Paper Authors

Abstract

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

A Systemic Approach to Global Competency for Engineers Juan Lucena, Gary Downey Colorado School of Mines/Virginia Tech

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to outline a systemic approach to global competency for engineers. Using quiz questions used in our Engineering Cultures course as a pathway into the problem of global competency, the paper begins by introducing the problem and briefly summarizing the learning criterion and learning outcomes for global competency presented in a forthcoming paper in the Journal of Engineering Education. That criterion calls attention to the importance of problem definition in engineering work. Building on the main elements of and lessons learned by NSF-sponsored systemic reform efforts in engineering education in place since 1990s, this paper outlines in detail the following aspects of systemic reform for global competency: 1) unifying visions and goals, including high standards for learning expected from all students; 2) a restructured system of governance and resource allocation, including a proposed new ABET criterion for global competency; and 3) alignment among all parts of the system, including hiring practices, modifications to engineering science and elective courses and textbooks, and accountability mechanisms. After reviewing several approaches to global competency, the paper concludes by asserting that “the ultimate success of methods for achieving global competency will depend both upon their integration across the full range of the engineering curriculum, including in engineering science courses, and upon widespread acceptance among engineering educators of the importance of giving as much weight and time to problem definition as is currently given to problem solving.”

Introduction We begin with a short quiz on problem definition in engineering. The quiz consists of two questions, one on international differences in what is emphasized in engineering work and one on international differences in what counts as engineers. All are true. The first is an example from World War II. During the summer of 1940, British freighters were sinking, victims of Nazi U-boats. Doubting its survival, the U.K. sent a purchasing commission to U.S. shipyards. A deal was quickly reached, but then all progress came to a stop. To the commissioners’ dismay, their ship plans proved meaningless to American engineers, workers, and managers. The entire set of drawings had to be redrafted and hundreds of additional drawings were needed before work could begin on building the ships that would help save the war for Britain. Explain. Second, in ABET criteria 3a-3k, the ability to apply math and science while understanding professional responsibility is first of the eleven criteria, while understanding of ethics is sixth and understanding of global, societal, environmental and economic issues is eighth. In contrast, in the eight criteria established by JABEE, the Japanese Board for Engineering Education, the ability to apply math and science is third, while an understanding of “social responsibilities” is second and the top position is held by the ability to “consider . . . issues from a global and multilateral viewpoint.” Explain

• Citation

• Format
  • APA
  • APA - LaTeX bibitem
  • MLA
  • MLA - LaTeX bibitem
  • Bibtex
  • EndNote - RIS

Lucena, J., & Downey, G. (2006, June), A Systemic Approach To Global Competency For Engineers Paper presented at 2006 Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois. 10.18260/1-2--1308