Strategies for Improving the Classroom Environment*

CYNTHIA J. FINELLIDepartment of Electrical and Computer EngineeringKettering University

ALLEN KLINGERSchool of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of California, Los Angeles

DAN D. BUDNYEngineering Student ServicesUniversity of Pittsburgh

ABSTRACT

This paper describes some strategies for the educator seeking tobetter his/her classroom effectiveness. It was inspired by one of thetechnical sessions of the 29th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference in which over a dozen experienced college in-structors engaged in a roundtable discussion of ways to improve aclassroom environment. In this paper, those ideas are discussedand then supplemented with general advice and specific sugges-tions from the experience of the authors. The paper concludeswith a bibliography of related reference material from a wide vari-ety of educational sources.

I. INTRODUCTION

An increasingly global and technical workplace requires UnitedStates colleges and universities to adapt the science and engineeringclassroom in order to attract and retain a diverse student body. At anational level, various reports—including the American Society forEngineering Education’s “Engineering Education for a ChangingWorld”1 and the National Science Foundation’s “RestructuringEngineering Education: A Focus on Change”2—have recognizedthis challenge and have made recommendations to reform science,mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education.Besides describing faculty reward systems and comprehensivechange across a college campus, these reports discuss a classroomenvironment where the process of education is student-centered,which features active learning, and that accommodates students’varied learning styles.

In her monograph, They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different: Stalkingthe Second Tier,3 Sheila Tobias echoes these findings. Her work pin-points some specific classroom characteristics that, if addressed,might help to retain some of the “second tier” students (i.e., thoseoften high achievers who are serious about their learning and careergoals but who, for some reason, chose not to pursue science and en-gineering). In particular, she notes the “classroom culture” of sci-ence and the traditional classroom environment and teaching styleused. She asserts that many traditional science courses suffer from alack of community (both between the instructor and the studentsand among the students themselves) and that many students desirethis relationship and are more successful when it is incorporatedinto the classroom. Other factors that Dr. Tobias identifies as po-tentially inhibiting student success are the lack of identifiable goalsin a course (i.e., the “big picture”), the competitive environmentthat is sometimes present in science and engineering courses, andthe often exclusive problem solving nature of the classroom. Shefurther states that many students would respond better to science ifmore cooperative and interactive modes of learning were part of thepedagogy, and if scientific knowledge were more closely and explic-itly linked to important societal issues.

This paper discusses some practical suggestions for improvingthe classroom environment, many of which parallel the strategiesdiscussed by Dr. Tobias. The ideas were inspired by a roundtablediscussion of over a dozen science and engineering educators at onesession of the 29th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Con-ference in San Juan, Puerto Rico. That session led to a follow-uppresentation at the 30 th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in EducationConference4 where general advice and specific suggestions from theexperience of the authors were used to supplement suggestionsfrom the roundtable discussion. This paper is a further extension ofthat presentation. Here, strategies for success are categorized intoactivities that pertain to planning the course and those that concernconducting the course. A bibliography included at the end of thispaper could be beneficial to instructors before entering the planningphase or throughout the course duration.

II. STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS

A. Planning the CourseSuccess in a course comes, in part, from having planned struc-

ture. Three things that can lead to such structure are describedhere—preparing a clear set of instructional objectives, developingthe course syllabus, and establishing grading policies conducive tostudent learning.

1) Instructional Objectives: Course instructors seek to conveyknowledge, encourage learning and interest, and develop a group of

October 2001 Journal of Engineering Education 491

Strategies for Improving the ClassroomEnvironment*

*Based on “Improving the Classroom Environment” by Allen Klinger, CynthiaJ. Finelli, and Dan D. Budny, which appeared in the Proceedings of the 30 th AnnualIEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Kansas City, MO, October 18–21,2000. IEEE Catalog No. 00CH37135, pp. T1B.1–T1B.6, © 2000 IEEE.

skilled individuals. One way to accomplish these things is to con-sider the exams before the semester begins and to list the skills thatwill be required to successfully complete them. Then, a set of in-structional objectives for the course can be prepared to reflect therequired skills.

