• warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/ieeecss/public_html/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.
  • strict warning: Declaration of content_handler_field_multiple::pre_render() should be compatible with views_handler_field::pre_render(&$values) in /home/ieeecss/public_html/sites/all/modules/cck/includes/views/handlers/content_handler_field_multiple.inc on line 322.
  • strict warning: Declaration of date_handler_field_multiple::pre_render() should be compatible with content_handler_field_multiple::pre_render($values) in /home/ieeecss/public_html/sites/all/modules/date/date/date_handler_field_multiple.inc on line 185.


Presentation Guidelines

We welcome you to the 2012 Frontiers in Education Conference. We hope that you enjoy the collection of paper and panel sessions, special sessions, keynote speakers, and social activities that have been assembled.

One of the unique features of FIE is that there are two different types of paper presentations: full papers and works-in-progress. Full papers focus on sharing completed work while works-in-progress are focused on ongoing work where input from the audience can help advance it. As such, the authors have been asked to use their 18 minutes as follows:

Full Papers

15 minutes for presentation (PPT or PDF format)
3 minutes for questions, answers, and transition to next paper
For Full Papers, authors should be prepared to answer questions from the audience.


10 minutes for presentation (PPT or PDF format)
8 minutes for questions, answers, and transition to next paper
For Works-in-Progress, authors should prepare discussion questions for the audience to answer.

We thank the authors who have contributed papers on their research and activities and the hundreds of reviewers who gave of their time to help us evaluate the contributions. The combined effort is what makes FIE the strong conference that it is.


Click here for FIE 2012 Program Schedule

Group Meetings Schedule

FIE 2012 Conference at a Glance

Wednesday, October 3
11:00 am - 6:00 pm Registration
Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area                                                    
1:30 pm - 6:00 pm

Exhibit Setup
Metropolitan Ballroom

1:30 pm - 4:30 pm Pre-Conference Workshops Session A                                                  
5:30 pm - 8:30 pm Pre-Conference Workshops Session B                                    


Thursday, October 4  

7:00 am - 5:00 pm

Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area
7:00 am - 8:00 am

Focus on New Attendees Breakfast Buffet
Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area                                                              

8:00 am - 9:30 am Plenary Session
Grand Ballroom
WIKISPEED - Revolutionizing Transportation through Agile, Lean and Scrum
9:30 - 5:00 pm Exhibits Open
Metropolitan Ballroom
9:30 am - 10:00 am Exhibit Hall Break
10:00 am - Noon Technical Sessions (T1)
Noon - 1:30 pm HP Terman and Rigas Awards Lunch
Sponsored by the Hewlett-Packard Company
Grand Ballroom AB
1:30 pm - 3:00 pm Technical Sessions (T2)
3:00 pm - 3:30 pm Exhibit Hall Break
3:30 pm - 5:00 pm Technical Sessions (T3)
5:00 pm - 6:00 pm Catalyzing Collaborative Conversations Sessions
6:00 pm - 8:30 pm Reception and Awards Banquet       
Ticketed Event
Cirrus Ballroom                                   
Friday, October 5  
7:00am - 5:00 pm Registration Open
Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area
7:00 am - 8:00 am Breakfast
Grand Ballroom AB
8:00 am - 9:00 am Plenary Session
Grand Ballroom AB
Is There a MOOC in Your Future?
9:00 am - 4:30 pm Exhibit Hall Open
9:30 am - 10:00 am Exhibit Hall Break
10:00 am - Noon Technical Sessions (F1)
Noon- 1:30 pm Premier Award Lunch
Sponsored by John Wiley & Sons, Microsoft Research, Autodesk, and TechSmith
Grand Ballroom AB
1:30 pm - 3:00 pm Technical Sessions (F2)
3:00 pm - 4:00 pm Focus on Exhibits and New Faculty Fellows
Metropolitan Ballroom
4:00 pm - 5:50 pm Technical Sessions (F3)
6:15 pm - 9:30 pm Transportations to and Reception at Museum of Flight
Bus loading zone on Union Street: Walk to the left after exiting the main hotel doors
Saturday, October 6  
7:00 am - 10:00 am Registration                                                                                                             
Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area
7:00 am - 8:00 am Breakfast
Metropolitan Ballroom
8:00 am - 10:00 am Technical Sessions (T1)           
10:00 am - 10:30 am Break
Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area
10:30 am - 12:30 pm Technical Sessions (S2)                                                  


Track 1  - 1:30 - 4:30pm

Workshop Title:
A Workshop on How Learning Works

Don't give me the theory, just show me how to do it! Have your students ever said that? Theory is what allows someone to know why something works and whether you might expect it to work in a new context. Education theory does the same, yet the theories and principles are difficult to gather, digest and apply. This workshop is intended to introduce a small but effective set of learning theories. You will not be an expert, but you should be able to develop proposal ideas that are founded on proven theories.

