Morocco, and 6) 3Australia and New Zealand. To meet the program’s goal of global engineering competencies,students visit companies, universities and are immersed in cultural and social attraction sites inthe respective host countries. In addition, students participating in the program are required tohighlight their learning and broader experiences through a reflective journal [18].MethodsTo answer the research question, we conducted a qualitative study employing the case studymethodological framework. Case study research is based on examining the context and everycomplex condition in the real-world setting of the phenomenon to have an integral
own.Groups of 4-5 students worked with a facilitator over 5-6 weeks. The course has anasynchronous and synchronous component to accommodate different time zones and schedules.A series of 5 video lectures guided students’ learning along the design path. The students weredirected to download a set of notes with blanks and encouraged to actively listen by filling in thenotes while watching the lecture. The length of the video lectures ranges from 8 - 32 minutes. Aset of 5 individual assignments (in the form of on-line quizzes) were created to support theasynchronous activities. After watching the video lecture, students are directed to complete aquiz. Responses to short-answer questions covered in the lecture and reflective exercises arecollected
in differences inethical perspectives. The ongoing collaborative project described in this paper attempts todevelop the cross-cultural sensitivity of Indian and USA students through their reflections oncase studies that present ethical dilemmas in real-world situations. Central questions addressed inthis paper include: 1) How does a pedagogical model based on socio-cultural theory andincorporating cross-cultural activities support undergraduate engineering students in socio-cultural and ethical thinking? and 2) How do engineering students develop their professionalidentities through socio-cultural and ethical discourse? Based on socio-cultural learning theory,the present collaborative effort engages hundreds of students in professional
, adaptational, or causal process. Due to the limitation of space and relevance tothe purpose of this paper, focus will be placed on the developmental and compositional modelsof intercultural competence. Developmental models are rooted in the recognition that intercultural competenceevolves over time. An influential example is the Developmental Model of InterculturalSensitivity (DMIS) created by Milton J. Bennett [10]. There are six stages in the DMIS modelwhere interactants progress from relatively ethnocentric understandings of other culturesto a more differentiated, sophisticated and ethnorelative comprehension and appreciation:“Denial” reflects attitudes that only one’s own culture is in some sense real or legitimate, whileother cultures are
work comfortably within holistic, multidisciplinary contexts to solvecontemporary challenges. Moreover, engineers are expected to have the ability to work on multi-national teams designing products in one part of the world that will be manufactured in anotherand sold in yet another. In short, engineering is in itself, a global enterprise [2]. Trainedindividuals are needed who understand participatory development and have the technical skills toaddress complex issues. As noted by William Wulf [3], President Emeritus of National Academyof Engineering:“…engineering is now practiced in a global, holistic business context, and engineers must designunder constraints that reflect that context. In the future, understanding other cultures
engineeringeducation.In this research, the quality assurance mechanism of engineering education is a continuouslyimproved, well-organized, and fully-participated mechanism. Its effective operation must bebased on a specific methodology and rely on specific quality management ideas and methods.Continuous quality improvement (CQI) is such an idea developed from TQM, refers to aspecific deliberate process that can optimize the quality outcome of a system [7]. Theapplication of CQI in the engineering education is reflected in two levels, i.e. institutionalaccreditation and program accreditation. First of all, the CQI concept continues to shape andcondense accreditation culture, influence and internalize the thoughts and behaviors from theleaders to the general
’ reflections using the asynchronous online discussionboard, Slack. The following class virtual gathering would include group discussions in break outrooms on Zoom and having a discussion on what they picked from that lecture topic that interestedthem and why. In that group break out session, they would pick the best researched topic and useit make a video about at end of course with all the best-chosen ideas for each lecture topic. Thetopics each week were: 1. Influential Brazilians Personalities, 2. Brazilian Music and Festivals,and 3. Biomes of Brazil.The program also offered interactive cultural engagement activities such as a synchronousCapoeira tutorial and a cooking class to make famous Brazilian dishes, such as pão de queijo andbrigadeiros
= "Strongly Agree." Significance levels are * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, *** = p < .001.Discussion and ConclusionThe results from our study provide different considerations from practice. From the pre-courseand post-course paired T-test, there was a significant increase in the GPI scores in theKnowledge, Social Interactions and Identity dimensions. This might mean that the GlobalEngineering course had an influence on students’ awareness of cultures on our global society andone’s own identity and engagement with a diverse group of people. The Knowledge dimensiononce again showed the largest growth, which may reflect the alignment of the learning objectivesof the Global Engineering Course with the knowledge dimension of the GPI scale. Although
programsIntroductionUniversities across North America have adopted global education as part of their educationalmandate [1]. This mandate corresponds to the emerging trend for a globalized workforce. In theUnited States (U.S.) specifically, study abroad has become more popular due to the emphasisplaced on global citizenry by institutions and employers [2]. This demand has more than doubledstudents’ participation in study abroad programs over the past decades [3]. Educational theoristKolb [4] posits that people learn effectively by immersing themselves in environments thatenable them to observe and reflect on their behaviors. Students who participate in internationalprograms acquire knowledge, skills, and beliefs useful in working with people in cross-culturalsettings [5
about ethical, racial, and cultural diversity determines their instructionaldiversities” (p. 126), and plurality in class. Teachers’ awareness of students’ cultures can betterequip them to interact with diverse students [12]. The plurality in culturally responsive teachingtheory reflects cultural synergies within the class, developed from the notion that race, class,culture, ethnicity, and gender shape the diverse students’ learning styles, requiring multipleinstructional strategies for the common learning outcomes [12]. Therefore, cultural synergies canbe viewed from three aspects. It requires various teaching techniques in class to accommodatevarious students’ learning styles; it is reflected on relevant curriculum by locally
offer professional development which shares and reflects on these strategies. These challenges that international students often face are important because mostacademic failures can be traced back to the first year of transition for an international student[13]. Additionally, all of these challenges can make it more difficult for students to feel a senseof belonging on campus, and this is important because this supports students' engagement andmotivation in their studies [10, 14]. While most universities offer some support to students, many large universities have onespecific international organization or center that is meant to meet the needs of all internationalstudents. These large centers focus on the broader student
respected by theirmembers. The U.S. score is below average, represented by a degree of acceptance of new ideasand trying new things. This can also be reflected in the good perception that innovation andcreating new products have [16].Finally, in terms of masculinity, the dimension that explains how much a society is driven bycompetition, achievement, and success, Ecuador and the U.S. have very similar rankings in themiddle of the spectrum. The countries can be considered highly success-oriented and drivensocieties, competitive, and status-oriented [16]. While these two countries rank similarly, thecompetitive drive differs according to their cultural dimension of Individualism. For example,Ecuador is a highly collectivistic country, so competition