# Archived Information

Title: Project Lead The Way: Forging New Generations of Engineers

\[Slide 1\]

Project Lead The Way: Forging New Generations of Engineers

\[Slide 2\]

Where is America's Future?

Where are we in American Education?

Where are the Rigor and Relevance in Career and Technical programs?

\[Slide 3\]

No Child Left Behind

-   A national initiative to raise school and student performance

-   Shared ideals and goals

-   Initially focused on national testing

-   Now needs to focus on an intervention

\[Slide 4\]

What intervention will work ?

-   Teaching and learning

-   Curriculum and professional development

The second drives the first.

\[Slide 5\]

The Rigor and Relevance Framework (to evaluate curriculum and
assessment), created by the International Center for Leadership in
Education

Figure 1: A graph with Part One of the Framework, the six levels of
Bloom's Taxonomy, on the Y axis: which measure increasing levels of
student knowledge, or simply stated, rigor

1.  Awareness

2.  Understanding

3.  Application

4.  Analysis

5.  Synthesis

6.  Evaluation

and Part Two of the Framework, five steps of the Application Model, on
the X axis: which measures increasing student abilities to apply
knowledge to solve problems, or simply stated, relevance.

1.  Knowledge

2.  Apply in discipline

3.  Apply across discipline

4.  Apply to real-world predictable situations

5.  Apply to real-world unpredictable situations

A vertical line runs between"2. Apply in discipline" and "3. Apply
across discipline" in the Application Model on the X axis and a
horizontal line runs at "3. Application on Bloom's Taxonomy" on the Y
axis. These two lines form four quadrants.

In the upper left quadrant is the letter C.

In the upper right quadrant is the letter D.

In the lower left quadrant is the letter A and

In the lower right quadrant is the letter B.

Quadrant C (upper-left) represents Advanced Knowledge: advanced thinking
processes involving application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

Quadrant D (upper-right) represents Advanced Application of Knowledge:
advanced application processes involving "application of knowledge to
real-world predictable situations" and "application of knowledge to
real-world unpredictable situations". Some variations of the Rigor and
Relevance Framework also include "application of knowledge to simulated
world situations" before considering predictable and unpredictable
real-world situations

Quadrant A (lower-left) represents Basic Knowledge: basic thinking
processes involving awareness, understanding, and application.

Quadrant B (lower-right) represents Basic Application of Knowledge:
basic application processes involving "knowledge in one discipline",
"application of knowledge in the discipline", and "application of
knowledge across the discipline".

.

Different instructional methods of different school systems can be
described on graph paper, communicating relative emphases the amount of
knowledge taught and the level of practice in problem-solving using the
knowledge.

For details, refer to
<http://uwf.edu/pals/21stcentury/rigorrelevance.htm>.

End of Figure 1

\[Slide 6\]

The Rigor-Relevance Framework, created by the International Center for
Leadership in Education: the United States curriculum.

Figure 2: A graph figure with four quadrants is shown, with the word
Rigor on the Y axis and the word Relevance on the X axis. Dark shading
covers the left half of the lower left quadrant, almost all the upper
left quadrant except the corner adjacent to the center of the graph, and
the upper-most parts of the upper-right quadrant. In the unshaded
portion, partly in the lower-left quadrant but especially the
lower-right quadrant, is written: "United States Curriculum".

End of Figure 2.

According to the graph figure, relevance, or application of knowledge,
is not usually taught in America at the lower levels of rigor, or the
instruction of knowledge, but taught later when the students gain more
advanced knowledge: in more rigorous study.

\[Slide 7\]

Project Lead-The-Way Provides:

Rigorous and relevant curriculum (with end-of-course exams) for
students,\
AND......\
Rigorous and relevant professional development for teachers and school
counselors.

\[Slide 8\]

Non Standards - Based Design Problem

Beverage Container Design Problem

Design a beverage container that can be used by students while they are
studying. Use good design criteria of function and aesthetic value.

\[Slide 9\]

From: Introduction to Engineering Design

Design a beverage container that will hold 12 fluid ounces:

-   Sketch the top view and a front cross-sectional view of the
    container.

-   Show the correct dimensions on the sketch needed to acquire 12 fluid
    ounces (show all your math calculations)

Is there a difference between cubic inches and fluid ounces ? You will
need to know...