Maura Borrego (National Science Foundation, USA)
Guy-Alain Ammoussou (National Science Foundation, USA)
Louis Everett (National Science Foundation, USA)
Susan Finger (National Science Foundation, USA)
Zhanjing (John) Yu (National Science Foundation, USA)

Track 1 - 5:30 - 8:30pm

Workshop Title:
Evaluation of Educational Research and Development Projects

With emphasis on project outcomes and impact, project evaluation is increasingly becoming an integral part of an NSF project. Lack of an evaluation plan in a proposal for an education project may be viewed by many NSF reviewers as a weakness. The goal of this workshop session is to prepare engineering faculty members to work with an evaluator to plan and implement an effective evaluation of an education research or development project. In pursuit of this goal, the session intends to increase the participants' awareness of the role of goals and outcomes in the evaluation process, of the nature of the cognitive and affective outcomes, and of evaluation tools for monitoring these types of outcomes. The workshop will examine the new NSF User-Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation. Workshop topics include: 1) the need for project evaluation; 2) evaluation types; 3) evaluation questions based on project goals, expected outcomes; 4) evaluating cognitive outcomes; 5) evaluating affective outcomes, 6) data collection and interpretation; 7) developing an evaluation plan for a proposed project, and 8) working with an evaluator. The workshop is intended for faculty members who are either seeking external support for educational research and development projects or are engaged in efforts to improve the educational experience of their students.

Zhanjing (John) Yu (National Science Foundation, USA)
Maura Borrego (Virginia Tech, USA)
Louis Everett (National Science Foundation, USA)
Susan Finger (National Science Foundation, USA)
Don Millard (National Science Foundation, USA)

Track 2 - 1:30 - 4:30pm     

Workshop Title:
Learning Agile Through Active Learning Activities

Games and simulation are a great way to learn theories and new behaviors that can be applied to classroom activities. The presenters are going to teach three games that can be used in a project-oriented course that deals with agile methods. The presenters will talk about the benefits of agile development and how these games will solidify behaviors that are essential to successful agile processes. Agile processes are becoming more pervasive in industry settings; however these same processes have not been widely adopted in academic settings. A common thread among agile software processes is the iterative approach to the project lifecycle. It can be challenging to integrate a pure agile process in a typical projects course due to the time constraints of a semester, but integrating elements of the agile approach can be useful from both an instructor and student perspective. This tutorial will introduce the participants to the key principles of the agile process which proclaims to value: - Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. - Working software over comprehensive documentation. - Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. - Responding to change over following a plan. There are many flavors of agile processes and this tutorial will focus on the Scrum model. Examples of how Scrum can be used to organize a classroom project will be discussed. Several open source tools that can be useful in supporting agile projects from the requirements gathering phase through development and testing will be demonstrated. Participants will engage in a participatory game to illustrate some of the main components of the agile process model. Attendees will leave this tutorial with ideas for integrating agile approaches into their own projects courses.

Jennifer Polack-Wahl (University of Mary Washington, USA)
Karen Anwalt (University of Mary Washington, USA)

Track 2 - 5:30 - 8:30pm        

Workshop Title:
Using Student Scrums for Course and Capstone Projects

Over the past ten years Agile software development practices have grown in acceptance and have gained a solid foothold in commercial software development. Our students are entering the workforce with an increasing percentage of companies that are using Agile processes and practices in the development of their products and services. The most widely used Agile project management framework is Scrum. Scrum has a well defined approach for organizing and controlling a software development project. It is almost always implemented in combination with Agile software development practices, but is flexible enough to even be used for managing non-software projects. Scrum facilitates continuous process improvement by having teams reflect at the conclusion of each short increment of the project (Sprint) to identify opportunities for improving the next development cycle. Additionally, regular team "stand-ups" provide frequent sampling of the project's pulse in order to support small mid-course corrections as needed. Selecting Scrum as the framework for student team projects has the advantage of introducing software process at a level of ceremony that both captures foundational software engineering practices and is manageable within the constraints of a class or capstone project. This workshop will introduce participants to the components of the Scrum framework with activities designed to demonstrate the flexibility of Scrum to support a diverse set of course learning outcomes at all levels of the curriculum. Intended audience: Anyone interested in using the Scrum framework for all levels of student team projects - from introductory project planning skills through capstone and research projects. The workshop assumes no prior Agile or Scrum experience, but also welcomes those with a background in applying Agile in the classroom. Workshop Format: Participants will be grouped together in Scrum teams and have the opportunity to participate in activities that reinforce the topic being covered. The goal is for each team to experience a complete Sprint, starting from initial product backlog development through release and retrospective. 6. Wrap-Up / Parking Lot Issues (20 min)

