Undergraduate Engineering Curricula Revision at the University of Denver Ronald R. DeLyser, Albert J. Rosa, John Mirth, and Jungho Kim University of Denver Denver, Colorado Abstract The Department of Engineering in anticipation of the changing needs of future graduates is redesigning its engineering programs. The curricular programs prepare its graduates to be globally competitive. The curricula innovations include interdisciplinary team design projects throughout the four years, increased use of computers, emphasis in communicative skills, forensic analysis of previous projects with a purpose to improve the original design, an increase in electives permitting more tailoring of individual programs, and an overall reduction in program hours to 192 quarter hours. Introduction The University of Denver is an independent coeducational institution with an enrollment of approximately 2,700 undergraduates, 2,900 graduates, and 2,700 non-traditional students. The Department of Engineering, a part of the Division of Natural Sciences, Mathematics and Engineering which is one of 13 colleges, schools, and divisions, is EAC/ABET accredited in electrical and mechanical engineering. In anticipation of the changing needs of future graduates we are redesigning our engineering programs. Our goal is to provide the finest educational programs available to our students, and thus to permit them the best preparation for the careers they wish to pursue. Specifically we seek accredited, forward-looking curricula; a modern, uncluttered, and capable infrastructure; and a talented, dedicated, supportive, and scholarly faculty. We seek to design and implement curricula that prepare students to be nationally competitive for either industry hiring or admittance to advanced degree programs. The curricular programs conceived will prepare students for the challenges of the next century, such as: globalization, interdisciplinary teaming, rapid design turn-around, customer-centric design, life-long learning, distributed systems and networks, the information superhighway, etc. Such programs will be grounded in fundamentals yet be flexible, attainable, supportive, and accreditable. Program Objectives In developing our new programs we sought to define a set of characteristics that each graduate would possess upon graduation. Each graduate should: (1) be capable of leadership in a global environment; (2) be able to pass the Fundamentals of Engineering exam as a prelude to professional registration; (3) know how to resolve open-ended design problems; (4) be able to enter industry with the needed skills to be able to solve real- world (practical) problems; (5) possess good communication skills; (6) have a strong grounding in the fundamentals and how to apply them;(7) know and uphold ethical and professional standards of the profession; (8) be able to think independently; (9) be able to analyze and synthesize engineering problems, including the design and conduct of experiments; (10) develop and practice interdisciplinary skills; (11) be computer literate and Internet capable; (12) develop and practice interpersonal skills - know how to work effectively as a member of a team; (13) be cognizant of current engineering problems and assess their social and economic implications; and (14) be prepared for a life of continual learning. In formulating our curricula, we constructed four themes that helped us in our characteristics. The first theme underlying the redesign of the curricula was that we felt that the students needed to be provided with an education that was more relevant to the “real world” instead of the dominant theory-based education they have been receiving thus far. Relevancy to the real-world will require more student interaction with faculty research projects, more interdisciplinary design projects, and more interaction with industry. The faculty was concerned that in carrying out this primary theme that theory and the fundamentals might be sacrificed for a more practical or technological approach. Since this is the part of their education that will stay constant and form the basis for their continual learning, our second theme involves assuring that students have gained and retained "the fundamentals". Hence, we have attempted to strike a balance between theory and practice. A third theme was the strong feeling that, as is the case for the current curricula, the first two years of the new curricula should be common for all degrees (Electrical, Mechanical and Computer Engineering.) A common curriculum builds an interdisciplinary view of engineering, a sense of teamwork, and would permit the greatest flexibility for students to delay choosing their