AC 2011-147: CORRELATION BETWEEN ”ETHICAL ISSUES” AND ”GRADE”PERFORMANCE IN A GRADUATE CLASSRobert M. Brooks, Temple University Dr. Robert M. Brooks is an associate professor in the department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Temple University. He is a registered professional engineer in PA and a fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers. His research interests are Civil Engineering Materials, Transportation Engineering, and Engineering Education.Naji Khoury, Temple UniversityJyothsna K S, Department of English, St.Joseph’s College, Bangalore Secured a gold Medal for the highest aggregate marks in the Post Graduate English Literature Course at St.Joseph’s College (Autonomous). Working for the
Engineering Education, 2011 Views of Diverse Groups of International and American Students Concerning Business, Cultural, and Ethical IssuesAbstractUniversity programs have a growing number of students from all around the world, making itimportant to consider the perspectives of these students to maximize their learning experiences.As manufacturing and business activities and operations become increasingly global, theopportunity for interaction with these students gives all of our students, including traditionalNorth American students, the opportunity to learn about other cultures and their impact onbusiness and business ethics. It is far too easy to assume mistakenly that all students view class topics from the traditionalCanadian
engineers. Skills include a working knowledge of business and ethics,teamwork experience, a solid grounding in engineering science as well as communication andpresentation skills. The program develops abilities such as an appreciation of the basic principlesof business, the profit motive, how to design and execute experiments, how to prepare projectplans and regulatory documents, and how to carry out a real-life project within a company.Program emphasis is placed upon engineering creativity and innovation. with a strong emphasison the needs of the nation to compete in the world market and maintain the strength of the U.S.economy. A second objective of the paper is to describe the current status of a recentlydeveloped Professional Science Master’s
important skills (seen in Table 1). The distribution of responses and mean value ofthe Likert Scale for each skill are shown in Table 2. Results suggest that the most importantskills are learning independently, working in teams, written and oral communication, solvingproblems, and working independently. All respondents rated these as essential, with over 50%indicating that an expert skill level is needed as seen in Table 2. These findings are similar toSekhon’s survey of Ph.D.s working in industry with mathematically-intensive disciplinesincluding engineering13. In the current study, practicing professional ethics, designingexperiments, giving presentations, writing reports and reviewing literature are also consideredimportant. At least 40% of
Manufacturing Systems Engineering program at the University of St. Thomas. We use results of the leadership courses to demonstrate compliance with several of the program outcomes. The EAC of ABET requires that engineering programs must demonstrate the fulfillment of a set of criteria. One of those criteria, Criterion 3 Program Outcomes, requires that engineering programs must demonstrate that their students attain eleven outcomes, often referred to as „a-k‟. The six specific outcomes that the leadership courses address are: d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility g) an ability to communicate effectively h) the broad education necessary to
strong analytical skills, communication,practical ingenuity, leadership, professionalism, ethics, and lifelong learning.Methods, Techniques, or Modes of InquiryQualitative methods were used to conduct the current study, which is one part of an exploratorystudy about engineering Ph.D.s14. To define the attributes of engineering Ph.D.s and to identify Page 22.267.4strategies to help engineering Ph.D.s to acquire expected skills, researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with industry and academic professionals in engineering fields. Resultswere analyzed from four questions (two about attributes and two about strategies). The researchteam
Preparation) 1 2 3 4 5 (Excellent Preparation)b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret data;(Little Preparation) 1 2 3 4 5 (Excellent Preparation)c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs withinrealistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, healthand safety, manufacturability and sustainability; Page 22.1427.7(Little Preparation) 1 2 3 4 5 (Excellent Preparation)d) An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams;(Little Preparation) 1 2 3 4 5 (Excellent Preparation)e) An ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems;(Little
andpractical experiences of focusing on setting objectives and accomplishing goals. This habitus-based focus that the professionally-experienced non-traditional students described wastransferred and utilized in their graduate school experience. Abigail feels strongly about herfocus and compares her level of focus to her peers when she claims, I have a focus probably that a lot of students don‟t have. I know why I‟m here. – AbigailEthan specifically discusses his direction of his research, and from his prior experience, knewthat it involved ethics. He states, I didn‟t have it necessarily formed to the level it was when it got bound into a document as a dissertation, but I had an idea of what I wanted to do for my research
