, 2024 Sociotechnical Integration as Programmatic Foundation in Engineering: Curriculum Design and ABET Assessment ProtocolsAbstractEngineering education has faced enduring criticism for being overly focused on the narrowlytechnical dimensions of engineering practice, ill preparing engineering graduates for their futurework. “Sociotechnical” approaches to engineering education have arisen as one category ofresponses to this perceived narrowness. This paper reviews our efforts to situate sociotechnicalintegration as the foundation of our new undergraduate design engineering undergraduate degreeprogram, focusing on how we have cast this foundation in both our program’s curriculum andthrough our ABET assessment protocol design and
., everyone can master a subject), and centering humanity and nature inthe STEM curricula. We find kinship with efforts to create curriculum driven by an ethic of care[6], and also, with the idea of “recasting agreements” [19]. We also acknowledge that engineersin training and in the workforce often encounter situations where they must make decisions orperform tasks that conflict with their personal values [20-21]. This inevitability is one we shouldprepare our students to navigate.STS Postures and Student AgencyThe STS Postures curriculum has been described in previous studies [6-8, 22-23], so we onlybriefly contextualize it here. The first two authors of this paper developed the STS Postures as away to integrate insights from many pedagogical
enrichment programs to increase students’ confidence and willingness to learn [44] Thriving is not only influenced by personal perceptions, but also by interpersonal relations, as well as contextual and institutional conditions [41] Institutions can include an ethics-based course in their engineering curriculum to foster the ethical and moral development of students [56] Institutions can provide disability inclusion programs and resources such as access to professional development resources, accommodations, and disability awareness [52]. Meso- A country’s government can change the requirements of its engineering programs to Macro better foster creativity, problem-solving
voluntarily undertaken by individuals, groups, or companies, but also asa mindset that must be widely adopted within the engineering community to reach a cultural“tipping point” towards stewardship. In this conceptualization, ‘tech stewardship’ is a “valuesensitive approach” to engineering design [6], which the ECL envisions as an integral part offuture technological innovation once sufficient cultural change has occurred withinengineering.Dimensions of StewardshipThe conceptualizations described above span different contexts, motivations, and definitionsof stewardship. In Table 1, we summarize these diverse understandings by characterizingthem according to five dimensions: 1. the object of stewardship, or the quantity beingstewarded (what); 2. the
. Similarly to classroom intervention,external intervention is offered on a one-time basis. Still, they play an introductory role to facultyand practitioners who were never exposed to the idea of integrating social justice thinking in thedesign process.Table 3Level of Interventions Included in ScLR Level of Intervention Articles Cited Classroom Brinkley, 2020; Brinkley et al., 2021; Claussen et al., 2019; D’Souza, 2017; Forbes et al., 2022; Hoople et al., 2020; Leydens et al., 2018; Motti & Dura, 2023; Murdock et al., 2023; Oleson et al., 2023 Curriculum Reynante, 2022; Rossmann et al., 2020 External Gale, 2022; Kang et al., 2022; Letaw et al
whatengineering is and what it means to be an engineer. The module integrates the InnerDevelopment Goals (IDG), which is a framework of skills and qualities needed to address theUN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The IDG were developed from a perspective thattechnical knowledge is not the limiting factor in addressing the climate crisis and relatedsocietal challenges, but rather, it is the emotional and cognitive skills of individuals andorganizations to fulfil the vision of the SDG. Learning activities throughout the year weredesigned to support students’ engineering identity, including the trajectory of theirconceptualization and the role, if any, that affective and macroethical considerations play.This work aligns with the LEES conference theme
students’ existing engineering identity may bolster the belief thatengineers can be effective agents of change [4]. To promote this within our institution’sengineering department, we have developed a pilot course offering that aims to guide students inembracing their role as active participants in shaping our world by augmenting the technical andcritical thinking mindset integral to an engineering identity with tools grounded in criticalconsciousness and compassion. Developing critical consciousness translates to an increasedawareness of inequitable systems and opportunities to further freedom and prosperity, whilecompassion elicits the self-belief and care for others that drives change.Related InitiativesThere is a wide range of ongoing
engineering coursecontent [14]-[15]. Researchers have also shown that the final course grades in engineeringcourses improve with the intervention of regular writing assignments [6]. The literature contains research into the effect of including regular writing assignments ina wide range of specific engineering courses [6]-[7], [10]-[17], [19]-[20], and some researchershave reported positive benefits from integrating writing faculty as team instructors in engineeringcourses [18] as well as placing writing centers directly within an individual engineeringdepartment [21]. Yet a concentration of interest among researchers appears to center on theinfluence of including regular writing assignments within engineering statics courses [6], [11],[16]-[17