In Preparing Instructional Objectives, Robert Mager describessome practical guidelines for writing effective instructional objec-tives.5 He asserts that the objectives must include three characteris-tics: (1) a statement about what the learner must be able to do, (2) adescription of the conditions under which the performance is tooccur, and (3) a description of the criteria for acceptable perfor-mance. James Stice6 states, “Instructional objectives are the most im-portant tool in the teacher’s kit because they specify the outcome ofthe course.” Thus, preparing instructional objectives gives the in-structor a clear idea of the purposes and goals of the course, allowingone to identify important material, delete extraneous content, andplan for the course activities. Further, when shared with the stu-dents, the objectives provide a logical and coherent framework forthe course and appeal to those students who desire the big picture.

2) Course Syllabus: After the course instructional objectives havebeen prepared, the most appropriate methods and materials for delivering the content can be selected and a syllabus can be devel-oped. The syllabus should describe how to achieve the course in-structional objectives. It should clearly communicate the coursegoals and should include a description of the instructional objectivesthat will guide the course, provide information about the textbook,indicate a list of supplementary reference material, contain the grad-ing policy, and address other course logistics. The syllabus shouldalso list the instructor’s contact information and office hours, as wellas a statement encouraging students to use the office hours (i.e.,more than just the phrase “… and by appointment”). The instructorshould also include some personal information and a description ofhis/her teaching philosophy. This will allow the students to feel arapport with the instructor and may begin to establish a sense ofcommunity in the classroom.

3) Grading Policy: The goal of establishing a grading policy is toprovide guidelines from which the instructor can measure differentlevels of accomplishment. This must be consistent with the coursegoals and with the course instructional objectives. As purported byTobias, a grading policy that fosters student cooperation and di-minishes the level of competition may be best for many courses inscience and engineering. It is difficult to encourage teamwork andcollaboration if students see classmates as competitors who couldraise or lower the curve, and many experts recommend stronglyagainst grading on a curve for just this reason.7–9

The instructor should take into account student grading con-cerns when establishing the grading policy. Many students needclarity and specificity in this regard; it is an important component ofevery course in their eyes. The policy should address their key ques-tions such as: How are the exams given? What will be their nature, fre-quency, and length? What fraction of the course grade will depend onexam scores? Further, the instructor should decide whether testsalone can accomplish the goals of the course or whether other de-vices (such as attendance, class participation, homework, and designprojects) will be used to provide a measure of different achievementlevels. From a student’s perspective, a verbal description of variousachievement levels can further clarify the grading policy.

Finally, throughout the semester, the instructor should providestudents with feedback about their performance with respect to the

grading policy. This simple task can be a useful tool in motivatingextra achievement for students with various learning styles.

B. Conducting the CoursePlanning a productive first class session and adopting a class-

room demeanor that may stimulate student interaction are two im-portant issues in conducting a successful course. Other issues in-clude incorporating practical applications into the classroom,motivating various student learning styles, encouraging class partic-ipation, and using active learning in the classroom.

1) The First Day: Getting off to a good start is vital, so the firstclass session is an ideal opportunity to be clear about expectationsand to impress on the students that the course is well-planned andorganized. This is a time for the instructor to share his/her expecta-tions for the course, to describe the overall goals of the course, andto explain the relevancy of the course to the students’ curriculumand their education in general. This can begin to create a climatewhere students view the instructor as approachable.

In addition to reviewing the course syllabus, some suggested ac-tivities for the first day include reading and distributing a letter aboutone’s teaching philosophy and discussing the value of pedagogicalactivities (i.e., focus on learning styles, active learning, or teamwork).Also, having students read advice from others in previous courses orhaving them participate in a course-specific icebreaker activity onthe first day, such as self-introduction, can go a long way towardsfostering a sense of community.

