INTEGRATING SERVICE-LEARNING PROJECTS INTO CIVIL ENGINEERING COURSES

Three service-learning projects of various content, workload, and community
partnering were identified and implemented in two core and one elective undergraduate courses in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Lowell in 2005. This paper presents how these service learning projects were seamlessly integrated into existing courses without removing pertinent course materials and without a significant increase in time commitment. Details on the course contents, course structure, projects implemented, and how each project was used to address certain course objectives were presented as well. The selected projects were as follows: (1) Davidson Street Parking Lot Redesign for the City of Lowell; (2) Intersection Analysis – Traffic Signal Control for the City of Lowell; and (3) Preliminary Building Structural Evaluation for the Architectural Heritage Foundation in Lowell, MA. Over 80 undergraduate students ranging from freshmen to seniors participated in these community-based projects. Course objectives and ABET program outcomes were evaluated by a course-specific survey questionnaire. Students’ experience on the S-L project was assessed by a newly developed survey instrument. The survey demonstrated that service learning had several positive impacts on the students.


INTRODUCTION
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) has a relatively new set of criteria, ABET EC 2000, for engineering programs.i In addition to achieving the more traditional technical objectives, these criteria require that graduates demonstrate: • an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams • an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility • the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context • a knowledge of contemporary issues.i Service-learning is the integration of academic subject matter with service to the community in credit-bearing courses, with key elements including reciprocity, reflection, coaching, and community voice in projects.ii Service-learning team projects have the potential to ensure students learn and satisfy these objectives in addition to applying engineering to the design of systems and experiments.Service-learning offers a way to integrate instructional methods designed to enhance student learning of technical subject matter with that of activities designed to address these above mentioned objectives.Research indicates that the S-L approach motivates students to work harder, be more curious, connect learning to personal experience, and demonstrate deeper understanding of subject matter.iii  While service-learning has been well established in many disciplines in higher education, engineering has been slow to adopt the pedagogy.iv, v Recently, efforts have been made to implement S-L in engineering contexts.Examples include civil and environmental engineering courses; vi first-year introductory courses; vii, viii capstone senior design courses; viiii multidisciplinary approaches; x, xi and the Engineering Projects in Community Service (EPICS) program at Purdue University.viiii, xii However, it appears no program in engineering has servicelearning spread throughout the curriculum in required mainstream courses.
At the University of Massachusetts Lowell (UML), the goal in the Francis College of Engineering (CoE) is to integrate service-learning into a broad array of courses so that students will be exposed to service-learning every semester in the core curriculum in every program in the entire CoE.This initiative was supported by NSF through the Department Level Reform Program.However, how to add new material into an already packed curriculum remains a challenge and more strategies and examples on how to integrate new material into an already packed curriculum are critically needed.The objective of this study was to present how three service-learning projects were seamlessly integrated into three courses in civil engineering curriculum without eliminating pertinent course materials and without a significant increase in time commitment as a first step towards undergraduate curriculum reform in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering (CEE).Details on the course contents, course structure, projects implemented, and how each project was used to address certain course objectives were presented as well.Course objectives and ABET program outcomes were evaluated by a coursespecific survey questionnaire.Students' experience on the S-L project was assessed by a unique survey instrument developed by Duffy and Brandis University.xiii

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATIONS
Three S-L projects with two community partners were identified through a S-L workshop held at UML.The associated community partners were: City of Lowell and Architectural Heritage Foundation (AHF) in Lowell.Three faculty members from CEE department worked with each of the community partners in detailing the project descriptions and integrating the project into the curriculum.Over 80 undergraduate students ranging from freshmen to seniors participated in these community-based projects.See Table I for more detailed information on the courses and the corresponding S-L projects.

