty. The modules
can be accessed at
http://www.ece.ua.edu/faculty/rpimmel/public_htlm/ec2000-modules.
The authors are very interested in receiving feedback from anyone who uses the modules, and our
contact information is available at the end of the paper.
Each of the modules has been beta-tested with a randomly selected group of engineering students in
various majors. Results of this usage show that the students had a positive reaction to the modules
and they had confidence in their ability to meet each of the modules’ learning objectives.
References
ABET,
(2000)
Criteria
for
Accrediting
http://www.abet.org/images/eac_criteria_b.pdf, January 1, 2002.
Engineering
Programs,
Benefield et al, (1997), “Quality Improvement in College of Engineering Instructional Programs”, J. Eng.
Ed. 86:57-64.
Dym, C.L. and P. Little, (2000) Engineering Design – A Project-Based Approach, Wiley.
Lientz, L. and K Rea, (1995), Project Management for the 21st Century, Academic Press.
Marra, R.M., K.Z. Camplese, T.A. Ligzinger, (1999), “Lifelong Learning: A Preliminary Look at the
Literature in View of EC 2000”, Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1, 11a1.7-11a1.12.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
10
Pinto, J. K. and O. P. Kharbanda, (1995), The Age of Project Management, Van Nostrand Reinhold.
SAE, International, (2001) SAE Engineering Academies, http://www.sae.org/contedu/academy.htm,
June 8, 2001.
Seat et al, (1999), “Enabling EffectiveTeams: A Program for Effective Interaction Skills”, J. Eng. Ed., 88:
385-90.
Smith, K.A., (2000) Project Management and Teamwork, McGraw-Hill.
Woods et al., (1997), Developing Problem Solving Skills: The McMaster Problem Solving Program”, J. Eng.
Ed., 86:74-91.
Wolff, Shelley A.M., (2000) “Perspectives on Lifelong Learning: HNTB’s Career Development Center”,
Proceedings, Society of Women Engineers National Conference, Washington DC.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by NSF Award Number EEC-9802942.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
11
Beth A. Todd, Ph.D.
Beth Todd is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the
University of Alabama. She received her B.S. degree in Engineering Science from Penn State
University and her graduate degrees in Applied Mechanics and Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering from the University of Virginia. Dr. Todd’s area of research is in biomedical
engineering, primarily related to the design of assistive technology and orthopedic
biomechanics. She is the primary developer of the module on lifelong learning. Dr. Todd can
be contacted at btodd@coe.eng.ua.edu.
Marcus Brown, Ph.D.
Marcus Brown is an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
University of Alabama. He received a B.A. degree in chemistry and a M.Div. from Abilene
Christian University. His Ph.D. in computer science is from Texas A&M University. His
research deals with the human-computer interface. He is the primary developer of the module
on time management. Dr. Brown can be contacted at mbrown@cs.ua.edu.
Russ Pimmel, Ph.D.
Russ Pimmel is a Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the
University of Alabama. He received his BSEE degree from St. Louis University and his
graduate degrees in electrical engineering from Iowa State University. Dr. Pimmel’s area of
research is in artificial neural networks and computer architecture. He is currently on leave
from Alabama to the National Science Foundation. Dr. Pimmel is the primary developer of the
module on project management. He can be reached at rpimmel@coe.eng.ua.edu.
Jim Richardson, Ph.D., P.E.
Jim Richardson is an Associate Professor in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the
University of Alabama. He received his BSCE degree from University of California-Davis and
his graduate degrees in civil engineering from the University of Nevada-Reno. Dr. Richardson’s
area of research is in structural engineering. He is the primary developer of the module on
teaming. Dr. Richardson can be reached at jrichardson@coe.eng.ua.edu.
ASEE Southeast Section Conference
12