advocating and implementing a broadermindset in the engineering curriculum. We begin by exploring the tensions in the cultureof engineering education through the lens of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. We thenfollow with a discussion of the co-contraries that exist in engineering education withinthe bounds of these cultural dimensions. We conclude with thoughts on how concepts ofengineering leadership could be leveraged to influence culture change that can positivelyinfluence the curricular aspects of engineering programs, as well as within theinstitutional environment. The work in this paper provides a baseline for discussion onhow engineering educators can work to bridge the culture gap that arises from thesystemic cultural tensions.1
this approach or whatits impact might be on the engineering leadership development of college students.The primary purpose of the practice paper is to present a short-term activity that models anidentity-based approach (reflexive instruction) to engineering leadership instruction. By using amodular format that can be easily scaled, this research presents instructional activities that can beapplied easily in a wide spectrum of courses, from introductory engineering to senior capstoneclasses. The lessons take 1-2 class periods; they are based on easily accessible resources; andthey require minimal preparation by instructors. Activities include an introduction into severalleadership styles, a teamwork activity, class discussion, and two essays.In
. Thesestudies fall into one of three categories: First are the studies that use the final product to assessteam performance but test instructional techniques or teamwork frameworks. The objective ofthis first category is to observe if they can modify teamwork inputs to achieve improvedteamwork outputs (designs or reports). Examples of this kind of assessment study include thework by Rodriguez et al. [1] and Ogot and Okudan [2], where they measured the diversity of ateam or the personality of each member to determine the impact on team performance. The second category of teamwork assessment focuses on the ability of a team to adopt andemploy a specific teamwork framework. The work by Senaratne & Gunawardane [3] is a goodexample of applying a
unbought, unbound, unafraid, and unintimidated to tell the truth." – Dr. Cornel WestIntroduction Leadership is a highly sought-after skill and experiential opportunity for engineeringstudents and professionals. Engineering leadership research has explored how engineeringincorporates and conceptualizes leadership in engineering professional and educational settings.For example, engineering leadership research has explored the definitions of what engineeringleadership is [1], [2]; the skills involved in engineering leadership [3]–[5]; and practices tosupport engagement in engineering leadership [6]–[11]. While there are studies that explore howengineering leadership is conceptualized, there is a lack of
community created.1 Introduction“I'm mid-career, I'm seen as someone who knows things, who should be doing, officialmentoring, that type of thing. And I [think to myself], "Oh, please don't make me do this”… I'mpositioned as somebody who knows things or somebody who could be supportive or somebodywho can... I want to be those things. But if it's seen as more of a professional capacity, [I feel],‘My life is a lesson of what not to do’.”We see in this quote, someone who struggles with the complexities of navigating a mid-careerprofessional academic journey; a journey that can be fraught with dead ends, wrong turns, andhard-earned lessons. Irrespective of the challenges, formal mentoring for academics at this stageof their career can be sparse
engineering. We also findthat alumni encounter career challenges in areas of organization-level leadership skills and innavigating possible career and role types. Based on findings, we discuss potential opportunity areasthrough which educators can enhance the effectiveness of EL programs.IntroductionCurricular and co-curricular Engineering Leadership (EL) programs have proliferated across NorthAmerican engineering schools in recent years [1, 2], with over 50 programs now established [2].Many of these programs, however, are in their formative or early operational years, and it is estimatedthat fewer than 10 of the most active programs operating today had launched prior to 2010 [1]. Anew opportunity is therefore emerging for larger-scale, longer-term
the advancement of research. An REU sitetypically hosts a small cohort of students for a summer and focuses student research on a certaintopic or theme [1]. In 2021, multiple institutions and faculty members in engineering educationcollaborated to host a virtual REU entitled, Establishing New Generations of scholars to Amplifyand Grow Engineering Education (ENGagED). The REU’s purpose was to engage moreunderrepresented students, specifically, Black and Latinx students, and as a result ofintersectionality, women, people from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, and first-generation individuals among other minoritized identities in engineering education research.Engineering education is a relatively new field of research compared to
and practitioners, this paper frames the current state ofthe community’s knowledge gaps and provides insights into the discipline’s future directions.IntroductionFor nearly three decades, the engineering community and society have realized that engineering work has a direct impact on societyand the world in which we live [1], [2]. Developing engineers for future work is socio-technical in nature; success in modernengineering projects requires more than technical capability, but also the ability to manage teams of people and lead them towards theaccomplishment of common goals. Adapting to this new socio-technical reality has brought a recognition that holistic engineeringdesign techniques and professional skills development, (to include
were also all full professors in the tenure-line. Theyhad work and leadership experiences outside of university settings, such as being professionalengineers and working in professional development settings. They averaged 2-3 years ofleadership experience, with two Fellows starting this year as the chair of their departments.In Fall 2022, the Fellows participated in four sessions involving critical reflection and dialogueon topics related to power and privilege. The topics of these discussions are described in Table 1.The scope of the discussions was broad, and included both Fellows’ roles as individuals insociety and how they, as STEM disciplinarians, viewed success in STEM education and that oftheir students.Through this work, the Fellows
,diverse, and equitable engineering leaders, educators, and researchers and to help bridge the gapbetween traditional academic graduate studies and the workforce demand for practical and appliedleadership skills.LEAD Division strategy priority: Inform.Key project objective: To assess the effectiveness of an innovative engineering-specificleadership group for graduate students. 1Project context: A study by the National Academy of Engineering identified technicalcompetence, business acumen, communication skills, leadership ability, and a global perspectiveas key skills for engineering leaders [1]. The development of graduate students’ leadership abilitiesthrough a
animportant aspect of the engineering profession. Accreditation boards across North America havecalled for engineering educators to equip engineering graduates with leadership capabilities toallow engineers to take on a more prominent role in technological, societal and businessadvancement [1], [2]. As a result, there has been increased focus and research aroundengineering leadership, both in terms of defining what it is (for example, [3], [4]), as well asidentifying the associated skills and effective pedagogical practices for teaching it [5]–[7].Engineering educators are working on closing the gap between the leadership needs of industryand the capability of engineering graduates. However, for particular sectors such as engineeringconsulting, given
engineers work in fields withpressing deadlines, on projects where millions or even billions of dollars, public safety, or thelives of the end user of their designs are at stake. Engineering and computer science-basedprofessions account for just under 6% the 800+ high-stress professions reported by ONET [1].Helping students to develop strategies for performing on teams effectively in stressful situationsis essential for their successful goal achievement, productivity and team performance in theirfuture engineering careers [2], [3]. This EL work in progress design paper will introduce amodel for a non-traditional engineering leadership development activity. Specifically, this paperwill explore the incorporation of a simulated stressful situation
affirming stories,but also institutionally realized leadership catalysts. By making four types of EL developmentcatalysts explicit, we provide engineering educators with authentic, industry-embeddednarratives to support their programing. This project is significant to the ASEE LEAD divisionbecause it provides us with a way of scaffolding leadership development opportunities for all ourstudents, even those who may resist the notion of engineering as a leadership profession.Keywords: career paths, engineering leadership, situated workplace learning, leadership narrativesIntroductionThe majority of engineers working in industry encounter supervisory or managerialresponsibilities within four years of graduation [1-4], yet research suggests that many of