Barry, B. E., & Whitener, J. C. (2011, June), How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking  Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. 10.18260/1-2--18062

\bibitem{asee_peer_18062}
  Barry, B. E., \& Whitener, J. C. (2011, June), \emph{How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking}
  Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Vancouver, BC.
  10.18260/1-2--18062

Brock E. Barry and JoAnna C. Whitener.  "How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking".  2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2011.  https://peer.asee.org/18062 Internet.  18 Apr, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_18062}
  Brock E. Barry and JoAnna C. Whitener.
  "How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking".
  \emph{2011 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2011.
  https://peer.asee.org/18062 Internet.  18 Apr, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_18062
author = "Brock E. Barry and JoAnna C. Whitener"
title = "How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking"
booktitle = "2011 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2011"
month = "June"
address = "Vancouver, BC"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/18062}
number = {10.18260/1-2--18062}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -                  How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering                      Students Compare? - Ethically SpeakingAs part of a previously completed doctoral dissertation, a mixed-methods (quantitative-qualitative) research program was designed and implemented to evaluate the methods ofincorporating ethics and professionalism in the engineering curriculum. In particular, the natureof the relationship between curriculum model used and outcomes on a nationally administered,engineering-specific standardized examination was the focus of the study. The study’spopulation included engineering students enrolled at nine southeastern public universitiesbetween October 1996 and April 2005. The institutions are partners in the Multiple-InstitutionDatabase for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) project. Thecurriculum models used by the participating programs were identified and defined for the periodof the study and a quantitative process was implemented to compare those models relative toperformance on the ethics and professionalism section of the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE)Examination. The FE Examination is a nationally administered, engineering-specificexamination generated and governed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering andSurveying (NCEES). The FE Examination is the only nationally administered examinationdesigned to align with the intended knowledge gained as part of an ABET-accredited program.The student-level database authorized for use in this study by NCEES contains a sortedpopulation of nearly 10,000 individuals.Multiple noteworthy outcomes of this study have been reported and presented previously. Theoutcomes include discussion of time-on-task relationships, institutional variations, andchronological correlations. Although disciplinary differences were not a primary focus of thecompleted study, statistically significant differences were observed between the aggregateperformance of the civil engineering, electrical engineering, and mechanical engineeringmembers of the study’s population. Additional statistical analysis illustrated that electricalengineering and civil engineering students perform better on the ethics and professionalismsection of the FE Examination than they do on the Examination as a whole. Conversely,mechanical engineering students tend to score lower on the ethics and professionalism section ofthe examination than they do on the Examination as a whole.Building on prior efforts, the current study investigated disciplinary differences in performanceon the ethics and professional section of FE Examination. This included application ofdescriptive and inferential statistics to appraise the previously noted differences between the civilengineering, electrical engineering, and mechanical engineering aggregate performance on theethics section of the Examination. While this investigation cannot identify which disciplinegenerates the most ethical or professional engineers, it does clearly identify which discipline inthis institutional sample is the best at preparing its students for the ethics and professionalismsection of the FE Examination.
AU  - Brock E. Barry
AU  - JoAnna C. Whitener
CY  - Vancouver, BC
DA  - 2011/06/26
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - How do Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Students Compare?: Ethically Speaking
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/18062
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--18062
ER  -