2) Classroom Demeanor: The instructor should design each classperiod with the goals of improving students’ understanding of theconcepts, having them learn to apply the basic principles of thecourse, and developing in them the ability to solve new problemswith these skills. These goals are easier to achieve when the instruc-tor’s classroom demeanor promotes confidence and community inthe students, and it is important that the rapport one initiates onthe first day be sustained throughout the semester. To facilitate thisrapport, the instructor should be available to students by establish-ing ample office hours, both for students and for teaching assis-tants, and by being available during those times.

The instructor should also show that he/she respects the stu-dents and their time in the classroom. Adhering to the scheduledstart and stop times of the class, not rushing through material at theend of the class session, eliminating meaningless activity and busy-work, avoiding long, personal stories, and not reading verbatimfrom a textbook or other source are important means for achievingthis focus.

Another way to establish a positive classroom demeanor is tovary the method for delivering course material. The instructor candistribute copies of key theoretical materials, leaving gaps for stu-dents to complete during class. The students will appreciate nothaving to take extensive notes during the class period, and they willhave more time to concentrate on the material being presented.Also, many approaches to delivering course material—such as classemail lists, websites, xeroxed handouts, and projects—can enlivenand enrich teaching and learning experiences, so the instructorshould strive to include a variety of these methods as well.

Setting realistic expectations and respecting students can alsopromote productive instructional activity. In this regard, instruc-tors should avoid talking down to the students, should not dis-courage students because of their mistakes, should speak openlywith the students, and should strive to practice positive, optimistic,

492 Journal of Engineering Education October 2001

success-oriented teaching. Being responsive to and encouragingstudent questions also conveys respect. As such, the instructorshould provide some answer to each student question, even if theanswer is just, “I’ll have to get back to you later about that.” Fur-ther, the instructor must follow through on what was promised bydetermining the answer and reporting back to the class.

To further promote a successful classroom environment, the instructor should practice some simple things such as facing thestudent audience and speaking slowly and clearly. Most studentsare either unfamiliar with the subject matter or are significantly lessacquainted with it than the instructor, so what might be a normalexchange in a collegial context may be not understood at all bysomeone exposed to the material for the first time. Language diffi-culties (in terms of an instructor or student with English as a sec-ond language) can also be minimized with this approach. Rephras-ing material throughout a lecture and keeping eye contact withstudents may also improve their understanding.

Throughout the semester, it is important to assess the progressof the course. The instructor should periodically review all assign-ments and tests, comparing them with the instructional objectives,and should determine whether the course is proceeding as expected.Collecting students’ written reactions and thoughts throughout thecourse can also be helpful in establishing a positive classroom de-meanor, and their suggestions can help shape the course direction.

One final suggestion involves periodically updating the coursecontent to reflect the evolving nature of engineering and techno-logy. For example, changes in cost, size, and availability of elec-tronic devices can be incorporated into electrical engineeringcourses, and selection of appropriate higher level programminglanguages, computer-aided design programs, and operating sys-tems can be added into software engineering courses. Further it isimportant to introduce students to global issues and perspectives.For instance, local newspapers and popular periodicals frequentlyfeature stories about technological innovations of other countries.Discussing a current story related to the course material can stim-ulate learning for many students. An attempt to verify that thegoals of the course reflect the current needs of the profession is anongoing necessity.

3) Practical Applications: Another key to completing a successfulcourse involves relating the curriculum to real life problems and tocurrent events. This is often made possible by including practicalapplications in the classroom, and the instructor can accomplishthis by drawing on personal experience or by using student exam-ples as sources of realistic problems. Students who participate inprofessional work programs, research activity, or community ser-vice while in college can be a valuable source of such information.Since there are many situations where universities, consortia, andacademic-industrial partnerships bring students into contact withrealistic problems, all that is necessary is to take advantage of thoseactivities in teaching situations.

