Paper ID #15029Enhancements for the Online Ethics Center for Engineering and ScienceDr. Frazier F. Benya, National Academy of Engineering Frazier Benya is a Program Officer in the National Academy of Engineering’s Center for Engineering Ethics and Society (CEES). She manages the projects run by CEES including the Online Ethics Center (OEC) for Engineering and Science website. Her work at the NAE has focused on ethics education for engineers and scientists; climate change, engineered systems, and society; energy ethics; and ethical and social issues with advancing military technologies. She received her Ph.D. in
Paper ID #16904Foundations of Social and Ethical Responsibility Among Undergraduate En-gineering Students: Project OverviewDr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette Carla B. Zoltowski, Ph.D., is Co-Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in electrical engineering and Ph.D. in engineering education, all from Purdue University. She has served as a lecturer in Purdue’s School of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. Zoltowski’s academic and research interests broadly include the professional formation of engineers and diversity and inclusion in engineering, with
a licensed P.E. Professor Bielefeldt’s research interests in engineering education include service-learning, sustainable engineering, social responsibility, ethics, and diversity.Dr. Nathan E Canney, Seattle University Dr. Canney teaches civil engineering at Seattle University. His research focuses on engineering educa- tion, specifically the development of social responsibility in engineering students. Other areas of interest include ethics, service learning, and the role of the public in engineering decisions. Dr. Canney re- ceived bachelors degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Seattle University, a masters in Civil Engineering from Stanford University with an emphasis on structural engineering
engineering ethics course ”Engineering Ethics and the Public,” which she has been co-teaching to students in engineering and science.Dr. Nathan E Canney, Seattle University Dr. Canney teaches civil engineering at Seattle University. His research focuses on engineering educa- tion, specifically the development of social responsibility in engineering students. Other areas of interest include ethics, service learning, and the role of the public in engineering decisions. Dr. Canney re- ceived bachelors degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Seattle University, a masters in Civil Engineering from Stanford University with an emphasis on structural engineering, and a PhD in Civil Engineering from the University of
-emphasizing social and economicpillars. Furthermore, most instruction on sustainability, as reported in the literature, appears tofocus on teaching the engineering student to be an engineer who practices sustainabledevelopment rather than a consumer who has a role in sustainable practice. In part, thisemphasis on the engineer's role in sustainability is a result of the Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET)'s mandate that engineering undergraduates complete theirdegrees having achieved student outcome (c): “...an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability
, and NCIIA. Dr. Sacre’s current research focuses on three distinct but highly correlated areas – innovative design and entrepreneurship, engineering modeling, and global competency in engineering. She is currently associate editor for the AEE Journal.Dr. Larry J. Shuman, University of Pittsburgh Larry J. Shuman is Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Distinguished Service Professor of industrial engineering at the Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh. His research focuses on improving the engineering education experience with an emphasis on assessment of design and problem solving, and the study of the ethical behavior of engineers and engineering managers. A former Senior Editor of the
was new and cutting edge (nano-carbons parts made on a 3D printer that may later be used for electronics). It is nice to learn while being on the forefront of this research. In the lab we were given free range to create these dyes using the given knowledge. We were then encouraged to try new procedures that could result in new dyes. This was satisfying because it gave me a sense of autonomy but was scaffold in a way that made us want to keep trying new ideas.No recommendations were made for program modification in regards to this objective.Objective E: Understand the social relevance and ethical implications of engineering activitiesrelated to manufacturing (human rights, environmental impact, etc
the weakness oftraditional lecture-based learning modules which may quickly become out of date for rapidlychanging areas like NSNT without diligent attention from well-informed instructors. By its nature,PBL-structured case studies promote learning at the cutting edge of a discipline and thus are well-suited to the emerging NSNT field.A central premise in using the case study technique is that the process of learning is just asimportant as the content [12]. In general, students work cooperatively during case studies to answerchallenging questions or to evaluate complex ethical issues. For PBL-structured case studies,students are expected to investigate and learn necessary content in order to understand the contextof a case. This requires
engineering ethics, researchin an academic setting, and graduate education opportunities and application process. Thefreshman year programs implemented showed success in recruiting students for the S-STEMprogram, and can serve as a model for other undergraduate programs looking to enrich theexperiences of their undergraduates by providing a comprehensive, supportive, and career-relevant environment inside and outside of the classroom.1. IntroductionEngineering education is constantly evolving and changing to meet the current and projectedneeds of the engineering profession. In 2010 1 the National Society of Professional Engineers(NSPE) released a position statement proposing additional undergraduate engineering outcomes:Leadership, Risk and
Anthropogenic Environmental Impacts, Sustainability Rating Schemes (e.g. inclusion) LEED), Resilience, Urbanization/urban sprawl, Sustainability economics, Governance for sustainability, Sustainable Innovation, Sustainability Ethics, Other 1- recycling, Other 2- water reuse, Other 3- energy reduction, Other 4- Urban heat island effect, Other 5- alternative transportation, Other 6- consider needs of people/ stakeholder engagement, NoneConclusion & Future DirectionOngoing integration of both stand-alone courses and modules have shown to be necessary forsustainability to reach 'appropriate' levels of mastery in engineering education, from a practicalimplementation
