refocusing on the operational level of pedagogy: a military analogy for bridging educational...

Refocusing on the Operational Level of Pedagogy:Refocusing on the Operational Level of Pedagogy:A Military Analogy for Bridging A Military Analogy for Bridging

Educational Strategy and Classroom TacticsEducational Strategy and Classroom Tactics

American Society for Engineering EducationNew England Section Annual Conference

17 March 2006

MAJ Ernest Y. WongDepartment of Systems Engineering

United States Military Academy

of 12

The United States Military Academy

The United States Military AcademyDepartment of Systems Engineering

- Serving the Academy & the Army since 1989 -

Department of Systems Engineering

- Serving the Academy & the Army since 1989 -

Diverse Faculty Academic Programs

State of the Art Facilities

Systems Engineering * Operations Research

Engineering Management * Information Engineering Systems Management

Systems Engineering * Operations Research

Engineering Management * Information Engineering Systems Management

39 Faculty (33 military, 6 civilian)15 Ph.Ds (+ 3 ABD) and 49 M.S.All military career fields represented4 White House Fellows in 11 yearsNationally recognized Academic & Research Programs

39 Faculty (33 military, 6 civilian)15 Ph.Ds (+ 3 ABD) and 49 M.S.All military career fields represented4 White House Fellows in 11 yearsNationally recognized Academic & Research Programs

Integrated laboratories:• Combat Simulation Lab (CSL)• Systems Methodology & Design Lab(SMDL)• Acquisition Management SystemsDesign (AMSD) Lab• Computer Aided Systems Engineering (CASE) Labs• Information Visualization Lab (IVL)

Integrated laboratories:• Combat Simulation Lab (CSL)• Systems Methodology & Design Lab(SMDL)• Acquisition Management SystemsDesign (AMSD) Lab• Computer Aided Systems Engineering (CASE) Labs• Information Visualization Lab (IVL)

Military Experience

Academic Expertise

Unique Capabilities

* ABET Accredited

of 12

Methods CourseMethods Course

SE350SE350

Design Course

SE450

Introductory Course

SE300

Crawl

• Introduces non-Engineering majors to a systematic problem solving framework• Acquaints undergraduate students to engineering concepts and terminology

--Stakeholder Analysis--Problem Definition--Value Hierarchy--Alternative Generation--Cost Benefit Analysis--Pareto Principle--Functional Decomposition--Assessment & Control

Walk Run

• Builds upon the mathematics and basic science concepts learned in the undergraduate core curriculum• Introduces non-Engineering majors to various quantitative

methods• Focuses on the application of economic, deterministic, and stochastic

models

• Develops student teams capable of helping satisfy client needs and proposing solutions to actual problems

--West Point Cemetery --Army/Navy Game Site--Cadet Summer Training--Cadet Ethics Training--Post 9/11 Traffic Flow--Officer Branch Selection--Army UAV Cmd & Cntl--Soldier Pre-Deployment Tng

--Decision Analysis (Risk and Uncertainty)--Engineering Economy (Time Value of Money)--Optimization Techniques--Forecasting--Spreadsheet Modeling--Monte Carlo Simulation

Core Systems Engineering Sequence Model

of 12

Educational Strategy, Operations, and TacticsClassrooms that educate, train, and inspire students

towards higher levels of cognitive functions

StrategyGeneral direction and overall plan

of the educational vision

TacticsEmployed techniques

and procedures for classroom interaction

& communications

OperationsContent and processes that bridge theoretical

concepts with practical knowledge

WHY?WHY?WHAT?WHAT?

HOW?HOW?

“Tactics is the art of using troops in battle; strategy is the art of using battles to win the war.”--Carl von Clausewitz

of 12

Military Strategy, Operations, and Tactics

All Three Help Commanders:• Visualize a logical flow of

operations• Allocate resources• Assign tasks

The U.S. Army’s Field Manual Number FM 3-0, Operations

FM 3-0, Operations, states:• The levels have “no finite limits

or boundaries between them” • The “interdependent

relationship of all three” helps achieve military victory

of 12

Operational Initiatives to Help BridgePedagogical Strategy & Classroom Tactics in SE350

Distribution for Return on $1000 in All 24

Assets/J33

0.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

3.000

3.500

Mean=0.1753421

-0.3 -0.05 0.2 0.45 0.7

@RISK Student VersionFor Academic Use Only

0000

-0.3 -0.05 0.2 0.45 0.7

7.29% 87.71% 5% 0 .3751

Mean=0.1753421 Mean=0.1753421

3. Monte Carlo Simulation—Actual Investment Ideas• Make course material relevant• Excite students into doing “what-if” analyses• Illustrate math concepts

- Understanding histograms & risk- Central Limit Theorem & diversification

2. Engineering Economy—Personal Finance Project• Stimulate interest • Provide post-graduation financial awareness• Leverage spreadsheet modeling for real-world problems