-   Use the computer design tool to apply good design criteria of
    function and aesthetic value to communicate the solution to this
    problem.

\[Slide 10\]

Truncated Cone Volume Solution

Figure 3: A gold-colored glass for drinking beverages, formed from the
open half of a cone (a "truncated cone") to which a flat bottom is
added. A large round base is added to the bottom of the glass helps
prevent the glass from tipping over, but the large round base is not
involved in the calculations below. End of Figure 3.

Formulas:

Formula 1: The volume of a cone in cubic inches equals one third times
three point one four one five (pi) times the radius of the circle formed
by the open mouth of the cone, in inches, squared, times the length of
the cone in inches. Radius is also diameter divided by two. Volume of
the cone in fluid ounces is derived by dividing the cubic inches formula
by one point eight zero four because one fluid ounce is one point eight
zero four cubic inches. End of Formula 1.

Formula 2: To get the inside capacity of the glass in fluid ounces, one
has to determine the total volume of two imaginary cones, one fitting
inside the other. The larger cone would run down from the top of the
glass inside but it would not stop at the base of the glass. It would
run through the base of the glass like an ice cream cone and eventually
form a point. The smaller cone is simply the part of the larger cone
that runs beyond the base of the glass. Determine height and radius of
the bigger and smaller cones and determine the fluid ounce capacity of
both using Formula 1. Subtract the smaller cone's fluid ounces from the
bigger cone's fluid ounces, and the fluid ounces of the part of the cone
in the glass is known. End of Formula 2.

Diagram: Cone A is the inside of the glass (the "truncated cone"). Cone
A-B is the larger imaginary cone running from the top of the glass down
through the base of the glass until it stops and forms a point like an
ice cream cone. H-A-B (height of the entire imaginary cone) is the total
length of this cone and R-A-B is the radius (or half the diameter) of
the circle formed by the open mouth of this cone. Cone B is the smaller
imaginary cone, or the part of the entire imaginary cone A-B that runs
past the base of the glass: H-B is the height of Cone B, from the point
to where the glass begins. R-B is the radius (or half the diameter) of
the circular bottom of the glass.

End of Diagram.

Calculations:

1\. Assign a value to R-A-B.

2\. Assign a value to H-A-B.

3\. Find the volume of cone A-B: V-A-B.

4\. Use the cubic inch to fluid ounce conversion factor of one point
eight zero four.

5\. In the front view, sketch the profile of the container using the
above assigned values (and the drawing in the diagram described above).

6\. Use the dimension function to find the length of R-B.

7\. Find the volume of cone (B) V-B.

8\. Plug the values of V-A-B and V-B into the formula V-A= V-A-B minus
V-B. This will give the volume of the truncated cone (A).

Note: If you move the position of R-B up or down, it will change the
volume of the truncated cone (A).

Note: The original Powerpoint 10 and 11 slides are on the last two pages
of this Word document.

\[Slide 11\]

Parabolic Container Solution

Figure 4: a blue goblet with a rounded parabolic exterior, a short stem,
and a thick rounded base to help prevent tipping.

End of Figure 4.

Table Of Values: the parabolic relationship between X and Y coordinates
is Y is equal to X squared and indicates how many inches the outside of
the one-eighth inch thick glass is from the center of the glass for
every inch above the bottom of the glass. The rows specify:

a Y value of 0.125 relates to an X value of .354, at one-eighth (.125)
of an inch above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the
glass is zero point three five four (.354) of an inch from the center of
the glass.

a Y value of .500 relates to an X value of .707, at half (.500) an inch
above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the glass is zero
point seven zero seven (.707) of an inch from the center of the glass.

a Y value of 1.000 relates to an X value of 1.000, at one inch above the
bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the glass is one inch from
the center of the glass.

a Y value of 1.500 relates to an X value of 1.225, at one and a half
(1.5) inches above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the
glass is one point two two five (1.225) inches from the center of the
glass.

a Y value of 2.000 relates to an X value of 1.414, at two (2.0) inches
above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the glass is one
point four one four (1.414) inches from the center of the glass.

a Y value of 2.500 relates to an X value of 1.581, at two and a half
(2.5) inches above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the
glass is one point five eight one (1.581) inches from the center of the
glass.

a Y value of 3.000 relates to an X value of 1.732, at three (3.0) inches
above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the glass is one
point seven three two (1.732) inches from the center of the class.

a Y value of 3.500 relates to an X value of 1.871, at three and a half
(3.500) inches above the bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the
glass is one point eight seven one (1.871) inches from the center of the
glass.

a Y value of 3.712 relates to an X value of 1.927, at the top of the
fluid chamber or three point seven one two (3.712) inches above the
bottom of the fluid chamber, the outside of the glass is one point nine
two seven (1.927) inches from the center of the glass.