Tom Reichlmayr (Rochester Institute of Technology, USA)

Track 3 - 1:30 - 4:30pm    

Workshop Title:
Assessing Professional Skills for ABET 

The Integrated Design Engineering Assessment and Learning System (IDEALS) is a set of assessment instruments that focus on aspects of professional development such as leadership, ethics, project management and communication skills within the context of capstone engineering design projects. These instruments have been piloted across a broad spectrum of diverse engineering programs and are available in a web format that facilitates data collection from students and feedback from instructional staff. This knowledge has been synthesized into a set of engaging and transferable modules that include learning objectives, supporting resource materials, preparatory tasks, lesson plans for faculty, and recommendations for timely follow-up using the online assessments. In addition, the instruments enhance student development through both formative and summative feedback and can be used to provide evidence for demonstrating the achievement of ABET student outcomes and program specific criteria. This workshop will describe key features of the IDEALS curricula and assessment instruments and will analyze feedback from early adopters. After a brief overview of the IDEALS learning model and curricular materials, participants will score samples of student work in small groups, discuss their results and share with the larger group. The workshop will also address how to use the assessment results for program accreditation. 

Phillip Thompson (Seattle University, USA)
Denny Davis (Washington State University, USA)
Steven Beyerlein (University of Idaho, USA)
Michael Trevisan (Washington State University, USA)
Jay McCormack (University of Idaho, USA)
Howard Davis (Washington State University, USA)

Track 3 - 5:30 - 8:30pm    

Workshop Title:
Training students to become better raters: Raising the quality of self- and peer-evaluations using a new feature of the CATME system

The goal of this workshop is to introduce participants to tools that can help them manage teams in their classes effectively and efficiently. We review some of the factors that instructors may wish to consider when administering self- and peer-evaluations and how they might improve the quality of those evaluations using rater training. We review the literature on peer-evaluation and rater training and engage the participants in discussions about their own experiences and practices. We conduct interactive, hands-on, practical activities using the CATME system. However, this is not just a software demonstration---we help instructors understand how the system can help them meet their learning objectives associated with self- and peer-evaluations. Attendees with wireless-network-capable laptop computers will interact with both systems in real-time. Our target audience is both new and experienced instructors using student-team-based learning strategies. There will be teamwork, individual work, brief lecture elements, demonstrations, and group discussion. Activities include participants sharing their experiences with student self- and peer-evaluations and hands-on use of the web-based tools in two ways: as if they were the students, allowing them to experience the student-view of the tools, and from the instructor's perspective including practice collecting student data and using it to manage teams.

Richard Layton (Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, USA)
Matthew W Ohland (Purdue University, USA)
Misty Loughry (Georgia Southern University, USA)

Track 4 - 1:30 - 4:30pm 

Workshop Title:
What were we thinking? Critically examining our beliefs about the purposes and goals of engineering and engineering education