Freshmen-level Introduction to Engineering (II) (Spring 2005) Project 1: Davidson Street Parking Lot Re-design
Introduction to Engineering (II) is a required course for all freshmen in CEE.This course is intended to train future civil and environmental engineers with communication (both verbal and written) and computer skills.This course covers a variety of topics, including: public speaking, PowerPoint presentation, technical writing, resume writing, engineering ethics, and AutoCAD.This course has a final project to evaluate students' ability to integrate all the essential skills learned in class (i.e.public speaking, PowerPoint presentation, writing and AutoCAD).
Traditionally, the final project has been to ask each student take one of their labs from Physics or Chemistry, draw their lab apparatus in AutoCAD, make an oral presentation using PowerPoint to explain their lab -underlying theory, what they measured & how, summary & conclusions.In Spring 2005, a service-learning parking lot re-design project was identified and used to replace the traditional project as a final project.The community partner for this project, the City of Lowell, was considering putting a 10-12' wide bike trail and eliminating some of the fences within an exiting parking lot on Davidson Street.The objectives of this S-L project were to (1) re-design and maximize the number of parking spaces, (2) allocate a 10'-12' wide bike trail along the Concord River to provide sufficient room for the development of a neighborhood bike trail.This project met three course objectives: (1) able to make 2D line and dimensioned engineering drawings using AutoCAD; (2) able to communicate technical information to an audience in written form; (3) able to function effectively in groups.
One class period (2 hours) was used for the site visit (5-minute drive from campus).Two school buses were provided to transport 40 students to the site.The project was technically challenging due to the irregular shape and the large size of the parking lot.The students were assigned into groups with each group having 3 or 4 students to work on a section of the parking lot.They measured the parking lot with RollaTapes (Figure 1), and produced dimensioned drawings of the new parking lot design with the AutoCAD program they learned in this course.A total of 221 parking spots were designed, with an individual number of 65, 121, and 35 for each section.
The City of Lowell's planners received 10 AutoCAD-generated parking lot re-designs and written reports on the designs (a design example is shown in Figure 2).They are currently determining which design will be used when the parking is redone.The students enjoyed doing a community-based project and the fact that one of the designs would actually be used by the City.
This S-L project was used as a tool to evaluate the ability of the students to use AutoCAD, create a Power Point presentation, make an effective oral presentation, work in a team and their ability to write a technical report.This project met several course objectives, ABET program outcomes (see Appendix A), and community objectives simultaneously.14.341: Transportation Engineering Laboratory (1 credit): Practice techniques of data collection, analysis and presentation that are commonly used in the planning, design and operation of transportation facilities with primary emphasis on highway systems.

Junior-level
Course 14.341 includes a two-lab sequence on Intersection Analysis: Part 1 consists of Volume Study and Analysis and Part 2 involves Traffic Signal Control.The data collected during the first part of this sequence are used to generate signal timings in the second part.The students submit a separate report after each lab.Traditionally, this exercise was merely a computational study in which students calculated hypothetical signal timings.This S-L project involved a practical analysis and design of the intersection signal timings using professional software tools.The implementation of this S-L project only required little additional time commitments in obtaining the current data and conveying the results and without taking out any course materials.
Project description: The objectives of this project were two fold: (1) to assess the performance of the existing signal control at the intersection of University Avenue and Riverside Street, located in Lowell, MA, and (2) to optimize the signal settings with existing traffic operations software, reassess the performance, and make recommendations to the City.This project met two course objectives, including being able to conduct an intersection volume study and calculate traffic signal timings at an intersection.
An hour-long volume study was performed by the students at the intersection (see Figure 3).Working in groups of four, they collected arrival information in 1-minute intervals for all approaches, including vehicle classification and turning movements.They also measured the signal timings activated at the time of the volume study.The data was input into Synchro 6 xiiii , a software package for modeling and optimizing traffic signal timings.The package includes Sim Traffic model for microscopic simulation analysis.xv Microscopic simulation models consist basically of two main components.First component includes a description of the road network geometry including traffic facilities as traffic lights, traffic detectors, variable message sign panels, etc.In the second part detailed modeling of traffic behavior is carried out which reproduces the dynamics of each individual vehicle, distinguishing between different types of vehicles, offering the possibility of taking into account behavioral aspects of vehicle's drivers.Sim Traffic analysis provides measure of effectiveness such as delay/vehicle, fuel efficiency, speeds, and exhaust emissions as output.Sim Traffic can model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, including roundabouts.In addition to calculating capacity, Synchro allows the user to quickly generate optimum timing plans by optimizing the splits, cycle length, and offsets to reduce delays and stops.Tables II and III show the results generated by these tools.The existing cycle length for the intersection was 90.5 seconds, with a green time of 45.4 seconds for Riverside Street and a green time of 45.1 seconds for University Ave.After the optimization with the measured volume data, the optimal cycle length for the intersection was found to be 55 seconds, green time of 31 seconds for Riverside Street, and 24 seconds for University Ave.The HCM level of service for the intersection was improved from C to B after the optimization.
As a result of the optimization, the software calculated that the HCM average control delay for the intersection would be cut by 33%.The microscopic simulation SimTraffic indicated that the total delay of the intersection and the delay per vehicle would be reduced by 36% and 25%, respectively.Both HC emission and CO emissions would be cut by 50%.In addition, the average speed and fuel efficiency would be improved by 12% and 14%, respectively.Thus, the results clearly indicate a significant improvement in terms of MOE after optimization of the signal settings.
Recommendations made to the City of Lowell were: to use during the study time period a cycle length of 55 seconds for the intersection, green time of 31 seconds for Riverside Street, and green time of 24 seconds for University Ave to improve the operational efficiency and effectiveness of this intersection control.