End of Table of Values

The glass is designed to hold twelve (12) ounces or twenty one point six
four eight (21.648) cubic inches. The height of the fluid container in
the glass is three point seven one two (3.712) inches and the radius of
the opening of the mouth of the glass is one point nine two seven
(1.927) inches, including the thickness of the glass, one-eighth (1/8 or
.125) of an inch. Computational error: the center of the glass to the
inside of the glass at the top cannot be one point nine two five (1.925)
inches as given if the total distance is from the center is one point
nine two seven (1.927) inches and the glass is one-eighth of an inch
(0.125 inches) thick: the distance from the center of the glass to the
inside of the glass has to be one point eight zero two (1.802) inches.
Below the fluid container is one point six eight eight (1.688) inches of
stem and a base half an inch (.5 inch) thick and one (1) inch wide.

Formulas: Volume of a cone is equal to pi times radius squared times d
times height or pi times y times d times y or y squared times pi divided
by two. The fluid chamber must hold twelve (12) fluid ounces or twenty
one point six four eight (21.648) cubic inches. Twenty-one point six
four eight (21.648) cubic inches multiplied by two (2) and divided by pi
(three point one four one five or 3.1415) equals thirteen point seven
eight two (13.782) Y axis inches squared or three point seven one two
(3.712) inches deep on the Y axis.

Other specifics: The cone beyond the fluid container is three point one
eight eight (3.188) inches high (three point seven one two (3.712)
inches deep of fluid container plus one point six eight eight (1.688)
inches of stem plus half an inch (.5 inch) of base plus one (1) inch
beyond the last part of the glass, or six point nine zero zero (6.900)
total inches of the combined cone, minus three point seven one two
(3.712) inches of fluid container). Diameter or radius of the base of
the fluid chamber is not specified.

Note: The original Powerpoint 10 and 11 slides are on the last two pages
of this Word document.

\[Slide 12\]

Traditional Assessment:

Question: What is the volume of a sphere with a radius of 1.5 inches?

(Answer: 14.13 inches cubed)\
\
Question: What is the surface area of a rectangular prism 2 inches by 3
inches by 1.5 inches?

(Answer: 27 square inches)

\[Slide 13\]

Authentic Assessment:

Great Aunt Mildred's favorite fragile glass decorations are in danger of
being crushed when she puts them away for the season. The original
cardboard storage box is no longer usable. She needs your help.\
\
Design a container which will hold her spherical and rectangular shaped
glass decorations. It needs to be made of a sturdy material which will
not disintegrate over time, and needs to securely hold the decorations
without allowing them to rattle and roll against each other and break.
The size and weight must be appropriate for Aunt Mildred to lift and put
away.

\[Slide 14\]

Attributes of the Project Lead The Way curriculum:

-   Is contextual project and problem based

-   Integrates national standards in mathematics, science, technology
    and English and language arts

-   Has both breadth and depth of content

-   Is supported by comprehensive professional development for teachers

-   Is sustained and updated through a private trust

\[Slide 15\]

Middle School Program: Gateway To Technology

-   Design and Modeling (9 weeks)

-   The Magic of Electrons (9 weeks)

-   The Science of Technology (9 weeks)

-   Automation and Robotics (9 weeks)

-   Environmental Engineering (9 weeks, in development)

-   Energy and the Environment (9 weeks, in development)

-   Aerospace Technology (9 weeks, in development) National Aeronautics
    and Space Administration

-   To Be Decided

\[Slide 16\]

High School Course Program: Pathway To Engineering

Foundation:

-   Principles of Engineering

-   Introduction to Engineering Design

-   Digital Electronics

Specialization:

-   Computer Integrated Manufacturing and/or

-   Civil Engineering and Architecture and/or

-   Bio-Technical Engineering (in development) and/or

-   Aerospace Technology (in development)

Capstone: Engineering Design and Development

Note: Course program requires college prep mathematics each year.

\[Slide 17\]

Figure 5: Three Phase Professional Development

# Phase 1: Self-Assessment and Pre-Core Training

Ready for core training

# Phase 2: Core Training Summer Institute

-   Gateway To Technology (Middle School)

-   Principles of Engineering

-   Introduction To Engineering Design

-   Digital Electronics

-   Computer Integrated Manufacturing

-   Civil Engineering/Architecture

-   Engineering Design and Development

Ready for teaching

# Phase 3: Project Lead The Way Virtual Academy

## Continuous Training

Master Teacher

End of Figure 5.

\[Slide 18\]

What is Project Lead The Way?

A 501(c) (3) not-for-profit corporation

-   No Cost to join Project Lead The Way

-   Free curriculum to schools

\[Slide 19\]

States Participating in Project Lead The Way School Year 2004 to 2005

States Participating: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia,
Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin

States Not Participating: Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Mississippi, Montana,
Nevada, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming

41 States and the District of Columbia with over one thousand (1,000)
School Sites and one hundred and twenty thousand (120,000) Students

\[Slide 20\]

Why Do Teachers Like This Program?

Because the Project Lead The Way curriculum is fully developed, teachers
are able to devote all of their energies to teaching and student
learning.

\[Slide 21\]

Project Lead The Way Believes That:

Rigorous integrated project and problem based curricula and rigorous
comprehensive professional development empower teachers.\
\
This operationalized belief can truly advance the goals of No Child Left
Behind.

\[Slide 22\]

America's Future:

A workforce that is CREATIVE and INNOVATIVE and an American educational
system that constantly builds its Human Capital....\
\
At stake is the assurance of the national prosperity and the national
defense.

\[Slide 23\]

To Learn More:

[[www.pltw.org](http://www.pltw.org/)]{.underline}

Complete a district application.

Complete an application for each campus that will offer the program.

\[Slide 24\]

Questions (big blue question mark under the word Questions)

\[Slide 25\]

Engineering Degrees Awarded 1988 (year Nineteen Eighty Eight) to 2003
(year Two Thousand and Three)

Figure 6: This is a five-line line graph representing the approximate
numbers (Y axis: from zero to eighty thousand in increments of ten
thousand: 0 to 80,000 in increments of 10,000; Y axis label: Number of
Bachelor's Degrees Engineering Disciplines) of engineering Bachelor's
degrees (not to be confused with engineering technology Bachelor's
degrees in the next slide) awarded between the years 1988 and 2003
(nineteen eighty eight and two thousand and three) (X axis), by
specialty:

-   Engineering as a whole, blue line, top of the chart

-   electrical and computer engineering, red line, top line of the group
    of four lines near the bottom of the chart

-   civil and environmental engineering, yellow line, bottom line of the
    group of four lines near the bottom of the chart

-   mechanical and aerospace engineering, purple line, criss-crosses the
    other engineering line, is in between electrical and civil
    engineering, almost the opposite pattern as other engineering

-   other engineering, light blue line, criss-crosses the mechanical and
    aerospace engineering line, is in between electrical and civil
    engineering, almost the opposite pattern as mechanical and aerospace
    engineering

Degrees for engineering as a whole and electrical and computer
engineering follow a U-shaped curve: low points in 1991-1992 and 1999
(years nineteen ninety one to nineteen ninety two and year nineteen
ninety nine) for engineering as a whole and a low point in 1996 (year
nineteen ninety six) for electrical and computer engineering, but have
rebounded by as much as ten thousand degrees by 2003 (year two thousand
and three). There were slightly over seventy thousand (70,000) total
engineering degrees awarded in 1988 (year nineteen eighty eight), of
which almost thirty thousand (30,000) were electrical and computer
engineering degrees. There were only sixty-three thousand (63,000) total
engineering degrees awarded in 1999 (year nineteen ninety nine) and
almost twenty thousand electrical and computer degrees awarded in 1996
(year nineteen ninety six). In 2003 (year two thousand and three),
however, there were slightly over thirty thousand (30,000) electrical
and computer engineering degrees and about seventy-five thousand
(75,000) total engineering degrees.