exercises to inspiresystems thinking. The PILLARS arecompleted first, integrating citizenshipfundamentals and design thinking and theengineering design process into bothPILLARS. Though they both integrate bothskill families, the content is inverselyproportional, as shown in Figure 2. Eachpillar presents students with a case toaddress civically with an appropriatesolution. The solutions may be tangibleproducts, processes, or models. Afterstudents complete both PILLARS, they willpractice both civics knowledge and designthinking skills repeatedly through engaging Figure 2 Graphic showint the composition of PILLAR 1 and PILLAR 2 having both Citizenship and Design Thinking andin the PATHWAYS
illustratedin the following sections, this perspective also makes it possible to critique administrativeapproaches in higher education that privilege classroom activities over other forms ofeducational work that are necessary for developing transdisciplinary curriculums, such as thework of external evaluators. By focusing on external evaluation as an integral component of aneducational system, this paper seeks to highlight the value of this seemingly “peripheral work”(Lederman, 2019). This in turn raises critical questions about how power dynamics and otherasymmetric relationships can be exposed early in the development of an academic plan. Suchexposure is important if the principles of transdisciplinary curriculums are to be fully realized inways that
and virtual international project experiences.” Jour. of Int. Engineering Education, vol. 3, no. 1, article 5, 2021.[6] Reddy, E. A., Kleine, M. S., Parsons, M., Nieusma, D. (2023, June) Sociotechnical Integration: What is it? Why do we need it? How do we do it? In 2023 ASEE Conference & Exposition.[7] M. D. Patton, "Beyond WI: Building an Integrated Communication Curriculum in One Department of Civil Engineering," IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 313-327, 2008[8] J. L. Craig, N. Lerner, and M. Poe, "Innovation Across the Curriculum: Three Case Studies in Teaching Science and Engineering Communication," Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on
Riddle Aeronautical UniversityKatrina Robertson, Embry Riddle Aeronautical UniversityTrey Talko, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Small Shifts: New Methods for Improving Communication Experiences for Women in Early Engineering Courses Abstract: This paper outlines methods and initial data from an educational intervention based on previous research published at ASEE. Students in introductory engineering courses face challenges communicating and integrating their ideas in team projects. Often these challenges with team communication fall along gendered lines, where women students experience marginalization in team settings. This paper builds from previous research in the field of engineering education which integrated
anxiety in engineering students, and the relationship between climateanxiety, environmental action-taking and an interest in pursuing a career in sustainability.Furthermore, this research can contribute to a gap in the literature on climate anxiety anddisciplinary cultures, and contribute to the broader understanding of engineering education andsustainability.Sustainability has been integrated into the engineering curriculum in various ways; throughstand-alone courses and program emphases, as a criterion in the design courses or otherwisethrough engineering design courses [7-8] and through incidental coverage or the inclusion of aspecific module related to sustainability in engineering technical courses [9]. There is arecognition of this work in
defineepistemologies as “ways of knowing” [36], or individuals’ thoughts surrounding knowledge oracquiring and retaining knowledge. With this definition, we define hidden epistemologies as theunspoken, unacknowledged ways of knowing that guide engineering in educational spaces aswell as the field. Though this terminology may be less common in EER, hidden epistemologieshave been studied in this field as hidden curriculum [37]–[39].The term “hidden curriculum” was coined by Philip Jackson [40], and it has been operationalizedin EER to mean “the unwritten, unofficial, and often unintended lessons, values, andperspectives made by individuals and found in physical spaces within an academic environment”[39, pp. 2–3]. One way researchers have distinguished hidden
Tech.Jan DeWaters, Clarkson University Dr. Jan DeWaters is an Associate Professor in the Institute for STEM Education with a joint appointment in the School of Engineering at Clarkson University, and teaches classes in both areas. Her research focuses on developing and assessing effective, inclusive teaching and learning in a variety of settings. An environmental engineer by training, Dr. DeWaters’ work typically integrates environmental topics such as energy and climate into STEM settings.Lucas Adams, Clarkson University Current Senior at Clarkson University in Potsdam, NY majoring in Applied Mathematics and Statistics ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024
alsoensuring the relevance and value of every component. Moreover, these additions must bedesigned to seamlessly blend with traditional subjects without overwhelming students ordetracting from their primary educational objectives. Incorporating mindfulness into the busyschedules of engineering students also presents a significant challenge. Often, students prioritizeactivities that directly impact their grades, leading to hesitation in participating in activities [37],like mindfulness practices that are optional and not integrated into the core curriculum. Thistendency can widen the gap in mental health support, especially for non-traditional students whojuggle work and study. Addressing this issue is crucial for creating an inclusive