- Model loan payments- Understand credit cards and credit card debt- Examine future income streams- Examine anticipated living expenses- Analyze inflation

Total Expenses

-500.00

0.00

500.00

1000.00

1500.00

2000.00

2500.00

3000.00

3500.00

4000.00

4500.00

5000.00

5500.00

6000.00

6500.00

Aug-94Mar-95Oct-95May-96Dec-

Jul-97Feb-98Sep-

Apr-99Nov-99Jun-00Jan-01Aug-01Mar-02Oct-02May-03Dec-

Jul-04Feb-05Sep-

Apr-06Nov-06

1. Spreadsheet Modeling—Federal Income Taxes• Introduce tax filing requirements• Show practical purpose for spreadsheets• Demonstrate spreadsheet as a management tool

of 12

Course - SE350 (Spring 2005) Answers: [5] S trongly Agree [4] Agree [3] Neutra l [2] Disagree [1] S trongly Disagree

Answer [5]

Answer [4]

Answer [3]

Answer [2]

Answer [1] (no rsp)

A1. This instructor encouraged students to be responsible for the ir own lea rning. 42 (42%)

48 (48%)

9 (9%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

A2. This instructor used effective techniques for lea rning, both in class and for out -of -class assignments.

37 (37%)

48 (48%)

12 (12%)

2 (2%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

A3. My instructor ca red about my learning in this course. 43 (43%)

49 (49%)

6 (6%)

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

A4. My instructor demonstrated respect for cadets as individua ls. 56 (57%)

37 (37%)

5 (5%)

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

A5. My fe llow students cont ributed to my lea rning in this course. 36 (36%)

42 (42%)

14 (14%)

5 (5%)

2 (2%)

0 (0%)

A6. My motivation to lea rn and to continue lea rning has increased because of this course. 29 (29%)

41 (41%)

17 (17%)

9 (9%)

3 (3%)

0 (0%)

B1. This instructor stimulate d my thinking. 35 (35%)

49 (49%)

12 (12%)

3 (3%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

B2. In this course, my critical thinking ability increased. 33 (33%)

44 (44%)

16 (16%)

5 (5%)

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

B3. The homework assignments, papers, and projects in this course could be complete d within the USMA time guide line of two hours prepara tion for each class a ttendance .

32 (32%)

54 (55%)

10 (10%)

3 (3%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

C1. This course helped me lea rn to use the engineering design process to design, manage or reengineer systems or processes .

32 (32%)

45 (45%)

16 (16%)

4 (4%)

2 (2%)

0 (0%)

C2. This course taught me to communica te effective ly both orally and in writing. 32 (32%)

29 (29%)

30 (30%)

8 (8%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

C3. This course improved my ability to solve rea l -world problems through qu antitative techniques.

28 (28%)

53 (54%)

13 (13%)

4 (4%)

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

C4. This course provided me with practica l, problem -solving experiences applicable to my future as an Army office r.

34 (34%)

44 (44%)

14 (14%)

5 (5%)

2 (2%)

0 (0%)

C5. Course exercise s and designs improved my ability to model, ana lyze , or prototype rea l-world problems or systems.

30 (30%)

54 (55%)

11 (11%)

3 (3%)

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

Summative Student Feedback in SE350

of 12

• “I see a lot of potential for Excel.”• “I thought the projects were very applicable.”• “I liked learning how to use the simulation models.”• “I really liked the systems modeling and design

portion of the course—it was straight-forward and

applicable.”• “I liked the projects; they gave me a chance to actually

figure out which course of action to take instead of me

knowing exactly which decision making process to

use.”• “I wish I had more of these projects.”• “I wish I had majored in Systems Engineering instead

of xxxxxxxx.”

Formative Student Feedback in SE350

of 12

Goal of Systems Engineering at USMA

“We are preparing graduates who are scientifically literate and capable of applying mathematical, engineering, and computational modes of thought to the solution of complex problems.”

--Dean, USMA

of 12

Pros and Cons of the Military Setting for Class

Pros• Standardized Curriculum

--Core courses

--Technology baseline• Common graduation prospects

--Duties and responsibilities

--Military environment

--Role as Second Lieutenant

Cons• Standardized Curriculum

--Core courses

--Technology baseline• Common graduation prospects

--Duties and responsibilities

--Military environment

--Role as Second Lieutenant

An inscription dedicated to Dennis Hart Mahan, An inscription dedicated to Dennis Hart Mahan, Professor of Engineering at the United States Military Professor of Engineering at the United States Military Academy from 1832 to 1871, describes him as “a man Academy from 1832 to 1871, describes him as “a man who emphasized that who emphasized that theoretical knowledgetheoretical knowledge should be should be applied with applied with common sensecommon sense.”.”

of 12

Operational Context—The Bridge Between Strategy and Tactics

of 12

Questions?

[email protected]

refocusing on the operational level of pedagogy: a military analogy for bridging educational...

Documents