AC 2011-242: WRITING CHALLENGES FOR GRADUATE STUDENTSIN ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGYJoy L Colwell, Purdue University, Calumet (Tech) Joy L. Colwell, J.D., is an Associate Professor of Organizational Leadership and Supervision and Director of Graduate Studies at Purdue University Calumet. She regularly teaches graduate courses in Leadership and Ethics and the Directed MS Project for the MS in Technology program at PUC.Jana Whittington, Purdue University Calumet Jana Whittington has a Ph.D. in education with a specialization in instructional design and online learn- ing. Additionally Jana has a MA in studio art and humanities, BFA in painting, and AA in graphic design. She has taught a variety of courses for 15+ years
participants for professional success in the engineering field.Current ProgramOur current program consists of three seminars--Modern Teaching Techniques, AdvancedTeaching Techniques, and the Academic Profession--together with a 10-hour mentored teachingexperience. Participants also have the option of completing additional mentoring hours andearning a PFF certificate from the associated university-level PFF program. Since most of ourPh.D. students do little teaching during their time at UC, the program was designed to providebasic skills for organizing class materials, delivering content, and evaluating students, exposureto active learning techniques, discussion of engineering-related topics such as project and teammanagement, ethics in engineering
department initiated an independent research propositioncourse for all first year PhD candidates. Student performance in this spring semesterthree unit course was treated as a graduate qualifier exam, and both students and facultyhave been supportive of this requirement, as summarized earlier1. Over the last decade, our first year approach to research education hasbroadened. Peter Kilpatrick added a one unit fall course, Introduction to Research, aprofessional development course including research ethics, presentations, andpublications. While these two courses were satisfying as stand-alone efforts, recentfaculty and graduate student sentiment pushed for an earlier engagement of student withresearch advisor, PhD committee, and research itself
practices and experiences in researchmethods. Unique to this distance-learning course is the incorporation of team-based activelearning activities in every lecture. In this active learning course, students learn quantitativeresearch methods by practicing the set of procedures in class. Students are expected toincorporate their research topics as examples throughout the class. Topics in research methodsinclude: defining research problems, conducting a literature review, qualitative and quantitativedata analysis, developing experimental designs, survey design, visual presentation of results,research ethics, and the process of writing a peer-reviewed journal article. The course culminatesin students’ research proposal.This paper discusses the lessons
communicateeffectively‖[11].What engineers need to experience and know, in addition to ―hard‖ knowledge, is ―process-oriented skills and awareness-oriented skills‖ [1]. Process-oriented skills include―communication, teamwork, and the ability to recognize and resolve ethical dilemmas‖ [1].These skills are powerful when combined with awareness skills involving ―understanding theimpact of global and social factors, knowledge of contemporary issues, and the ability to dolifelong learning‖ [1]. But what are the most effective ways of incorporating process andawareness-oriented practices into engineering curricula already crowded with necessary science,math, and disciplinary courses? How can engineering schools, which must ensure that theirstudents graduate with
. Pirsig’s examples include ego, anxiety, boredom, impatience, and aninability to re-evaluate facts that might seem unimportant. Dealing with hang-ups can be assimple as taking a break from the problem for a while. How can you avoid losing your gumption about publishing a paper, in a collaborativeenvironment like a large research group? Here are some points to watch out for. 1. Agree on authorship – Who will be an author? a) Agree on roles in writing, and define who will prepare materials such as figures and tables, and who will write the different text sections. Be clear on the roles of each author in the paper, and ensure that the ethical expectation that each author must make a substantial
program, theory vs. application (hands-on), 2) faculty issues such astenure and reward systems and staying current with field and pedagogy, 3) specific curriculumcontent issues of communications, teamwork, technology use, ethics and 4) concern regardingstudent preparation and retention of information. Objective 3 Students will be able to recognize the options for types of instructionalapproaches.. Results from a pair of questions related to types of instructional approaches theypreferred as a student and then how they are or have been teaching demonstrate that a gap doesexist between the two (Figure 2). The largest gap occurs in the areas of active learning exercisesand laboratory
“older,” “mature,” “adult,” “non-traditional” or “returning” students, have had a variety of careerand life experiences between their undergraduate and graduate studies. These returning studentsdiffer from direct-pathway graduate students; they are often more motivated and mature9,10, moregoal-directed4,10, more aware of ethical issues9, have better teamwork skills9, have a high workethic10, and more skilled with a variety of tools and types of equipment10. They also utilize timemanagement strategies more effectively than younger students, and model effective studystrategies for direct-pathway students to emulate11. These characteristics can add to theclassroom environment and enrich the graduate experience for the student body as a whole9,10