For example, Kettering University has a mandatory cooperativeeducation program. Students are placed with an employer in theirfield of study (currently the school has partnerships with over 600companies), and they alternate semesters at their worksite and oncampus beginning with their first freshman semester. A similar sit-uation is the Federal Work-Study Program at UCLA.10 Under thisprogram, undergraduate students have some financial support fromthe federal government, and they get practical experience by work-ing for the university, for governmental agencies, or for public or

private non-profit organizations. At the University of Pittsburghthe connection with industry begins in the first year when studentsare teamed with alumni in the Pittsburgh area to assist the studentswith their semester writing projects. A similar program is the Manu-facturing Engineering Education Partnership between Penn State,the University of Puerto Rico, and the University of Washington.Through all of these experiences, students are often able to providepractical insight to classroom activities.

4) Learning Styles and Class Participation: Striking a balance be-tween lecturing and engaging in alternative teaching techniques tostimulate students with various learning styles can be a challenge.Learning style is a biologically and developmentally imposed set ofpersonal characteristics that make some teaching (and learning)methods effective for certain students but ineffective for others, andvarious models of learning style preferences have been described.These include the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,11 Kolb’s LearningStyle Model,12, 13 the Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model,14 andthe Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model.15, 16 Several practition-ers within the domains of science and engineering education havenoted the importance of embedding a learning style approach with-in a variety of teaching strategies,17–30 and still others have studiedapplications of psychological types in various educational do-mains.31–35 Rita Dunn has offered the following statements based oncurrent research on learning styles to assure that every person hasthe opportunity to learn:36

● Each person is unique, can learn, and has an individual learn-ing style.

● Individual learning styles should be acknowledged and respected.

● Learning style is a function of heredity and experience, in-cluding strengths and limitations, and it develops individuallyover the life span.

● Learning style is a combination of affective, cognitive, envi-ronmental, and physiological responses that characterize howa person learns.

● Individual information processing is fundamental to a learn-ing style and can be strengthened over time with inter-vention.

● Learning style is a complex construct for which a compre-hensive understanding is evolving.

● Learners are empowered by a knowledge of their own andothers’ learning styles.

● Effective curriculum and instruction are learning-style basedand personalized to address and honor diversity.

● Effective teachers continually monitor activities to ensurecompatibility of instruction and evaluation with each indi-vidual’s learning style strengths.

● Teaching individuals through their learning style strengthsimproves their achievement, self-esteem, and attitude towardlearning.

● Every individual is entitled to counseling and instruction thatresponds to his/her style of learning.

● A viable learning style model must be grounded in theoreticaland applied research, periodically evaluated, and adapted toreflect the developing knowledge base.

● Implementation of learning style practices must adhere to ac-cepted standards of ethics.

To promote effective learning, it is important to provide suit-able activities that appeal to each learning style.


An instructor who strives to understand his/her own learningstyle may also gain skill in the classroom. Consider the question,How does the way you learn influence the way that you teach? Most instructors tend to think that others see the world the way they do,but viewing things from a different learning perspective can be use-ful. It is good practice to specifically contemplate approaches to ac-commodate different learners, and this is often easiest after an in-structor learns about his/her own learning style. An instructor withsome understanding of differences in student learning styles hastaken steps toward making teaching more productive.

It is also important for the instructor to encourage class par-ticipation, but one must keep in mind the differences in studentlearning style when doing so. Research has shown that there aredominant learning characteristics involved in the perception ofinformation through concrete versus abstract experience.12,13,30

Some learners need to express their feelings, they seek personalmeaning as they learn, and they desire personal interaction withthe instructors as well as with other students. A characteristicquestion of this learning type is why. This student desires andrequests active verbal participation in the classroom. Other indi-viduals, though, best obtain information through abstract con-ceptualization and active experimentation. This learner tends torespond well both to active learning opportunities with well-de-fined tasks and to trial-and-error learning in an environmentthat allows them to fail safely. These individuals like to test in-formation, try things, take things apart, see how things work,and learn by doing. A characteristic question of this learningtype is how. Thus, this student also desires active participation;however, hands-on activity is preferred over verbal interaction.