Senior-level Design of Masonry Structures (Spring 2005) Project 3: Preliminary Building Structural Evaluation
Design of Masonry Structures is a senior-elective course.It covers the fundamental characteristics of masonry construction, the nomenclature, properties, and material specifications associated with basic components of masonry, the behavior of masonry assemblages subjected to stresses and deformations, and the design of un-reinforced and reinforced masonry structures in accordance with current codes.Traditionally the students were given a final exam to evaluate their performance in class.In Fall 2005, a S-L project was identified and provided to the students as an option to replace their final exam.The time demand of the project was reported approximately 20 hours spent for site visits and report preparation.
Project description: The Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association (CMMA) owned a large masonry mill building built in 1825.CMMA cooperated with the Architectural Heritage Foundation (AHF) to look into the possibility of renovating this building to house a medical center, a shopping area, and residential units.The students were asked to perform a preliminary structural evaluation of this mill building.The project met several course objectives: (1) understanding the structural behavior of masonry structures, (2) functions of structural components made of different material systems and their interaction, (3) mechanisms of degradation and failure, (4) their impact on the service life, and (5) the structural implications of re-development and renovation actions.A team of three students (two undergraduate and one graduate) participated in this project.
The project implementation started with planning meetings to determine the project stages, identification and acquiring of national and local masonry codes and other useful resources, and purchasing of necessary equipment such as a laser range meter to minimize the risk of accidents during field measurements.Two site visits were conducted (see Figure 4) and on-site measurements and visual inspection were performed.The students examined the foundations, floors, and clay brick walls.Inspections revealed the following: some foundation is submerged under water and signs of previous movement (Figure 5); visible cracking and signs of deterioration in the basement; and consistent inclined cracking of the clay walls (Figure 6).Written reports with recommendations were submitted to the community partners CMAA and AHF.The students' recommendations, with supporting pictures and calculations, were to perform: (1) foundation repair and lateral load analysis, (2) add properly designed steel column supports after foundation rehabilitation, and (3) new masonry repairs.
Student surveys before and after the project implementation showed that all three students found the project educating, rewarding, and worth including this experience in their resume.It was the opinion of the instructor and students alike that this S-L project better served the course objectives and ABET program outcomes than the final exam it replaced.ABET Program Outcomes describe what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of graduation.These relate to the skills, knowledge, and behaviors that students acquire in their matriculation through the program.The following are the ABET Program Outcomes for CEE Department: xvi  A. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering; B. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret data; C. an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints; D. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams; E. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems; F. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility; G. an ability to communicate effectively; H. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context; I. a recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in life-long learning; J. a knowledge of contemporary issues; K. an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

ABET PROGRAM OUTCOMES MET
The S-L projects implemented in these three courses all addressed in a substantial way several of the ABET program outcomes by the activities listed in Table IV.

