Exam–Least & Most Valuable Aspects of CAEE-201

I’ve just completed reading all the answers to the two questions that asked you about the LEAST and MOST valuable aspects of this course.  There were, as one might expect from 180+ short essays, a wide range of responses, but there were themes that recurred.

My Overall Impression

CAEE-201 has served its purpose for most of you. Most were happy with the course overall. Some had vehement objections to an aspect (particularly discussions), but liked other aspects a great deal. At the end you know more about the fields, the department, the professors, the kinds of calculations one makes, and what life is like in the profession.

 

Aspects that were broadly popular with no almost dissent

• The overall course – many people liked the mix of lectures, labs, site visits, discussions
• Some found particular aspects unhelpful, but were overall satisfied.
• Site Visits – almost all who mentioned them found them intriguing and beneficial for several reasons
• Motivation – they made the topic interesting
• Understanding – they made the connection between “reality” and the calculations more comprehensible
• NOTE:  The student professional societies often sponsor site visits.  For those of you who value them I urge you to join your society and take advantage of the site visits.
• Laboratories – they made understanding the practice of engineering more understandable
• There were a few who found them not beneficial, but not many
• There were specific concerns about the quality of instructions, level of consistency, frequency.
• The use of Excel as a tool was both praised and regarded as too limiting.

Aspects for which there were conflicting views

• Discussions
• As in the past there were multiple complaints that they were boring, confusing, too structured or unstructured.
• There were also many positive comments on their benefits for understanding the lectures, for dialog with other students, for exploring the field.
• My comment is that there’s probably never going to be unanimity, but I’ll stick by the idea that introducing you to the professional literature is worth the effort.  I’ll also continue to tinker with the specific requirements, attempting to incorporate some of your suggestions such as assigning a specific article for discussion
• Lectures
• Many people lauded the variety of lectures and the enthusiasm of the lecturers.
• Others were uninterested in the lectures and labs that weren’t in their particular focus area.

 

Aspects that received explicit but not wide appreciation

• Graduate Studies Panel Discussion
• Some felt it was very beneficial in helping plan their career
• Others wanted more on the non-graduate career
• Software Tools
• A number of you singled out learning specific software tools as beneficial:  Revit; Excel; ArcGIS
• Senior Design
• Quite a few appreciated the opportunity to see your future
• A number of the Business & Engineering students, however, felt it was irrelevant to them

 

Suggestions I’ll Try to Implement in Future

Many of you made specific suggestions.  The following are ones that I’ll do my best to implement in future versions of this course.

• Industry Professionals Panel – I’ll try to bring in graduates to talk about careers in industry
• Change the “Extra Credit” for labs to include discussions of related topics, current industry projects that are related, etc.
• Provide a Sample Memo & Discussion – to help people understand the format that’s expected
• Change the discussions (again) to provide more variety – discussion of a particular article is one strong idea.

Jim Mitchell