DOC PREVIEW
MSU ECE 480 - Case Study

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 7 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Reprint: Proceedings of the 1997 Frontiers in Education Conferenc ,Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 215-219 (Nov. 5-8, 1997)Cross-Functional Teaming in a Capstone Engineering Design CourseDiane T. Rover and P. David FisherDepartment of Electrical EngineeringMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing, MI 48824-1226Abstract - This paper describes a cross-functional teamingapproach used in a computer-engineering capstone designcourse. Students are grouped into two sets of interdependentteams, “design teams” and “skill teams.” While designinga product, students acquire an understanding of the needfor lifelong learning and the need to depend upon eachother for critical skills and knowledge necessary to ensureoverall project success.Design teams are formed for the entire semester. Eachteam works on a specific engineering design project thatinvolves the collaborative development and evaluation of a“product” containing an embedded computer. Skill teams are formed from representatives of eachdesign team. These team members acquire specific skillsand knowledge needed to ensure success within theindividual design projects. Skill teams are highly focused.For example, one team learns how to use Microsoft’sPowerPoint presentation software tools. These teammembers take this knowledge back to their design teams,instruct design-team members in PowerPoint basics, anduse PowerPoint in team presentations. Other skill teamsfocus on topics such as: management of class and teamactivities; browsing the internet to obtain information aboutembedded-system hardware components, software, designtools, and third-party suppliers; hardware and softwarestandards related to embedded systems; and programmable-logic-device technologies and trends.IntroductionABET is scheduled to begin a three-year phasedimplementation of ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 (ABET2000) with the 1998-99 accreditation cycle; fullimplementation is scheduled with the 2001-02 cycle [1].During the three-year transition period, institutions “mayelect to have their programs evaluated under the currentcriteria or under Engineering Criteria 2000.” In the firstyear of this phased implementation, Michigan StateUniversity is scheduled for the next general review of itsengineering programs. After careful consideration of theopportunities and risks associated with each of the options,the faculty in the Department of Electrical Engineeringvoted to recommend that the department move forward withplans to prepare for its next general review of its electricalengineering program by seeking continued accreditation ofthe program under ABET 2000. It also recommended toseek first-time accreditation of its computer engineeringprogram using this same criteria. With the endorsement ofthe department and college administration, the facultybegan to develop and implement a plan to comply withABET 2000 for the 1998-99 accreditation cycle. Early faculty activities related to developing andimplementing this plan focused on the followinginterrelated initiatives. The faculty:- benchmarked selected academic programs at otherinstitutions for the purpose of evaluating our majorengineering design experience because engineeringdesign was perceived by some faculty as a possibleweakness in both the existing electricalengineering and computer engineering programs;- identified a set of key employers of our graduatesand formed an “Employer Stakeholder FocusGroup” to advise the faculty as programeducational objectives and assessment strategieswere developed; and- developed a “working set” of electrical engineeringand computer engineering program educationalobjectives, to be used in evaluating the existingprograms against ABET 2000. A thorough review of the computer engineeringprogram was undertaken by the Computer Engineering TaskForce, comprised of faculty from both the ElectricalEngineering and Computer Science departments. One resultof these initial activities was the restructuring of thecomputer engineering capstone design course, a courserequired for all computer engineering majors. This paperdescribes this newly revised course and places theserevisions in the context of ABET 2000 [1] and the baselinecomputer engineering curriculum at Michigan StateUniversity [2]. 1Reprint: Proceedings of the 1997 Frontiers in Education Conferenc ,Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 215-219 (Nov. 5-8, 1997)Initial Findings and OutcomesBenchmarking Engineering DesignAs part of the process of benchmarking major engineeringdesign, twelve representative institutions were surveyed. Thestudy was interested in determining how ABET’s majorengineering design requirement was interpreted and howdifferent institutions fulfilled this requirement. Oneoverarching finding in this study was that there is greatvariability in the way different institutions interpret this ABET requirement, as well as how this major engineeringdesign experience is incorporated into the curriculum.Significant results of the study include the following. - Some programs identify a specific course as thecourse where students gain their major engineeringdesign experience; others identify a sequence ofcourses; and still others point to the curriculum asa whole.- Some programs rely heavily on industrial advisors;others have little on no formal involvement withindustry on student design projects.- While most programs contain some form of majordesign project, considerable variability occurs withteaming, oral and written communications,realistic design constraints, and engineeringethics.This benchmarking exercise suggested that our approach ofoffering a one-credit capstone course on professionalism,communications, and ethics followed by a four-creditcapstone design course was not out of line with thepractices at other institutions or with the intent of


View Full Document

MSU ECE 480 - Case Study

Documents in this Course
ganttv1

ganttv1

6 pages

sd97

sd97

17 pages

ap_EO

ap_EO

14 pages

Load more
Download Case Study
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Case Study and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Case Study 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?