Mechanical and aerospace engineering, civil and environmental
engineering, and other engineering, by contrast, had only mild changes
of, at most, several thousand degrees each up or down over four years
and only subtle change, in the hundreds of degrees each per year. There
were almost nineteen thousand (19,000) mechanical and aerospace
engineering degrees and seventeen thousand (17,000) other engineering
degrees awarded in 1988 (year nineteen eighty eight), along with
slightly over eight thousand five hundred (8,500) civil and
environmental engineering degrees.

Mechanical and aerospace engineering followed an opposite path as other
engineering. It gradually fell to slightly over eighteen thousand
degrees per year in 1991 (year nineteen ninety one) and stayed constant
until 1994 (year nineteen ninety four) before it gradually slid to
fourteen thousand degrees per year in 1999 (year nineteen ninety nine)
and gradually rose to seventeen thousand degrees in 2003 (year two
thousand and three).

Civil and environmental engineering remained steady until 1993 (year
nineteen ninety three), when it gradually increased to almost twelve
thousand degrees in 1997 (year nineteen ninety seven), gradually fell to
nine thousand (9,000) degrees in 2001 (year two thousand and one), was
unchanged in 2002 (year two thousand and two), and approached ten
thousand degrees in 2003 (year two thousand and three).

Other engineering degrees gradually declined to fifteen thousand
(15,000) degrees in 1992 (year nineteen ninety two) and then gradually
increased to nineteen thousand (19,000) degrees in 1996 (year nineteen
ninety six), stayed steady until the year 2001 (two thousand and one),
and then rose to nineteen thousand and five hundred (19,500) in 2002
(year two thousand and two) and almost twenty thousand (20,000) in 2003
(year two thousand and three).

In 2003 (year two thousand and three), almost seventeen thousand
(17,000) mechanical and aerospace, almost ten thousand (10,000) civil
and environmental engineering, and almost twenty thousand (20,000) other
engineering Bachelor's degrees were awarded. Added to about thirty
thousand (30,000) electrical and computer engineering Bachelor's
degrees, a total of seventy-five thousand (75,000) engineering
Bachelor's degrees as a whole were awarded in that year.

Source: *American Association of Engineering Societies, 2003 (year two
thousand and three).*

End of Figure 6.

\[Slide 26\]

Engineering Technology Degrees Awarded 1988 (year Nineteen Eighty Eight)
to 2003 (year Two Thousand and Three)

Figure 7: This is a two-line line graph representing the approximate
numbers (Y axis: from four to sixteen thousand in increments of two
thousand: 4,000 to 16,000 in increments of 2,000, Y axis label: Number
of Engineering Technology Degrees) of engineering technology Associate's
(blue line, above) and Bachelor's (red line, below) degrees awarded each
year from 1988 to 2003 (nineteen eighty eight to two thousand and three)
(X axis).

From 1988 to 1999 (years nineteen eighty eight to nineteen ninety nine),
the numbers of Associate's and Bachelor's degrees in engineering has
generally declined, although both two- and four- year degrees have
increased each year since then. There were almost fourteen thousand
(14,000) Associate's degrees and almost twelve thousand (12,000)
Bachelor's engineering technology degrees awarded in 1988 (year nineteen
eighty eight). 1999 (year nineteen ninety nine) seems to have been the
record low year with slightly over twelve thousand (12,000) Associate's
and slightly over ten thousand (10,000) engineering technology degrees
awarded. In 2003 (year two thousand and three), there were slightly less
than eleven thousand (11,000) Associate's and slightly more than nine
thousand (9,000) Bachelor's engineering technology degrees awarded.

The increases since 1999 (year nineteen ninety nine) of two- and four-
year degrees awarded reflects that the Associate's trend is volatile
whereas the Bachelor's trend seems almost even. Temporary increases in
the number of Associate's engineering technology degrees have been noted
in 1989 (year nineteen eighty nine), 1994 (year nineteen ninety four),
and between the years 2000 and 2002 (years two thousand to two thousand
and two), only to fall again within one to three (1 to 3) years. On the
other hand, the decline in the number of Bachelor's engineering
technology degrees from 1988 to 1999 (years nineteen eighty eight to
nineteen ninety nine) was almost even, with plateaus between 1990 and
1991 (years nineteen ninety and nineteen ninety one) and 1994 and 1996
(years nineteen ninety four and nineteen ninety six), and the
approximate one thousand (1,000) increase in the number of four-year
degrees since 1999 (year nineteen ninety nine) has held steady, almost
linear, through 2003 (year two thousand and three).