The instructor must have a sincere interest in the students.However there is no best single way to encourage participation.Individual student differences in willingness to participate byasking questions often surface.37–39 Still, although the number oftimes an individual speaks up strongly depends on student per-sonality qualities, a class where all are encouraged to enter intodialog is preferable, and opening the lecture to questions bene-fits all students.

5) Active Learning: An ancient proverb states, “Tell me, and Iforget; Show me, and I remember; Involve me, and I understand.”This is the basis for active learning in the classroom,40 and extensiveresearch indicates that what people tend to remember is highly cor-related with their level of involvement. Edgar Dale’s cone of learn-ing 41 shows that students tend to remember only 20% of what theyhear and 30% of what they see. However, by participating in a dis-cussion or other active experience, retention may be increased to upto 90%.

Cooperative learning is a formalized active learning structurewhich, as defined by Johnson, Johnson, and Smith,42, 43 involves stu-dents working together in small groups to accomplish shared learn-ing goals and to maximize their own and each other’s learning.Their work indicates that students exhibit a higher level of individ-ual achievement, develop more positive interpersonal relationships,and achieve greater levels of academic self-esteem when participat-ing in a successful cooperative learning environment.

However, cooperation is more than being physically nearother students, discussing material with other students, helpingothers, or sharing materials amongst a group, and instructorsmust be careful when implementing cooperative learning in theclassroom. For a cooperative learning experience to be successful,

it is essential that the following five elements be integrated intothe activity:42, 43

1. Positive Interdependence—Students perceive that they needeach other in order to complete the group task.

2. Face-to Face Interaction—Students promote each others’learning by helping, sharing, and encouraging efforts to learn.Students explain, discuss, and teach what they know to class-mates. Groups are physically structured (i.e., around a smalltable) so that students sit and talk through each aspect of theassignment.

3. Individual Accountability—Each student’s performance isfrequently assessed, and the results are given to the group andthe individual. Giving an individual test to each student orrandomly selecting one group member to give the answer accomplishes individual accountability.

4. Interpersonal and Small Group Skills—Groups cannotfunction effectively if students do not have and use the re-quired social skills. Collaborative skills include leadership,decision making, communication, trust building, and conflictmanagement.

5. Group Processing—Groups need specific time to discusshow well they are achieving their goals and maintaining ef-fective working relationships among members. Group pro-cessing can be accomplished by asking students to completesuch tasks as: (a) List at least three member actions thathelped the group be successful, or (b) List one action thatcould be added to make the group even more successful to-morrow. Instructors also monitor the groups and give feed-back on how well the groups are working together to thegroups and the class as a whole.

When including cooperative learning in the classroom, the in-structor should do so after careful planning. Also, the students maybe more receptive to the experience if the instructor shares somethoughts about cooperative learning and the benefits to be gainedby the activity.

IV. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS AND SUMMARY

Many of the participants in the 29th Annual IEEE/ASEEFrontiers in Education Conference roundtable session that in-spired this paper teach in universities throughout the UnitedStates in several departments of engineering and computer sci-ence. It is the experience of these participants and of the authorsof this paper that students in those disciplines have strong com-petitive tendencies, frequently seek to avoid writing, and oftenobtain less training in verbal give-and-take than those in sociol-ogy, political science, and English. Some of the classroom prac-tices recommended in this paper expose students to a mode oflearning that supports writing and speaking skills, providinglong-term career benefits for students.

There are many different approaches to improving a classroomenvironment, and Table 1 summarizes some suggestions identifiedin this paper. Including activities that appeal to all learning styles,creating a classroom with active participation of students, combin-ing open-ended tasks and those with well-defined goals, includingboth demonstrations and lectures in the classroom, and using verbaland pictorial descriptions and examples are key to a good overall in-structional model.


V. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The attached bibliography provides several ways to tap into thethoughts of others about class activities. One way to begin involvesinvestigating learning or cognitive styles. Another is to focus on asubject area and seek out stimulating sources within it. A third ap-proach involves reviewing material specifically geared towards im-proving class methods.

For the reader seeking reference material about effective ways tostructure learning, the books presented in references44–49 can begrouped under the heading Educational Quality. They discuss top-ics (such as society, culture, visual thinking, brain dominance, andquality issues) that pertain to the United States’ educational sys-tem. For those interested in the subject of mathematics, the cita-tions listed under50–61 could be classified as Quantitative Thinking.Several of these are written by non-mathematicians and cover awide range of historic and cultural issues in the area of mathemat-ics education.

Finally, besides the resources cited throughout this paper, refer-ences listed under62–66 could be classified as Engineering Education,and they provide information that could be useful for any college in-structor in science or engineering. Materials published by the Amer-

ican Society for Engineering Education (including Prism and theJournal of Engineering Education) and by the IEEE Education Soci-ety (including IEEE Transactions on Education) are also valuable re-sources. Many of these references have useful web sites as well (forexample, see http://www.asee.org, http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu, http://www.ams.org/journals, or http://www.jstor.org/journals).

REFERENCES

1. “Engineering Education in a Changing World,” Report of anASEE Workshop for the Engineering Deans Council and CorporateRoundtable, American Society for Engineering Education, Oct.,1994.

2. “Restructuring Engineering Education: A Focus on Change,”Report of an NSF Workshop on Engineering Education, NSF 95-65,National Science Foundation, Aug. 16, 1995.

3. Tobias, S., They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different: Stalking theSecond Tier, Science News Books, Long Branch, NJ, 1994.

4. Klinger, A., C.J. Finelli, and D.D. Budny, “Improving the Class-room Environment,” 30th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Con-ference, Kansas City, MO, Oct. 18–21, 2000.

5. Mager, R.F., Preparing Instructional Objectives, Third Edition, TheCenter for Effective Performance, Atlanta, GA, 1997.

6. Stice, J.E., “A First Step Toward Improved Teaching,” EngineeringEducation, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 394–398, Feb., 1976.

7. Davis, B.G., Tools for Teaching, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco,CA, 1993.

8. McKeachie, W.J., Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory forCollege and University Teachers, Tenth Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company,Boston, MA, 1999.

9. Wankat, P.C. and F.S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1993. Out of print—also see http://unitflops.ecn. purdue.edu/ChE/News/Book/.

10. “1999–2000 On-Campus Work-Study Employer Guide,” Univer-sity of California, Los Angeles, http://www.saonet.ucla.edu/fa/workstud/common/employer_guide.asp, 1999.

11. Myers, I.B. and M.H. McCaulley, Manual: A Guide to the Develop-ment and Use of the Myers-Briggs Indicator, Consulting Psychologists Press,Inc., Palo Alto, CA, 1985.

12. Kolb, D.A., Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learn-ing and Development, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, CA, 1984.

13. Kolb, D.A., “Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences,” inA. Chickering and Associates (editors), The Modern American College,Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 1981.

14. Felder, R.M., “Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and TeachingStyles in College Science Education,” Journal of College Science Teaching,vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 286–290, 1993.

15. Dunn, R., “Understanding the Dunn and Dunn Learning StylesModel and the Need for Individual Diagnosis and Prescription,” Reading,Writing and Learning Disabilities, vol. 6, pp. 223–247, 1990.

16. Dunn, R., J.S. Beaudry, and A. Klavas, “Survey of Research onLearning Styles,” Educational Leadership, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 50–58, 1989.

