OSU College of Engineering Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs Forum Christine Kelly November 28, 2012

History BS ChE, University of Arizona Process Engineer, Tate and Lyle PhD ChE, University of Tennessee Assistant Professor, Syracuse University Associate Professor, Oregon State

Role, Responsibilities, Vision Objectives

Potential (and sometimes conflicting) Objectives Enable underrepresented populations (women and minorities) Student learning of curricular content Improve retention 4 year graduation rate Professional skills and habits Work-ready

Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs (3 modes of activities) Serve faculty AdministrateInitiate

Example….Academic Dishonesty Serve Faculty -Lower barriers for faculty to identify and report academic dishonesty Administrate – comply with and develop academic dishonesty policies Initiate – understand and change student motivations for academic dishonesty

Concrete Activities – Academic Dishonesty Administrate Maintain database and documentation of academic dishonesty cases Meet with students File reports with University Serve Faculty Identify impact of types of assessment on academic dishonesty Demonstrate support for faculty who decide to report Facilitate the use of antiplagiarism software (training ) “Save-able” on-line reporting form Initiate Learning sciences literature for motivation and causes of academic dishonesty Develop strategy/pilot program to change culture to reduce incidents

Serve faculty – by lowering barriers Administrate – by efficiently complying with policies and procedures Initiate – by collecting and analyzing data to understand and test root causes In general, with challenges and opportunities facing COE, this position should…

Large Enrollment ABET Experiential Learning

Large Enrollment Serve Faculty Best practices TA training Administrate - ENGR - Classrooms Initiate Initiate to Excel Despite Large Enrollments Initiate a community of practice to share strategies and techniques Pilot and implement a flexible common first year (unload units with large populations) Consider and study an appropriate first year gate to reduce 2 nd year class sizes, and to reduce student frustration at pro- school limitations

Flexible Common First Year Pilot themes (sustainable energy, human health, etc.) across ENGR disciplines in undecided first year engineering classes in 2013 Better distribution of students across programs Improve retention among underrepresented populations Facilitate a better student:major fit Communicate pro-school realities - reduce second year class sizes

ABET Serve Faculty - Standardize - TA training Administrate - Self-study preparation - Site visit Initiate Initiate for Useful ABET Develop meaningful assessment of teaching and learning Understand what students learn (not what we teach) Integrate practice with requirements Ensure intuitive, practiced feedback loops

Experiential Learning Service and global learning, internships, student research OSU commitment to experiential learning – Activation of higher thinking processes – Integration of knowledge – Improves retention, especially of underrepresented populations

Experiential Learning Serve Faculty - Internship coordinators/ industry relations Administrate - Student groups - MECOP Initiate Initiate to Achieve Excellence in Experiential Learning Value faculty effort toward experiential learning activities* Initiate collaborative global and service learning opportunities with partners across campus (e.g. Center for Civic Engagement, OSU Hydrophiles, International Programs) In collaboration with industry relations and foundation, develop strategies to increase internship opportunities

Large Enrollment ABET Experiential Learning - Administrate - Serve faculty -Initiate - Administrate - Serve faculty -Initiate - Administrate - Serve faculty -Initiate

Compelling Questions Can cross unit peer teaching evaluations reduce barriers, encourage best practices, and engage communities of practice to fertilize learning? Are we prepared for INTO impacts? Can we develop an “opportunity” perspective regarding INTO? What does retention mean in the era of large pro- school denials? How do we enable underrepresented populations? Does mastery-based assessment have a larger role in large class environments?

Objectives Revisited Teaching Enable underrepresented populations Student learning retention 4 year graduation rate Professional skills Work-ready Research Mentor graduate students Scholarship Publications Research funding Commercialization Broader Topics Inform policy Set national research priorities Faculty governance

Qualifications Experiential Educational research (JEE) Co-wrote BIOE ABET self-study Co-director SESEY (recruitment under represented groups) Pre-med advisor National Student Design Competition (WERC) Taught ENGR and honors courses Characteristics Student focused Value diverse motivations of my colleagues Detail oriented and responsive High energy and enthusiastic Organized Motivation Delight in student growth and learning Passion for opening engineering to underrepresented groups Enjoy working with others toward a common goal

Impacts of INTO Intersection with impacts of large enrollment – Teachers have less time for students with special needs, but more students with special needs Culture differences around academic dishonesty Some INTO students communications skills (speaking, writing) quite low INTO student expectation vs. reality (units have perceived little control about claims prior to enrollment) Perception of domestic students on teams with INTO students (workload unfairly increases) Tendency to cluster – impact on English development New paradigm of a large M.Eng. populations – will faculty value and serve this population?

OregonU.S. Under- represented Group Representation among OSU 2011 Engineering Graduates Representation among Oregon’s Population Representation among U.S Engineering Graduates Representation within the U.S. Population Female16.6%50.5%18.4%50.8% Hispanic2.5%12.0%7.9%16.7% Native American 1.0%1.8%0.4%1.2% African American 0.5%2.0%3.9%13.1%

OSU Bachelor's Degree Awarded by Discipline 2011 Degree Total Number of Graduates Number of Women Percentage of Women Biological161063% Chemical491939% Environmental8338% Nuclear18422% Industrial/Manufacturing38821% Civil901517% Electrical and Computer641016% CEM991010% Mechanical9489% Computer Science7568%