• 인재니움
• /
• 제5권3호
• /
• pp.43-48
• /
• 1998

• 인재니움
• /
• 제5권3호
• /
• pp.63-67
• /
• 1998

• 인재니움
• /
• 제2권3호
• /
• pp.20-31
• /
• 1995

• 인재니움
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.20-34
• /
• 1998

• 인재니움
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.68-78
• /
• 1998

• 인재니움
• /
• 제6권3_4호
• /
• pp.46-54
• /
• 1999

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.65-76
• /
• 2015

Despite its ineffectiveness, the dominant pedagogy for engineering education is still "chalk & talk". Meanwhile, student-centered learning models have been highlighted for strong communication, teamwork skills, deep understanding and analysis on social, environmental and economic issues as well as application of their engineering knowledge in practice. Among others, on problem- and project-based learning, this article examines theoretical background and detailed features and a comparison between both learning models including common and different features from the previous theoretical and empirical studies. It reviews some cases of where they have been practiced successfully in engineering, and further, applied strategies for engineering education are suggested.

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제16권6호
• /
• pp.78-86
• /
• 2013

This paper presents an undergraduate curriculum flowchart model for industrial engineering. Because Industrial Engineering deals with wider categories today than before, the coherent curriculum flowchart design is very difficult. We propose an effective approach using knowledge profile analysis for each course.

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.5-19
• /
• 2007

공과대학은 다른 인문, 사회 계열과는 달리 교양교육과정이 전공과정과 뚜렷하게 구분되기 때문에 어떤 형태와 내용으로 구성되어 있느냐에 따라 학생의 학습 성과(outcomes)에 많은 영향을 미칠 수 있다. 또한 한국의 공과대학에서는 공학교육인증(ABEEK) 시행에 따라 그 기준에 부합하는 교양교육과정을 구성하는 방법상의 문제에 많은 혼란이 있어 왔다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 미국의 우수한 공과대학으로 꼽히고 있는 스탠포드대학교(Stanford University), 메사추세스공과대학(Massachusetts Institute of Technology), 로즈헐맨공과대학(Rose-hulman Institute of technology)과 프린스턴대학교(Princeton University)와 미시간대학교(Michigan University-Ann Arbor) 그리고 펜실베이니아 주립대학교(Pennsylvania State University)와 캔자스주립대학교(kansas state University)의 교양교육과정을 비교하여 한국 공과대학 교양교육과정 구성에 시사점을 찾기 위해 구현방식과 학문적 영역상의 특성을 분석하여 제시하였다.

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.66-75
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to norm the engineering design competency test. To achieve the purpose of the study, a survey was conducted on engineering college students nationwide using engineering design competency test developed in the precedent study, and a total of 2,859 questionnaires were analyzed. The main results are as follows. First, the national average of engineering design competency scores was 158 out of 240 points. Second, there was no significant difference between genders in engineering design competency by background variables. On the other hand, there was a significant difference by major. It was found that mechanical and construction majors have higher engineering design competency than IT and chemical/material engineering majors. Also, the scores of engineering design competency increased as the grade went up. Third, the number of courses related to engineering design did not affect by engineering design competency, but the actual number of times of experience in engineering design was affected by engineering design competency.