17. Budny, D.D., “Counselor Tutorial Program (A Cooperative Learn-ing Program for the High Risk Freshmen Engineering Courses),” Journalof the Freshmen Year Experience, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 29–52, 1994.

18. Felder, R.M., “Matters of Style,” ASEE Prism, vol. 6, no. 4, pp.18–23, Dec., 1996.


Table 1. Suggestions for improving a classroom environment.

19. Felder, R.M. and L.K. Silverman, “Learning and Teaching Stylesin Engineering Education,” Engineering Education, vol. 78, no. 7, pp. 674–681, 1988.

20. Finelli, C.J., “Assessing Improvement in Students’ Team Skills andUsing a Learning Style Inventory to Increase It,” 31st Annual IEEE/ASEEFrontiers in Education Conference, Reno, NE, Oct. 10–13, 2001.

21. Harb, J.N., S. Olani Durrant, and R.E. Terry. “Use of the KolbLearning Cycle and the 4MAT System in Engineering Education,” Jour-nal of Engineering Education, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 70–77, 1993.

22. Hein, T.L., Digital Video, Learning Styles, and Student Understand-ing of Kinematics Graphs, Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University,1997.

23. Hein, T.L., “Learning Style Analysis in a Calculus-Based Introduc-tory Physics Course,” 1995 Annual Conference of the American Society for En-gineering Education, Anaheim, CA, June 25–28, 1995.

24. Hein, T.L. and D.D. Budny, “Teaching to Students’ LearningStyles: Approaches That Work,” 29th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Ed-ucation Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Nov. 10–13, 1999.

25. Hein, T.L. and D.D. Budny, “Why Bother Learning about Learn-ing Styles and Psychological Types?” 2000 Annual Conference of the Ameri-can Society for Engineering Education, St. Louis, MO, June 18–21, 2000.

26. Hein, T.L. and D.A. Zollman, “Investigating Student Under-standing of Kinematics Graphs Following Instruction that Utilized In-teractive Digital Video Techniques, and the Role that Learning StylePlays in that Process,” AAPT Announcer (Addendum), vol. 26, no. 4,pp. 3, 1997.

27. Herrick, B., D.D. Budny, and J. Samples, “Teaching to Your Audi-ence,” 28th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Tempe,AZ, Nov. 4–7, 1998.

28. Melton, D.E., C.J. Finelli, and L.M. Rust, “A Digital Signal Pro-cessing Laboratory with Style,” 29th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Edu-cation Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Nov. 10–13, 1999.

29. Sharp, J.E., J.N. Harb, and R.E. Terry, “Combining Kolb LearningStyles and Writing to Learn in Engineering Classes,” Journal of EngineeringEducation, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 93–101, 1997.

30. Tendy, S.M. and W.F. Geiser, “The Search for Style: It All De-pends on Where You Look,” National FORUM of Teacher Education Jour-nal, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 3–15, 1998–1999.

31. Gladis, S.D., Personality Types and Writing Styles, Human ResourceDevelopment Press, Inc., Amherst, MA, 1993.

32. Godleski, E.S., “Using Personality Type (MBTI) to Increase Re-tention of Engineering Students,” 1986 Annual Conference of the AmericanSociety for Engineering Education, Cincinnati, OH, pp. 304–307.

33. McCaulley, M., “Psychological Types in Engineering: Implicationsfor Teaching,” Engineering Education, vol. 66, no. 7, 1976.

34. McCaulley, M., et al., “Applications of Psychological Type in Engi-neering Education,” Engineering Education, vol. 73, no. 5, pp. 394–400,1995.

35. Yokomoto, C.F. and R. Ware, “Improving Problem Solving Usingthe MBTI,” 1982 Annual Conference of the American Society for EngineeringEducation, College Station, TX.

36. Dunn, R., “Learning Styles Network Mission and Belief State-ments Adopted,” Learning Styles Network Newsletter, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1,1992.