Whether or not you call it philosophical, each of us conducts our research and teaching based on an underlying set of beliefs about engineering and education. Our philosophical beliefs guide many of our decisions and subsequent behaviors. Thus, we believe it is essential to critically examine our beliefs and strengthen our arguments for the work we do. Participants in this workshop will discuss and employ the rigorous methods of argumentation and philosophical reasoning to critically examine various beliefs about the purposes and goals of engineering and education. This workshop aligns with the work of previous philosophical sessions at FIE conferences and connects to the paper sessions on philosophy and engineering education submitted to FIE 2012. The goals of the workshop are: 1. To discuss and critically reflect upon some of the key philosophical issues affecting the engineering profession and engineering education. 2. To further the development of the philosophical foundations of engineering education. 3. To begin formulating philosophically sound statements regarding the education of engineering students. Based on the work of earlier sessions, this workshop will focus attention on the methods of philosophical reasoning and argumentation that help lead to the development of coherent, consistent, and comprehensive statements about the purposes and goals of engineering education. This workshop will present, explain, and work with the topics that address the following questions: - What is philosophy and why is it relevant to engineering and engineering education? - How can a philosophy of engineering education increase clarity and understanding of engineering education? - What is a reasonable philosophy of engineering education? The workshop will present and provide participants with the tools and methods used to reason philosophically toward developing a doctrinal system that answers the above questions coherently and comprehensively. These methods entail collective and dialectical processes that promote creative and critical reflection focused on the foundational beliefs and meanings of engineering and engineering education. These are the beliefs that serve as a basis for evaluation and action in engineering education. The primary method is rational reflection that helps work out the conflicts and inconsistencies in our belief systems. It also helps one develop a more coherent and consistent set of beliefs about engineering education. The aim of this work is to achieve a more adequate understanding of engineering and engineering education for the purpose of improving our practice. We will use a simplified version of Nicholas Rescher's method of philosophical reasoning, along with methods of argumentation—especially rhetorical and dialectical criticism. Rescher's method strives to build comprehensive system of beliefs out of the various data that inform our knowledge and practices. It also provides a set of evaluative criteria to help evaluate the results of this reasoning process. These methods include rigorous standards for systematically developing a coherent set of beliefs to guide action—in this case the education of engineering students. We will include some of the work previously started at past FIE sessions, as well as examples of educational philosophies from other disciplines. The agenda for this workshop will begin with preparatory readings provided to registered participants prior to the workshop. The readings will provide a focus and foundation for the issues addressed in the workshop. These materials will help participants prepare for what we expect will be a fast-paced and lively workshop. Over the past few years, we have developed a community of engineering educators interested in the philosophical foundations of their profession. These educators have participated in previous special sessions at FIE and presented papers at symposia focused on the philosophical foundations of engineering education. If you have participated in any of the previous sessions or symposia on philosophy at FIE, please consider participating in this workshop. If you have not participated previously, we cordially invite you to join us in this fascinating project. 

Russell Korte (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA)
John Krupczak, Jr (Hope College, USA)
Mani Mina (Iowa, USA)
William Grimson (Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin Ireland, Ireland)

Track 4 - 5:30 - 8:30pm   

Workshop Title:
Teaching Engineering Design to Middle and High School Students using STEAM Machines™   

Objective: To expose participants to the STEAM Labs™ camps and curriculum for introducing middle and high school students to the engineering design process in the context of designing and building chain machines in local or geographically-distributed teams. Findings from a design-based research study done on the STEAM Labs™ program will be presented to substantiate its impact on student interest in and knowledge of engineering design and related concepts. A STEAM Machine™ is a chain reaction contraption that completes a simple task in an overly complex way. In STEAM Labs™ camps, students are challenged with learning and applying the Boston Museum of Science Engineering is Elementary® engineering design process to design and build a chain reaction machine. In addition, the program embeds students in local or geographically-distributed teams to expose them to other cultures, improve the quality and quantity of their design communication, and simulate a trans-national engineering and manufacturing environment. Machines designed by geographically-distributed teams have the added constraint that their parts must connect together across camp sites using communication technology, resulting in machines that start at one site, progress through a number of complex intermediate steps, and culminate by completing the simple task such as popping a balloon at the final site. This hands-on workshop will begin with a brief background on chain reaction machines and competitions. The STEAM Labs™ curriculum and the results of the research on the impact of the program will be presented, followed by a review of the Boston Museum of Science Engineering is Elementary Engineering Design Process. Participants will be given the opportunity to engage in a Rube Goldberg machine design activity, followed by a time to share their critiques and participate in discussions about how these activities can be adapted for use in middle and high school classrooms or outreach programs. Finally, participants will receive sample curriculum resources for use in their programs.

Shawn Jordan (Arizona State University, USA)
Odesma Dalrymple (Arizona State University, USA)
Nielsen Pereira (Western Kentucky University, USA)

Track 5 - 1:30 -  4:30pm   

Workshop Title:
Building Learning Tools using IMS Learning Tools Interoperability 

The IMS Learning Tools Interoperability standard (www.imsglobal.org/lti) greatly reduces the effort required to integrate an externally hosted learning tool into nearly all of the mainstream learning management systems (Blackboard, Desire2Learn, Moodle, Canvas, Sakai, OLAT, and others). IMS Learning Tools Interoperability uses the OAuth protocol to send identity, course, user, and role data to the external tools. External tools can do roster transparent provisioning and single sign on using LTI as well as return grades to the calling learning management system. LTI allows those who would build innovative tools for teaching and learning an unprecedented simplicity in plugging their tool into any number of different learning management systems. This workshop will introduce the standard as well as demonstrate freely available sample code to simplify the building LTI compliant tools in PHP. Participants will develop and integrate a simple tool into Canvas, Sakai, Blackboard, or Moodle as part of the workshop.     