feelings of belonging in modern science. Her research specialties include histories of women, gender, and sexuality in modern science and technology; the interplay between engineers and engineering practices and the infrastructure of everyday life; and the relationship between design, technology, and justice.Dr. Avneet Hira, Boston College Dr. Avneet Hira is an Assistant Professor in the Human-Centered Engineering Program and the Department of Teaching, Curriculum and Society (by courtesy) at Boston College. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Engineering as Conflict: A Framing for Liberal Engineering EducationIntroductionIn this paper we use the framing of “engineering as conflict” to
all stakeholders.Integrating social justice with engineering in the classroom is difficult, as most engineeringeducators do not possess the requisite social justice background. Some engineering facultymembers have successfully conducted this integration, whether for a thermodynamics [23] orcontrols [13, 24] course. It is incredibly challenging to attempt this integration within an entireengineering program [25].We propose an alternative integration. Rather than adding social justice directly into ourengineering courses, we rely on a social justice core curriculum to provide a thorough socialjustice foundation. Through this core curriculum, students learn how to critically analyze socialconditions. We then administer social justice case study
fellow engineering education researchers on howto design effective programs in this field. Figure 1: A cartoon depiction of an interdisciplinary conversation on responsible AI 1IntroductionFor decades, engineering educators have raised concerns about the need to embrace humanist and liberal artseducation in the engineering curriculum. Researchers have called for integration between technical and humanisticcontent [1], [2], [3] as a path towards achieving “humanistic engineers” who can engage in socio-humanisticcritiques: “Instead of—or alongside—traditional socio-humanistic coursework, we propose to integrate
[11]. This process is typically focused on understandingenough to make a productive change to a situation rather than primarily seeking to understand theroot cause.The problem-solving mindset is also prevalent in engineering education, but there are critiquesthat assert the curriculum isn’t fully representative of the profession [12]. In the UK, MacLeodsuggests that engineering education is geared toward developing an academic mindset rather thanan engineering mindset [13]. He mentions that the education that engineers receive doesn’t helptheir ability to innovate because it centers around a theoretical approach where problems arewell-defined. This approach differs greatly in comparison to the engineering practice, whereengineers must often
Material Culture. It presents a configuration andtriangulation of ethnographic methods to reveal concealed relations of design, the designer’sethical and caring thought and practice, and how, if at all, design relationships were valued. Thismethodology was tested throughout three semesters with undergraduate students in acommunity-engaged Architectural Technology course.IntroductionIn August 2015, I began an ethnographic study at a large, urban, Midwestern University on how,if at all, concerns with ethics were expressed within an architectural technology course forinterior design majors. Entitled Commercial Construction, the course utilized community-engaged pedagogy. My research aimed to identify whether and, if so, how ethical thought
about gender and thegender binary (per Caroline Perez and Cordelia Fine). Assignments in Race & Technologyinclude an “infrastructure exploration” [25] in which students plan and execute a local journeyinformed by readings from Langdon Winner, Rayvon Fouché, Simone Browne, and others, thenpresent their observations to their classmates in ways that facilitate further discussion. For thecapstone project in Race & Technology, students may choose to propose a redesign of either aspecific technology or a STEM curriculum, drawing on the course readings and discussions. Thereadings lists for both classes are included as Appendices A and B.The Gender & STEM course was developed and taught by Mary Armstrong, a scholar ofliterature and gender
situations.The study highlights the critical deficiency in engineering education at preparing students forethical and professional responsibilities in the workplace. Students expressed that theirundergraduate and graduate programs overly emphasized technical skills while neglectingprofessional development, communication skills, and ethics training. We found that thesecurricular priorities affected students’ perception of the culture of academic engineeringdepartments and, subsequently, shaped their own professional values and understanding ofengineers’ duty to society.Despite a handful of students viewing ethics as an unnecessary distraction to their curriculum,the majority expressed a desire for more expansive professional and ethics training
in ways that reinforce existing power structures. This underscores theimportance of critically assessing educational materials for their role in upholding or challenginghegemonic narratives within the engineering discipline and broader society–an avenue that wewish to explore further.From an STS perspective, policy is considered an integral part of infrastructure, as it shapes thecontext of the specific places in which scientific and technological work unfolds. Policies dictatewhat is built, how it is used, who has access to it, and the norms of its use and conversely, theconsequences of a lack of transparent policy around how spaces are regulated. Yet, policies alsomust be translated and performed, and those performances are in part guided