ASSESSMENT
Each course was evaluated by a course-specific survey.Due to space limitation, only the course survey results collected from Introduction to Engineering (II) Spring 2005 (Table V) was presented in this paper as an example (see Appendix A for the full survey).The difference among the course surveys is the course specific objectives; the other sections are the same for all the courses taught in CEE.Student course surveys in all three courses showed that both course specific objectives and ABET program outcomes were met.
Students' experience on the S-L project was assessed by a newly developed survey instrument (see Appendix B). xiii The same survey was given to the students to fill out before and after they have conducted the S-L projects.The pre-survey was conducted on all the freshmen in CoE and juniors from CEE in Fall 2005 (n=218).The post-survey was conducted on the same population after their completing the S-L projects in spring 2006 (n=145, noticing that some freshmen didn't move up to Spring 2006).In the first part of the survey, the students were asked to rank five attributes representing their career values chosen from challenge/helping/independent/income/outdoors/physical/prestige/public/security/creativity/ variety/team based on their S-L experience.However, this part of the survey results was not conclusive.In the second part of the survey, the students were asked to answer twelve questions.The central limit theorem xvii was used to obtain the standardized sample mean (Z) whose values are given by the difference between the sample mean and population mean divided by the standard error of the mean.For a sample size of 145, one can conveniently and accurately assume that the distribution of the standardized sample mean is normal.Setting the statistical significance criteria at the 95% confidence level, in other words, that 1-F(Z) >0.95, one can determine the statistical of the responses to each question in Table VI.As can be seen from the last column of the table, responses to questions 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, and 12 are the questions that display a statistical significance in the post-survey responses with respect to the pre-survey responses.An examination of the statistically significant responses shows that the implementation of service learning may have had an impact on the students from the following perspectives: (a) Students have reinforced their belief that service and academic coursework should be integrated.(b) Students developed a better sense that engineers should use their skills to solve social problems facing their local community as well as communities internationally.(c) They have become more interested in pursuing a career that involves helping people.(d) They have become more comfortable working with people from different race and backgrounds.(e) They have developed better relations with the faculty members.

DISCUSSIONS
How to fit more material into an already packed curriculum is a continuing challenge to engineering educators and students.From our experiences, it was found that a S-L project can be seamlessly integrated into a course without taking out course materials and huge time commitment.Careful planning is definitely needed, i.e., a parking lot re-design project was a good replacement for a lab presentation, traffic signal study was a good replacement for a similar study using historical data, and building preliminary assessment was a good replacement for a final number-crunching exam.The extra time associated with each project was the site visit.From the students' perspective, it seems like that students spent more time (+ 0.7 hours) on the S-L projects (as indicated by the students' survey in Table VI) as opposed to regular projects.This is expected when a social dimension is added to a project; which typically requires more time for the students to think through all unforeseeable issues and incorporate their thinking into design or analysis.With careful planning, we were able to cover all the subjects that we can normally cover.
Finding the right project for the community and students can be challenging.The project has to be the "right size" and "right topic" so that it is feasible for the students to accomplish within class time and be able to deliver the product to the community partner.Therefore, adequate planning and detailed coordination with the community are both critical to the success of each project.
No. 14.340) is a required course for all junior students.It consists of 3 recitation lectures per week and is accompanied by a 3-hour laboratory (Course No. 14.341).Generally, lab assignments are coordinated with lecture materials in such a way that students have the opportunity to practice what they learn in theory in a subsequent lab.The following are the course descriptions from online university catalog.

FIGURE 1 FRESHMEN
FIGURE 1 FRESHMEN WERE BUSED TO THE PARKING LOT TO DO ON-SITE MEASUREMENTS FIGURE 3 VOLUME STUDY AT THE INTERSECTION (OCTOBER 2005, WEDNESDAY, 4-5PM) FIGURE 5 FOUNDATION SUBMERGED UNDER WATER feel I have improved my presentation skills and computer skills.3.40 Did this course help you better achieve the following ABET Program Outcomes?(0 = not at all; 1 helped somewhat; 2 helped; 3 helped a lot; 4 helped tremendously) 3(a) ability to apply knowledge of math, science & engineering 3.30 3(b) ability to design experiments, & analyze & interpret data 3.10 3(c) ability to design a system, component or process to meet desired needs 3

TABLE IV .
ABET PROGRAM OUTCOMES MET BY THE ASPECTS IN S-L PROJECTS

TABLE VI STATISTICAL
SIGNIFICANCE OF POST S-L EXPERIENCE SURVEY RESULTS