Charles Severance (University of Michigan, USA)

Track 6 - 5:30 - 8:30pm

Workshop Title:
Project-Enhanced Learning in Engineering Science Education

Goals of the workshop Early drop out and poor retention rates are a major challenge to engineering education, which in many institutions have prompted a focus on improved first-year experiences. Retention and contributing learning challenges persists into the middle years, particularly when students confront the first engineering science courses in their major field. Students often perceive these courses as too abstract, intended to weed them out, and not meaningfully connected to their professional aspirations. A proven approach to improve student learning, self-efficacy, motivation, and retention is the use of active learning, including problems and projects. Over the past decade, the presenters and colleagues developed a particular model called project-enhanced learning (PEL) for core engineering science courses at the sophomore and junior levels. The project component enhances and does not replace traditional deductive exposition that most teachers find indispensable in these courses. Critically, any intervention such as a project must be adoptable by the typical instructors of these courses, who may have career goals and incentive structures that limit teaching time commitment. Thus, project attributes must be carefully constructed to minimize additional workload to the instructor as well as the student, and thus more structured than a senior-level creative design project. It has been observed that PEL not only improved learning of the targeted engineering science content, but also enhanced peer-to-peer interactions, revealed student misconceptions, improved student motivation, and inculcated design skills and professionalism. The workshop is aimed at giving instructors an opportunity to evaluate and adapt the PEL model, which instructors at multiple institutions have found feasible and beneficial during an NSF-funded implementation program. Project-Enhanced Learning (PEL) will be presented as an active learning strategy that integrates abstract concepts and deductive mathematical analysis with a concrete and meaningful project experience. The PEL experience is intended to motivate and anchor student learning and provide low-load feedback and assessment to the instructor. The workshop is intended to virally propagate an easily adaptable educational practice that is sustainable for the typical harried instructor. The experiences of project implementation (over the past ten years) make the proposed instructor-researcher team well equipped to lead this workshop. The organization, planning, and implementation of PEL are modeled on past successes and resources available from educators who developed the method. The experiences of early adopters will be shared. Participants will review the strategies and implementation techniques of PEL, including the alignment of the most challenging course topics with project tasks, use of an on-line project discussion forum, substituting project tasks for traditional homework, and giving students ownership while managing workload and divergent thinking. Pairs or small groups of workshop participants will be formed to actively carry out a 'project' to develop PEL for some common engineering science courses chosen by interest of the audience. Each group will brainstorm for project ideas for their course, and develop a feasible project outline, task structure, solution verification, and assessment approach for the project. Groups will reassemble to discuss their reactions, opinions, and ideas. Workshop participants are likely to be engineering faculty members interested in new learning techniques in challenging and analytical engineering science courses, with the objective of improving learning and retention in engineering. Graduate students and post-docs with interest in engineering or similar STEM education can benefit as well.  

Razi Nalim (IUPUI, USA); Manikanada Rajagopal (IUPUI, USA); Robert Helfenbein (Indiana University--IUPUI, USA)

Track 7 - 1:30 - 4:30pm

Workshop Title:
Teaching Computer Security Literacy to the Masses: A Practical Approach

