obtained his B.Sc. in aeronautical and astronautical engineering from the Ohio State University, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in engineering from the University of Arkansas. He holds a Professional Engineer certification and worked as an Engineer and Engineering Manger in industry for 20 years before teaching. His interests include project management, HVAC, robotics/automation, and air pollution dispersion modeling.

The recent national economic downturn has placed increasing pressure on higher education to do more with less, or maintain program integrity with diminishing dollars. Faced with financial challenges to adding faculty, especially in light of enrollment increases, there has to be another way to meet this challenge. In conventional course occurrences, events like a midterm, final and assignments tend to overlap between classes, and can cause big spikes in student workload. With an increased number of students in each class, students can also feel the pressure of increased competition. These stresses' on both faculty and students, negatively affect the positive outcomes desired by both groups. This paper describes the formulation, design, and execution of two planning methods used to help balance the needs, workload, and time resources for both the faculty and students in an Engineering curriculum. One approach compares weekly instructor workload for the planning and delivery across three classes. Covering items from the creation of the syllabus and homework assignments, to lecture preparation and grading, its goal is to create a workable structure for the instructor. The second approach compares the actual weekly assignment and exam load across seven classes for students with when those assignments and exams need to be graded by the instructor. This method looks at the work that needs to be accomplished and sets up a structure to help insure the success of the student learning, and the instructor's ability to actually grade the work in a balanced format. Included in the paper are the actual grading workload counts for each method. The paper also challenges the reader to review his or her own instructional planning methods for possible improvements in outcomes for both students and faculty.

M.B.A. at the Lake Forest Graduate School of Management, and Ph.D. in Engineering Management at Walden University. He holds a Professional Engineer license and has 30 years of industrial experience as an Engineer or Engineering Manager at General Motors, Cadnetix, and Motorola. His interests include engineering management, technological literacy, improving the competitiveness of American companies, and real-time embedded systems.

He obtained his B.S. in Manufacturing Technology and M.Ed. in Adult Education in a specially combined program of Technology and Education at Eastern Washington University. His interests include collecting and re-manufacturing older technologies.

A few years ago, members of our Engineering & Design Department began a study to determine the effects of class attendance on student success. Today's engineering and technology students have grown up in an environment that is very different from the students of 20 years ago. They access information, engage in social contact through digital media, and often have almost instant access to this digital media through portable, wireless devices. There is a thought that with this greater connectivity they may not respond in the same manner to the teaching methods of past generations of students. In addition, the students of today may not feel the same need to be physically present in their classes in order to be successful. Initial results presented at American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) AnnualConference and Exposition in 2012, determined that attendance does correlate with student success and the correlation changes during the progression of a student throughout their undergraduate experience. Results presented at the ASEE 2013 Conference indicated that an instructor's attendance policy did not significantly affect overall attendance rates of students that earned high grades in a course, but that it did affect the students that earned lower grades.This current paper discusses the relationship between student attendance and success based on whether the course is math intensive or not, and tracks and analyzes the attendance behavior of students throughout their entire undergraduate studies. Combined attendance data, collected since 2008 by a variety of instructors, is tracked and analyzed for approximately 20 classes per year, ranging from freshman to senior students. The types of programs covered in this current paper include: Mechanical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Technology, Manufacturing Technology, Design Technology, Construction Management, Applied Technology, and a service course to the general student body.