Refocusing on the Operational Level of Pedagogy:
A Military Analogy for Bridging
Educational Strategy and Classroom Tactics
American Society for Engineering Education
New England Section Annual Conference
17 March 2006
MAJ Ernest Y. Wong
Department of Systems Engineering
United States Military Academy
The United States Military Academy
Department of Systems Engineering
- Serving the Academy & the Army since 1989 Diverse Faculty
39 Faculty (33 military, 6 civilian)
15 Ph.Ds (+ 3 ABD) and 49 M.S.
All military career fields represented
4 White House Fellows in 11 years
Nationally recognized Academic &
Research Programs
State of the Art Facilities
Academic Programs
Systems Engineering *
Operations Research
Engineering Management
Information Engineering
Systems Management
*
Unique Capabilities
Integrated laboratories:
• Combat Simulation Lab (CSL)
• Systems Methodology & Design Lab
(SMDL)
• Acquisition Management Systems
Design (AMSD) Lab
• Computer Aided Systems Engineering
(CASE) Labs
• Information Visualization Lab (IVL)
Slide 2 of 12
Academic
Expertise
Military
Experience
* ABET Accredited
Core Systems Engineering Sequence Model
Crawl
Walk
Run
Introductory Course
Methods Course
Design Course
SE300
SE350
SE450
• Introduces non-Engineering majors to a
Developslearned
studentinteams capable of
• Builds
upon
the mathematics and basic science •concepts
systematic problem
solving
framework
helping satisfy client needs and
the undergraduate
• Acquaints undergraduate
students to core curriculum
proposing solutions to actual
• Introduces
non-Engineering majors to various quantitative
engineering concepts
and terminology
problems
methods
--Stakeholder Analysis
Point Cemetery
• Focuses on the application of economic, deterministic,--West
and stochastic
--Problem Definition
--Army/Navy Game Site
--Value Hierarchymodels
--Decision Analysis (Risk and Uncertainty)--Cadet Summer Training
--Alternative Generation
--Cadet Ethics Training
--Engineering Economy (Time Value of Money)
--Cost Benefit Analysis
--Post 9/11 Traffic Flow
--Optimization Techniques
--Pareto Principle
--Officer Branch Selection
--Forecasting
--Functional Decomposition
--Army UAV Cmd & Cntl
--Spreadsheet Modeling
--Assessment & Control
--Soldier Pre-Deployment Tng
--Monte Carlo Simulation
Slide 3 of 12
Educational Strategy, Operations, and Tactics
Classrooms that educate, train, and inspire students
towards higher levels of cognitive functions
WHY?
Strategy
General direction
and overall plan
of the educational
vision
WHAT?
Operations
Content and processes
that bridge theoretical
concepts with practical
knowledge
HOW?
Tactics
Employed techniques
and procedures for
classroom interaction
& communications
“Tactics is the art of using troops in battle; strategy is the art of using battles to win the war.”
--Carl von Clausewitz
Slide 4 of 12
Military Strategy, Operations, and Tactics
All Three Help Commanders:
• Visualize a logical flow of
operations
• Allocate resources
• Assign tasks
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
Slide 5 of 12
The U.S. Army’s Field Manual Number FM 3-0, Operations
Operational Initiatives to Help Bridge
Pedagogical Strategy & Classroom Tactics in SE350
1. Spreadsheet Modeling—Federal Income Taxes
• Introduce tax filing requirements
• Show practical purpose for spreadsheets
• Demonstrate spreadsheet as a management tool
2. Engineering Economy—Personal Finance Project
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
Slide 6 of 12
Total Expenses
6500.00
6000.00
5500.00
5000.00
4500.00
4000.00
3500.00
3000.00
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
1000.00
500.00
Sep-
Apr-06
Nov-06
Dec-
Jul-04
Feb-05
Oct-02
Mar-02
May-03
Jan-01
Jun-00
Aug-01
Sep-
Apr-99
Nov-99
Dec-
Jul-97
Feb-98
Oct-95
Mar-95
May-96
0.00
-500.00
Aug-94
• 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
Summative Student Feedback in SE350
Answers:
[5] Strongly Agree
[4] Agree
[3] Neutral
[2] Disagree
[1] Strongly Disagree
Course - SE350 (Spring 2005)
Answer Answer Answer Answer Answer
[5]
[4]
[3]
[2]
[1]
(no rsp)
A1. This instructor encouraged students to be responsible for their own learning.
42
(42%)
48
(48%)
9
(9%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
A2. This instructor used effective techniques for learning, both in class and for out-ofclass assignments.
37
(37%)
48
(48%)
12
(12%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
A3. My instructor cared 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 individuals.
56
(57%)
37
(37%)
5
(5%)
1
(1%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
A5. My fellow students contributed to my learning in this course.
36
(36%)
42
(42%)
14
(14%)
5
(5%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
A6. My motivation to learn and to continue learning has increased because of this course.
29
(29%)
41
(41%)
17
(17%)
9
(9%)
3
(3%)
0
(0%)
B1. This instructor stimulated 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 completed
within the USMA time guideline of two hours preparation for each class attendance.
32
(32%)
54
(55%)
10
(10%)
3
(3%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
C1. This course helped me learn 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 communicate effectively 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 real-world problems through quantitative
techniques.
28
(28%)
53
(54%)
13
(13%)
4
(4%)
1
(1%)
0
(0%)
C4. This course provided me with practical, problem-solving experiences applicable to my
34
future as an Army officer.
(34%)
44
(44%)
14
(14%)
5
(5%)
2
(2%)
0
(0%)
54
(55%)
11
(11%)
3
(3%)
1
(1%)
0
(0%)
C5. Course exercises and designs improved my ability to model, analyze, or prototype
real-world problems or systems.
Slide 7 of 12
30
(30%)
Formative Student Feedback in SE350
• “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.”
Slide 8 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
Slide 9 of 12
Pros and Cons of the Military Setting for Class
Cons
Pros
• Standardized Curriculum
• Standardized Curriculum
--Core courses
--Core courses
--Technology baseline
--Technology baseline
• Common graduation prospects • Common graduation prospects
--Duties and responsibilities
--Duties and responsibilities
--Military environment
--Military environment
--Role as Second Lieutenant
--Role as Second Lieutenant
An inscription dedicated to Dennis Hart Mahan,
Professor of Engineering at the United States Military
Academy from 1832 to 1871, describes him as “a man
who emphasized that theoretical knowledge should be
applied with common sense.”
Slide 10 of 12
Operational Context—The Bridge Between
Strategy and Tactics
Slide 11 of 12
Questions?
ernest.wong@usma.edu
Slide 12 of 12