Goal of the workshop Cyber criminals, hackers, and malware are thriving in part because too many people are blindly relying on technology as their main line of defense. Although necessary, technical security measures like firewalls, patches, and antivirus software are not sufficient because cyber criminals have evolved and now focus on human vulnerabilities such as curiosity to accomplish their goals. As a result, the decisions that people do and do not make in the course of their daily interactions with information technology often have the greatest effect on the security of their computers and the confidentiality of their personal information. The primary method for educating students and the general public about cyber security has been through limited awareness campaigns and the construction of top-ten security lists. These approaches are neither effective nor sufficient as it is poor pedagogical practice to believe that students - or anyone for that matter - can remember, understand, and apply knowledge when the educator provides them with nothing more than an inherently incomplete top-ten bullet point list of security tasks to perform. We believe that formal computer security education is the key to combating the threats intrinsic to the Information Age. Each day, people are inundated with alerts and pop-ups informing them about patch updates, antivirus signatures, firewall exceptions, suspicious emails, and malware threats but lack the proper education or vocabulary to make value-based decisions regarding the benefits and consequences of taking specific action on these items. What a formal pedagogical approach to practical computer security education provides is the context and knowledge for students to apply computer security best practices when faced with a novel situation and the ability to be proactive in the face of new threats, not reactive. We argue that computer security literacy is not only the next step in computer security defense; it is the most important step we can take. Through this workshop we want to encourage the engineering education profession to reach out to the populous and help make them security literate. The goal of this workshop is to present a novel approach to teaching Computer Security Literacy. This approach, developed at Iowa State University, demonstrates how Computer Security Literacy courses for non-technical students benefit them in their current daily activities and in the future as working professionals. The proposed workshop centers on how two distinct, one-hour, 8-week courses on Computer Security Literacy can be taught. The first course is on concepts found in Computer Security Literacy and the second course is a hands-on, lab-based course where students use the technology and experience how security affects them. Description of topics/subjects/content of the workshop The workshop will demonstrate a proven and effective manner in which to teach Computer Security Literacy. At Iowa State University, we have addressed the gap in security education by developing a course entitled "Introduction to Computer Security Literacy" and a follow on hands-on lab course. The specific purpose of this 8-week, 16-lecture course is to provide both students from technical and non-technical majors with the opportunity to formally learn about the many components of practical computer security knowledge. An emphasis is placed on technical and non-technical majors because previous research on this topic has discovered that despite the perceived advantage of students from technical majors (i.e., computer engineering, computer science, management information systems), students from non-technical majors are, on average, on an equal playing field with their non-technical cohorts when it comes to practical cyber security knowledge. The workshop will focus on methods and techniques that can be used to teach security literacy. Participants will take home the course syllabi, sample lecture and lab materials, as well as sample homework assignments to support the development of similar courses at the respective participants' universities. The intended audience for this workshop includes faculty in computer engineering, computer science, or anyone who is interested in teaching Computer Security Literacy. The audience does not need to have any security background. The materials and workshop is designed to show how security literacy can be taught. 

Doug Jacobson (Iowa State University, USA)
Julie Rursch (Iowa State University, USA)
Joseph Idziorek (Iowa State University, USA)

Track 7 - 5:30 -  8:30pm

Workshop Title:
It's More Than Coding: Using Video Scenarios to Engage Students in Computing

It's More Than Coding: Using Video Scenarios to Engage Students in Computing This workshop will introduce attendees to video scenarios as a novel tool that can be used in conjunction with traditional teaching techniques to engage students in activities that emphasize computing in the context of understanding problems that individuals are facing and developing solutions to help solve them. After participating in the workshop, attendees will have gained an understanding and appreciation for a variety of ways in which video scenarios can be used, the value they can add to a classroom or laboratory experience, and how the use of video scenarios can be integrated with their own teaching techniques. Studies indicate that students, particularly females, find computing most engaging when it is presented in relation to real-life problems, rather than when it is presented in ways that emphasize computing for the sake of computing. This highly participatory workshop introduces attendees to the use of video scenarios as a novel tool for encouraging students to explore computing in a problem-centric, rather than a code-centric, manner. Video scenarios are short films (2-5 minutes in length) that depict individuals facing problems in life-like settings. The scenarios emphasize the diverse and often ill-defined nature of real world problems, and the potential for creative and entrepreneurial computing solutions they present. The exercises that accompany the videos emphasize critical and computational thinking from a perspective of solving problems that individuals are experiencing, rather than from a strictly code-writing perspective. Attendees will participate in exercises that highlight a variety of ways that video scenarios can be used to enhance traditional computing education and explore ways in which the use of video scenarios can be incorporated into their existing teaching strategies. All videos and associated discussion/exercise problems are freely available on the web at www.virt-u.org. The intended audience is college and secondary school CS educators whose classes may range from general education through programming and upper-level computing courses.   

Madalene Spezialetti (Trinity College, USA)






Conference Sponsors

The 42st Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, sponsored by the IEEE Education Society, the IEEE Computer Society, and the ASEE Educational Research and Methods Division will be held on October 3-6, 2012 in Seattle, WA at The Sheraton Seattle Hotel.

The Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) is one of the two major international engineering education conferences offered every year. Over 500 academic and industry representatives are expected at this conference. Participants will include university presidents, college deans, department chairpersons, faculty in engineering and engineering technology, and industry leaders from throughout the country and the world. The majority of the attendees, however, are engineering and engineering technology faculty.