37. Baron, R., What Type Am I? Discover Who You Really Are, PenguinPutnam Inc., New York, NY, 1998.

38. Jung, C.G., “Psychological Types,” in R.F.C. Hull (editor), TheCollected Works of C.G. Jung, vol. 6, Princeton University Press, NJ, 1971.

39. Mamchur, C., Cognitive Type Theory and Learning Style, Associa-tion for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA, 1996.

40. Bonwell, C.C. and J.A. Eison, Active Learning: Creating Excitementin the Classroom, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, no. 1, TheGeorge Washington University, School of Education and Human Devel-opment, Washington, D.C., 1991.

41. Dale, E., Audiovisual Methods in Teaching, Third Edition, DrydenPress, New York, NY, 1969.

42. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, and K.A. Smith, Active Learning:Cooperation in the College Classroom, Interaction Book Company, Edina,MN, 1991.

43. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, and K.A. Smith, CooperativeLearning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, no. 1, The George Washington Univer-sity, School of Education and Human Development, Washington, D.C.,1991.

44. Adams, J.L., Conceptual Blockbusting, W.H. Freeman, San Francisco,CA, 1974.

45. Deming, W.E., Out of the Crisis, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,1986.

46. Fisher, R. and W. Ury, Getting to YES, Houghton Mifflin, Boston,MA, 1981.

47. Lumsdaine, E. and M. Lumsdaine, Creative Problem Solving, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1995.

48. Stevenson, H.W. and J.W. Stigler, Learning Gap—Why Our SchoolsAre Failing and What We Can Learn from Japanese and Chinese Education,Summit Books, New York, NY, 1992.

49. Tobias, S., Overcoming Math Anxiety, W.W. Norton and Co., NewYork, NY, 1994.

50. Beckmann, P., A History of Pi, Golem Press, Boulder, CO, 1982.51. Chernyak, Y.B. and R.M. Rose, The Chicken from Minsk, Harper-

Collins Basic Books, New York, NY, 1995.52. Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, The

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc., Reston, VA, 1992.53. Devlin, K., Mathematics: The Science of Patterns, W.H. Freeman and

Company, New York, NY, 1994.54. Dunham, W., Journey Through Genius: The Great Theorems of

Mathematics, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1990.55. Gillings, R.J., Mathematics in the Time of the Pharaohs, The MIT

Press, Cambridge, MA, 1972.56. Hoffman, P., The Man Who Loved Only Numbers—The Story of

Paul Erdos and the Search for Mathematical Truth, Hyperion, New York,NY, 1998.

57. Joseph, G.G., The Crest of the Peacock—Non-European Roots ofMathematics, I.B. Tauris and Co. Ltd Publishers, London, UK, 1991.

58. Kasner, E. and J.R. Newman, Mathematics and the Imagination,Tempus Books of Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA, 1989.

59. Osen, L.M., Women in Mathematics, The MIT Press, Cambridge,MA, 1974.

60. Sobel, D., Longitude—The True Story of a Lone Genius Who Solvedthe Greatest Scientific Problem of His Time, Fourth Estate, London, UK,1995.

61. Stein, S.K., Strength in Numbers, John Wiley and Sons, New York,NY, 1996.

62. Brent, R. and R.M. Felder, “It’s a Start,” College Teaching, vol. 47,no. 1, pp. 14–17, 1999.

63. Davidson, C.I. and S.A. Ambrose, The New Professor’s Handbook: AGuide to Teaching and Research in Engineering and Science, Anker PublishingCompany, Bolton, MA, 1994.


64. Gupta, M.S., Teaching Engineering: A Beginner’s Guide, IEEEPress, New York, NY, 1987.

65. Klinger, A., “Course Development in Computer Science Design,”29 th Annual IEEE/ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Juan,Puerto Rico, Nov. 10–13, 1999.

66. Smith, R.A., Innovative Teaching in Engineering, Ellis Horwood,New York, NY, 1991.


Documents

Strategies for Improving the Classroom Environment*