Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert Green, Mississippi State University; Jerry Emison, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

conclusions on the differences between engineering and political sciencestudents and how they approach problems.Because one of our objectives was to improve the writing ability of the students, we asked if theythought the amount of writing in the class was about right. As shown in figure 1, most of thestudents thought the amount of writing was about right. This was particularly interesting becausewe, the ones who had to grade the writing, thought there was too much writing. The six in-classwriting assignments imposed a heavy grading load because the students were given detailedfeedback on the assignments. Grading could have been easier had it not been done with suchdetail. We did allow one assignment to be completed at home and received mixed reviews

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Devin Stewart, National Academy of Engineering; Norman Fortenberry, National Academy of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

National Science Foundation has the largest non-formula drivenbudget of funding sources. The NSF’s Directorate for Education and Human Resources funded$48.06 million in education research in fiscal year 2006 through the Research and Evaluation onEducation in Science and Engineering (REESE) program3. This funding accounts for 6 percentof the budget for the EHR Directorate. This amount has declined for the last several years, andthe Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Request proposes that it continue to decline in fiscal year 2007.Small amounts of education research funding were made available as part of the STEM TalentExpansion Program (STEP); though no education research grants are expected to be awarded infiscal year 2006, 1 to 3 grants of up to $500,000

Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carl Fayerweather, University of Toledo; Sorin Cioc, University of Toledo; Douglas Oliver, University of Toledo

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

, there were nooverall negative feelings toward the project. In two of the areas, question 1 and 2, thestudents felt strongly positive toward the project. This is reassuring because these twoquestions dealt with the two main ABET criteria meant to impress on to the students,ABET (3)(c) and (3)(j).The students were also encouraged to write comments on the project. Most of thecomments dealt with the short amount of time given for the presentation and debate.However, since the amount of time was equal for every team, they did not see it as unfair.The presentations needed to take no more than one week of class. Since we were dealingwith a class of 48 students, the duration of the presentations had to be strictly limited.Also included is a graphical

Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alison Tramba, University of Virginia; Edmund Russell, University of Virginia; P. Paxton Marshall, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

policy.1 Current engineering curricula,however, provide little preparation for engineering students to provide this essential leadership.Knowledge is divided into distinct “disciplines” which constrain the ability to address complexreal-world problems. Engineering professors, with little public policy experience, emphasize thetechnical aspects of their subjects without examining the social implications of the technology.The NAE followed its 2004 publication with an education-specific document emphasizing a shiftin both materials and methods presented in a more interactive and interdisciplinary approach.2This paper describes the efforts of the School of Engineering and Applied Science (SEAS) at theUniversity of Virginia (UVa) to meet the need

Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Dunn, Environmental Protection Agency

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

of the semester, the studentspresented their work at the regional EPA office for an audience of EPA and City of Chicagostaff. The next section describes the two elements of the project in greater detail. The balance ofthe paper discusses the students’ results, the grading methodology, and the post-projectassessment.2. Project Description To introduce the project to the class, I lectured briefly on the SmartWay Partnership and gavethe following four goals for student participation in the project. 1. Gain insight into a voluntary emission control program 2. Become familiar with mobile source control technologies 3. Calculate emissions reductions and economic impacts from involvement in a

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kristen Tull, Lafayette College; Sharon Jones, Lafayette College

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

context. The emphasis of the course material is on the federallevel, however international, state, and local differences are included. The desired studentoutcomes are as follows:1) Students will know why public policy is needed in modern society, and in particular, why it is needed for technological issues.2) Students will know what the main organizations are in the technical public policy arena.3) Students will understand at a basic level what the public policy process involves, and how that relates to technological issues.4) Students will understand at a basic level what the policy analysis process involves, and how that relates to technological issues.5) Students will understand what it means to be a

Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joel Haight, Pennsylvania State University; Richard Devon, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

. Page 11.854.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Katrina in the Classroom: Engineering and Public Policy through Project-based LearningA Note on Engineering and Public PolicyWe assume that engineering educators have two sorts of interest in public policy 1. What and how to teach students about the role of public policy in engineering and technology and vice versa. This is our focus in this paper. 2. Public policies that concern engineering educationPublic policies are the policies of public institutions that affect our lives including, but notlimited to, federal, state and local governments. Public universities and utilities, and NGOs mayalso be included. Since government policies

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Devon, Pennsylvania State University; Elizabeth Kisenwether, Pennsylvania State University; Richard Schuhmann, Pennsylvania State University; Robert Pangborn, Pennsylvania State University; Kim Barron, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

Page 11.551.5same unit, and they share the same mission to provide the professional skills that new engineersneed to succeed and excel in industry the public sector, or private practice. There is muchsymbiosis among the three programs with shared teaching duties, meetings, funded projects, anddaily interaction.In the rest of the paper, we will, 1. Describe these programs in design, entrepreneurship, and leadership 2. Review studies that show why these programs represent important education for our engineering students for work in the national and global economies 3. Analyze the survey data that Penn State’s College of Engineering has collected from its alumni for more than a decade. These data both address how the

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Douglas Sicker, University of Colorado-Boulder; Tom Lookabaugh, University of Colorado-Boulder

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

ITP attend SFTP events as part of agraduate seminar course. This course focuses on exposing ITP students to policy and businessissues in telecommunications and also serves as a compulsory writing seminar (directed atimproving the writing skills of these students). 3.1. The Interdisciplinary Telecommunications ProgramFounded in 1971, ITP is the oldest telecommunications degree program in the country;combining technology knowledge with the business, economic, and regulatory insights necessaryto thrive in a world of increasingly ubiquitous networks.1 The mission of CU's ITP is theadvancement of telecommunications science as its own discipline through research andeducation of technology, economics, management and policy issues. The historic

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carole Womeldorf, Ohio University-Athens

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

embody these ideals? Does this principle instruct us, as engineers and educators, to focus on public policy and our society’s technological choices? Finally, how can we, as engineering educators teach students to responsibly tackle the ethical questions that lack a quantitative answer? An introduction of a three- tiered approach to encompass the range of issues involved is described. Specifically, strategies from chess instruction, computer games, and the potential power of a graduate with knowledge of competence, self, and the surrounding world are described.In Gunn and Vesilind’s book of the same name, Hold Paramount,1 they skillfully prod and pokeat the ethical

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Frank Barnes, University of Colorado-Boulder

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

competition. Let us consider some approaches to this problem.1. Let us consider first the possibility of requiring our undergraduates to play a significant roll in teaching other undergraduates. In teaching a class you learn the material better than when you took the course and you have to define the problems in a form the other students can learn to solve them. This will deepen their understanding of the technical material they are trying to teach. Students do not like to be embarrassed in front of their piers and they will prepare. They also get practice in organizing and presenting material. These are skills we are often told by industry that our students are lacking and skills they will need if they are lead organizations

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jacqueline Isaacs, Northeastern University; Christopher Bosso, Northeastern University; Carol Barry, University of Massachusetts-Lowell

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

current and projected workforce. To increase student awareness of thesocietal implications of this developing technology, the academic partners in the Center forHigh-rate Nanomanufacturing (CHN), an NSF-sponsored Nanoscale Science and EngineeringCenter (NSEC), have created a team taught course entitled “Nanomanufacturing I”. Assessmentof engineering and science student performance is reported for the segment of the course thataddressed policy issues.1. IntroductionThe academic partners in the Center for High-rate Nanomanufacturing (CHN), an NSF-sponsored Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center (NSEC), have created a team taughtcourse entitled “Nanomanufacturing I”. Faculty from all three core partner academicinstitutions, including Northeastern