Society Sponsors

American Society for Engineering
Education (ASEE)
Educational Research Methods
(ERM) Division
Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
IEEE Education Society
IEEE Computer Society

Conference Affiliates

Hewlett-Packard Company – sponsor of the Terman and Rigas Awards Luncheon

John Wiley & Sons, Microsoft Research, Autodesk, and TechSmith – sponsors of the Premier Award Luncheon

Conference Amenities

Meals and Social Events

Breakfast Buffets
7:00 a.m.–8:00 a.m. Thursday – Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area
    Focus on First-Time Attendees
7:00 a.m.–8:00 a.m. Friday – Grand Ballroom AB
7:00 a.m.–8:00 a.m. Saturday – Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area

Refreshment Breaks ● Exhibit Hall
Morning and afternoon breaks Thursday and Friday in Metropolitan Ballroom
Morning and afternoon breaks Saturday in Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction Area

Frederick Emmons Terman and Harriet B. Rigas Awards Luncheon – Grand Ballroom AB
Sponsored by the Hewlett-Packard Company

11:45 a.m.–1:15 p.m. Thursday
The Frederick Emmons Terman Award is presented annually to an outstanding young electrical engineering educator by the Electrical and Computer Engineering Division of the American Society for Engineering Education.
The Harriet B. Rigas Award is presented annually to an outstanding woman engineering educator in recognition of her contributions to the profession.

Premier Award Luncheon - Grand Ballroom AB
Sponsored by John Wiley & Sons, Microsoft Research, Autodesk, and Techsmith

    11:30 a.m.–1:00 p.m. Friday
The Premier Award for Excellence in Engineering Education Courseware recognizes high-quality, noncommercial courseware that enhances engineering education. The award promotes successful courseware and provides models of excellence for educators.

Saturday Luncheon – Grand Ballroom AB

    11:30 a.m.–1:00 p.m. Saturday
Join us once again for great networking with your colleagues. This luncheon will also feature the introduction of the 2013 FIE Conference General Co-Chairs.

The Museum of Flight

6:00 p.m.–9:30 p.m. Friday
Join your colleagues as we board busses at 6 p.m. for the short trip to the Museum of Flight. The Museum’s collection includes more than 150 historically significant air- and spacecraft, as well as the largest aviation and space library and archives on the West Coast. We will have drinks, heavy hors d'oeuvres, and an exclusive evening view of the exhibits. Be sure to bring the drink tickets you received when you checked in at registration.

New Faculty Fellows ● Exhibit Hall – Metropolitan Ballroom

3:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m. Friday
A special session focusing on the New Faculty Fellows will occur directly following lunch on Friday. This session will provide an opportunity to meet this year’s New Faculty Fellows, a group of new CSET educators who were selected based on an application and a full paper being presented at this year’s conference. There will also be an opportunity to view their poster presentations at this time.

Focus on Exhibits ● Exhibit Hall – Metropolitan Ballroom

3:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m. Friday
Visit the FIE exhibits and check out the latest textbooks, computer software, lab equipment, and other innovations while enjoying refreshments provided by our sponsor.

Awards Banquet ● Cirrus Ballroom

6:00 p.m.–8:30 p.m. Thursday
This year's award banquet features fine food, drink, and camaraderie along with presentation of special awards from FIE, the IEEE Education Society, the ASEE ERM Division, and the IEEE Computer Society. There is a separate charge for the banquet.

FIE Registration Conference Desk

Registration will be open in the Metropolitan Ballroom Prefunction area during these times:
    Wednesday        11:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m.   
    Thursday              7:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.   
    Friday                    7:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.   
    Saturday               7:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.       

Hospitality Table ● Near Conference Registration
If you are looking for a certain kind of a restaurant, shop, golf course, or health club, stop by the hospitality table close to the registration area. Maps and brochures of area attractions will be available.
FIE Message Center ● Near Conference Registration
The conference will maintain a message board by the registration area. Messages received for conferees will be posted there. In an emergency, we will make every effort to locate you.

Full Papers

Paper categories:

The anticipated audience for FIE represents a broad spectrum of backgrounds.  Attendees cover all disciplines relating to engineering education and come from a variety of institutions and organizations worldwide.  Typical interests range from education research to extending promising results into their own educational settings.  Attendees are eager to learn not only of your results but how your results might be applied in their particular discipline at their particular institution.

Papers submissions were categorized as follows.
1.    Innovative Practice
2.    Research-to-Practice
3.    Research

These categories influence the overall structure and contents of the submitted work.  Each category follows with suggestions for expected paper contents.


1. Innovative Practice Category

Papers in the innovative practice category share information about how a faculty member or team has developed and implemented novel practices across the breadth of topics of interest to conference participants. Each paper should address the following two areas.

Elaborate the specific contribution of the paper to innovative practice. Contributions may be made in various forms, but they should answer questions such as the following: What is unique about the innovative practice to be presented? How does this innovative practice differ from and build on previous practice as documented in the literature, including previous FIE conferences? What new ideas would conference participants take away from this paper and/or presentation?