Source: *American Association of Engineering Societies, 2003 (year two
thousand and three).*

End of Figure 7.

\[Slide 27\]

Engineering Bachelor's Degrees Awarded in 2003 (year Two Thousand and
Three) by Population Groups

Figure 8: This is a bar graph indicating how many (Y axis from zero to
forty-five thousand in increments of five thousand, 0 to 45,000 in
increments of 5,000: count figures accompany each of the bars: Y axis
label: Number of Bachelor's Degrees for 2003) men (X axis: red bars,
left) and women (X axis: blue bars, right) grouped by the following
ethnic categories (X axis, from left to right, "Non-Minority",
"African", "Hispanic", "Native", "Asian", "Foreign Nationals") earned
Bachelor's degrees in engineering in 2003.

Forty two thousand, one hundred and three (42,103) non-minority men and
nine thousand, one hundred and ninety-four (9,194) non-minority women
earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering in 2003. Two thousand, two
hundred and ninety-five (2,295) African American men and one thousand,
one hundred and thirty-four (1,134) African American women earned
Bachelor's degrees in engineering in 2003. Three thousand, five hundred
and forty-nine (3,549) Hispanic men and one thousand, one hundred and
three (1,103) Hispanic women earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering in
2003. Two hundred and ninety-seven (297) Native American men and
ninety-one (91) Native American women earned Bachelor's degrees in
engineering in 2003. Seven thousand, two hundred and forty-two (7,242)
Asian-American men and two thousand, four hundred and sixty-three
(2,463) Asian-American women earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering in
2003. Four thousand, four hundred and thirty one (4,431) men of foreign
nationalities and one thousand, one hundred and twenty-nine (1,129)
women of foreign nationalities earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering
in 2003.

Source: *American Association of Engineering Societies (2003) (year two
thousand and three)*

End of Figure 8.

\[Slide 28\]

Engineering Technology Bachelor's Degrees Awarded in 2003 (year Two
Thousand and Three) by Population Groups

Figure 9: This is a bar graph indicating how many (Y axis from zero to
seven thousand in increments of one thousand, 0 to 7,000 in increments
of 1,000: count figures accompany each of the bars: Y axis label: Number
of Bachelor's Degrees for 2003) men (X axis: red bars, left) and women
(X axis: blue bars, right) grouped by the following ethnic categories (X
axis, from left to right, "Non-Minority", "African", "Hispanic",
"Native", "Asian", "Foreign Nationals") earned Bachelor's degrees in
engineering technology in 2003.

Six thousand, two hundred and forty (6,240) non-minority men and six
hundred and thirty-one (631) non-minority women earned Bachelor's
degrees in engineering technology in 2003. Six hundred and sixteen (616)
African American men one hundred and eighty-six (186) African American
women earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering technology in 2003. Four
hundred and fifty-four (454) Hispanic men and eighty-six (86) Hispanic
women earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering technology in 2003.
Fifty-six (56) Native American men and eleven (11) Native American women
earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering technology in 2003. Four
hundred and forty (440) Asian-American men and sixty-seven (67)
Asian-American women earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering technology
in 2003. Three hundred and thirty-seven (337) men of foreign
nationalities and eighty-eight (88) women of foreign nationalities
earned Bachelor's degrees in engineering technology in 2003.

Source: *American Association of Engineering Societies (2003) (year two
thousand and three)*

End of Figure 9.

\[Slide 29\]

Mission:

To create dynamic partnerships with our nation's schools to produce an
increasing and more diverse group of students to be successful in
engineering and engineering technology programs at the four-year and
two-year college level.

End of transcript. What follows are slides ten (10) and eleven (11) of
the original Power Point presentation on which this transcript is based.

![](media/image1.png){width="2.170138888888889in"
height="3.5833333333333335in"}

![](media/image3.png){width="2.763888888888889in"
height="4.166666666666667in"}