The Grants for the Department-Level Reform of Undergraduate Engineering Education solicitation provides an opportunity for institutions to compete for planning and implementation grants to assist departmental and larger units in:

• Engaging faculty in the scholarship of learning and teaching on a department wide basis,
• Developing, implementing, assessing and disseminating comprehensive plans to reformulate, streamline and update engineering degree programs,                
• Developing, implementing, assessing department wide transformational change of student learning experiences,
• Incorporating Service Learning opportunities into engineering programs,
• Meeting the emerging workforce and educational needs of U.S. industry, and
• Incorporating methods for integration of research and teaching. 

This solicitation is a collaborative effort between the Directorate for Engineering (ENG) and the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR).

This is an opportunity to compete for grants to enable departmental and larger units to reformulate, streamline, and update engineering degree programs, develop new curricula for emerging engineering disciplines, and meet the emerging workforce and educational needs of U.S. industry.  Grants will be available for both planning and implementation efforts.

These efforts should increase both the relevance of undergraduate engineering curricula to modern engineering practice and induce an increased proportion of students who enroll to complete engineering degree programs. This can be accomplished by introducing modern learning strategies, expanding both the disciplinary breadth and the range of problems and problem-solving techniques to which engineering students are exposed, incorporating new laboratories and research experiences, and effectively integrating the powerful software tools used in engineering practice.  

Significant reform on a departmental wide basis can only be built on a solid foundation of understanding of how students learn engineering, how faculty teach engineering and how we can best assess learning. Integration of teaching and research as well continuous faculty development are key to the success of departmental level reform. Cultural change requires active faculty participation and department head leadership.

A unique feature of the solicitation this year is the emphasis on service learning as an important means to enhance student learning outcomes. Industry partners have offered their in-kind support for proposals which include a significant service learning component. See Section IV B.

Overview

The NSF Grants for the Department-Level Reform of Undergraduate Engineering Education solicitation encourages proposals that build on the pioneering efforts of the NSF Engineering Education Coalitions, supports the goals of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, (http://www.abet.org) and reflects advances in the science of learning.

Departments or multiple departments may update and reconstitute elements of the curricula in existing engineering disciplines or invent elements of completely new curricula for emerging engineering disciplines or cross-disciplines.  The proposed efforts should define the interfaces between the new elements and existing programs, and streamline and update course offerings to make the curriculum both more attractive and effective by:

• Introducing emerging knowledge related to information technology, bioengineering, microelectronics, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), nanotechnology, product design and realization, advanced materials, manufacturing, etc.  
• Using cognitive theory and latest pedagogical concepts to improve learning outcomes. 
• Replacing legacy materials with improved content emphasizing the fundamental, underlying behavior of physical and biological systems and the social systems in which they are employed. 
• Exposing students to the computational methods and design practices employed by practicing engineers to solve engineering problems, preferably in collaboration with industry leaders in developing tools implementing such methods. 
• Emphasizing critical thinking skills as well as communication and interpersonal skills. 
• Ensuring that the course content as well as pedagogy are sensitive to the needs of a diverse student body.
• Making full use of modern teaching methods, including mentoring, team-based and experience-based learning, computer simulation, and distance learning. 
• Incorporating service learning as a means to broaden students' professional skills  and enhance their learning outcomes and academic performance, while providing sustained support for community service organizations.

Proposals should reflect:

• An understanding of the research on how students learn engineering and how the practice of teaching must build on this understanding.
• An understanding of the research and practice of the assessment of learning outcomes.
• The benefits of integrating teaching and research.
• The appreciation that faculty participation, faculty development and faculty appreciation for the scholarship of learning are critical to the success of departmental reform.
• The realization that collaboration with experts in the field of learning, pedagogy and assessment is critical to departmental reform.
• The importance of stimulating students, particularly underrepresented minorities, to pursue graduate studies.

Proposals which incorporate service learning projects must ensure that these projects:

• Count for engineering course credit (for example, not be in addition to requirements but replacements for them).
• Align with ABET requirements, especially those for teamwork, communication skills, and project based experiences.
• Be multidisciplinary.
• Include a strong assessment and evaluation plans, and research on the impact of service learning on teaching and learning.

An international dimension to the service learning projects is also encouraged.

Prior receipt of a Planning Grant for the Departmental-Level Reform of Undergraduate Engineering Education is not a requirement for participation in the implementation component of this solicitation.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Why is a department-level involvement required? 
In most universities, fundamental change occurs at the departmental level.  We're looking for a few departments that have been asking themselves the question "starting from a clean page in 2004, what is the best possible learning experience we can provide for our students, that will prepare them for professional practice or for the career they choose?"

Can the target be a single degree program (as in a department) or does it have to include a group of programs (as in a college)?
Either approach is acceptable.  We encourage multidepartmental and interdisciplinary experiments.

Will ABET let us do this?
EC 2000 encourages experimentation, as long as a clear rationale is presented for change and appropriate methods are instituted for evaluating outcomes.  Since NSF requires similar characteristics in a successful proposal, we anticipate that the receipt of NSF funding is likely to enhance the case for accreditation.  

How should we incorporate the in-kind support into the proposal ?                                           Proposals interested in being eligible for in-kind support from HP and Microsoft, should ensure that their proposals for departmental level reform contain service learning themes. However, the proposal implementation should not depend on the availability of this in-kind support. Such proposals should clearly explain how the in-kind support will add value to the implementation of their proposal.

Departmental reform is a huge undertaking.  If we receive a planning grant, what assurance do we have that future opportunities will provide the resources required to complete these efforts, assuming that our planning grant results in successful proposals to follow-on programs?
Any future program commitments depend on the availability of funds.  We, nevertheless, expect to fund some implementation efforts in the future. However, it is obvious that we cannot fund all fundable implementation efforts. We expect that departments will use the outcomes from their planning grants to solicit institutional support for implementation as an integral part of catalyzing change.