In this section, the authors would describe the setting (in the broad context of engineering education, not necessarily the particular institutional context) for the innovative practice, motivations for the innovative practice, what has been accomplished, what results have been obtained, and what remains to be done.

Full Paper
The criteria for full papers (limited to 6 pages) in the innovative practice category are the following:
•    What is the breadth of the audience that will be interested in the subject of the paper?
•    To what extent are the practices described in the paper innovative?
•    To what extent does the paper connect its work to prior work?
•    To what extent is the paper professionally written and presented?

Please note that one author from each paper is expected to register for and participate in the full conference.

2. Research-to-Practice Category

Papers in the research-to-practice category share information about how a faculty member or group of faculty members has developed and implemented new practices explicitly based on research on engineering education and/or education. Research-to-practice papers demonstrate transfer from research to practice. Each paper should address the following two areas.

Elaborate the specific contribution of the paper towards illustrating how engineering education research informs engineering education practice. Contributions may be made in various forms, but they should answer such questions as: What is situation being addressed? What are the goals of the practice being implemented? What research provides the foundations for the inventive practice?

Authors should describe the setting (in the broad context of engineering education, not necessarily the particular institutional context) for the practice, motivations for the practice, research that has supported the practice, what results have been obtained, and what remains to be done.

Full Paper
The criteria for the full papers (limited to 6 pages) in the research-to-practice category are the following:
•    What is the breadth of the audience that will be interested in the subject of the paper?
•    To what extent are the practices described in the paper innovative?
•    To what extent are the educational practices described in the paper based on research in education and/or engineering education?
•    To what extent does the paper demonstrate transfer from educational research to educational practice?
•    To what extent is the paper professionally written and presented?

3. Research Category

Papers in the research category present new, preliminary research results or research methodologies. Each paper should address the following two areas.

Elaborate the specific research contribution of the paper. Contributions may be made in various forms, but they should answer questions such as the following: What are the research questions that were addressed? What results have been found? How do the results build on prior research?

In this section, the authors would describe the context for the research, motivations for the research, prior research related to this research, a brief synopsis of the methodology, what results have been obtained, and what remains to be done.

Full Paper

The criteria for the full papers (limited to 6 pages) in the research category are:
•    What is the breadth of the audience that will be interested in the subject of the paper?
•    To what extent are the research questions clearly stated?
•    To what extent is the methodology appropriate for the research questions?
•    To what extent does the paper incorporate the relevant research?
•    To what extent are the research questions and results meaningful and original
•    To what extent is the paper professionally written and presented?

Call For Papers

*View Call for Papers in pdf format.

The 42nd Annual Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference is the major international conference about educational innovations and research in engineering and computing. FIE 2012 continues a long tradition of disseminating results in these areas. It is an ideal forum for sharing ideas; learning about developments in computer science, engineering, and technology education; and interacting with colleagues in these fields.

What May You Submit?

Proposals for participation in the 2012 FIE Conference can be submitted in the following venues:
1.    Papers: Full papers
2.    Papers: Work-in-progress (WIP)
3.    Special Sessions
4.    Panels
5.    Pre-Conference Workshops

Information on each of these is provided in the sections following the schedule.
In addition, FIE 2011 offers travel grants to support participation of new faculty who are presenting full papers at the conference. More information is provided in the section on New Faculty Fellows below.

Proposals are submitted in a two-stage process. First, initial versions of the proposals (abstracts in the case of papers) must be submitted by January 31, 2012, and then they will be reviewed. If you are invited to submit for the second stage of the process, you must submit a preliminary version of the complete document by April 15, 2012. These documents will then be peer-reviewed. If accepted, final versions of the documents as they will appear in the conference proceedings must be submitted by July 1, 2012.

Topics of Interest

  • Accreditation Issues
  • Courseware Technologies
  • Design Experiences: Senior Capstone and Other
  • Disciplinary Education Research
  • Distance Learning: Methods, Technologies, and Assessment
  • Entrepreneurship Programs
  • Faculty Development
  • Gender and Diversity
  • Global Education Issues
  • Interdisciplinary Teaching Approaches and Experiences
  • Introductory Computing Courses
  • Introductory Engineering Courses including Engineering Sciences
  • K - 12 Initiatives and partnerships
  • Laboratory Experiences: On-Site and at a distance
  • Professional Skills (Oral and Written Communication, Teamwork, Ethics)
  • Service Learning
  • Undergraduate Research Experiences
  • Other topics that address issues at the frontiers in STEM education