geographic, disciplinary, and historical variations in engineering education and practice.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette Carla B. Zoltowski, Ph.D., is Co-Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in electrical engineering and Ph.D. in engineering education, all from Purdue University. She has served as a lecturer in Purdue’s School of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. Zoltowski’s academic and research interests broadly include the professional formation of engineers and diversity and inclusion in engineering, with specific interests in human-centered design, engineering ethics, leadership, service-learning, assistive-technology, and
, underrepresented students and engages time assisting the McNair Scholars Program at Cal Poly Pomona.Ms. Suzanna Conrad, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Suzanna Conrad is the Head of Digital Services & Technology in the University Library at Cal Poly Pomona. Suzanna obtained her MLIS from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign in 2011 and her MBA from the University of East London in 2006. Suzanna provides leadership for the planning, implementation, and support of digital collections and services for the University Library. Suzanna is the Convener for the ACRL Digital Curation Interest Group. Suzanna’s research interests include human- computer interaction, scholarly communication, and ethics in
requiresteaming, creative problem solving, ethics, and written and oral communication. All of the ENGR1110 sections place significant emphasis on providing students a positive engineering designexperience and cultivating an awareness of the engineering profession. Each department teachesone or more sections of ENGR 1110 and students are encouraged to take the section offered bythe program they believe they want to major in. Total semester enrollments approximate 500students, but individual sections vary from 20 to 130 students depending on the semester anddiscipline. An overarching aim of ENGR 1110 is to increase the likelihood students will remaininterested in engineering while taking predominantly math, science, and general curriculumcourses. Research
; demonstrating a positiveattitude toward injury prevention and environmental protection; and regulatory and specialinterests.Desired skill sets or knowledgeParticipants were asked to identify skill sets or knowledge they wish new technicians orengineers had that they don't currently have. The most commonly mentioned needs included: Programmable logic controller (PLC) and robot controller programming Soft skills, such as work ethics, customer service, effective communication, conflict resolution, time management, project management Troubleshooting Safe working practices Electrical knowledge - basic single and three phase electrical knowledge; higher voltage power; electric motors and drivesAlso mentioned were CNC
capital facility projects: The Construction Industry Institute. [6] Seager, T., Selinger, E., and Wiek, A. (2011). “Sustainable Engineering Science for Resolving Wicked Problems.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 10.1007/s10806-011-9342-2. [7] Shepherd, A., and Cosgrif, B. (1998). “Problem-Based Learning: A Bridge between Planning Education and Planning Practice.” Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17(4), 348-357. 10.1177/0739456X9801700409. [8] Tomkinson, B., Tomkinson, R., Dobson, H., and Engel, C. (2008). “Education for Sustainable Development – an Inter-Disciplinary Pilot Module for Undergraduate Engineers and Scientists.” International Journal of Sustainable
plastics manufacturing technology, deals with product design, prototyping and modeling,production and process optimization, quality control and failure analysis, materials testing andcharacterization, process automation and robotics, and environment technology.1-5This NSF project utilizes Science, Technology Society & Environment (STSE) instructionalstrategies. The STSE strategies link topics in the science and technology fields to their human,social and environmental contexts by including a variety of perspectives on scientific disciplines;historical, philosophical, cultural, sociological, political and ethical. The STSE approach cutsacross disciplines as part of a broad effort to understand, analyze, and consider the consequencesof social
project that introduces a variety of introductory engineering topics and requiresthe application of science and mathematics concepts. While each instructor is free to choose adifferent project and pedagogical implementation, the common technical topics include unit conversions, statistics, problem solving, engineering design, and safety. Ethics, teamwork, andcommunication are also emphasized in this course.After learning about the INSPIRES Heart-Lung project at the ASEE 2012 Chemical EngineeringSummer School, Rowan University adapted the project for use in Freshman Engineering Clinic Iin the fall semester that year. The overarching goal of
containing value statements, and individuals rate their values on a Likert scale. When implicit, value affirmation occurs through the assertion of desirable or ideal behaviors of an individual or population (e.g., an ideal professional engineer would be ethical in all business dealings). • Behavior Understanding: Behavior understanding is the process by which individuals identify their current actions or decisions with respect to a particular domain. In this research, behavior is always explicit taking the form of a survey instrument, and individuals rate their behaviors (as listed in the survey instrument) on a Likert scale. For example, an individual might rate the behavior, “When making
Paper ID #16514NSF TUES Grant: A Collaborative, Multi-Campus Program to EnhanceSTEM Learning in Energy Science, Technology and PolicyDr. Gary P. Halada, Stony Brook University Dr. Halada, Associate Professor in Materials Science and Engineering at Stony Brook University, directs an interdisciplinary undergraduate degree program in Engineering Science. He designs educational ma- terials focused on nanotechnology, advanced manufacturing, and how engineers learn from engineering disasters and how failure and risk analysis can be used to teach about ethics and societal implications of emerging technologies. Halada also
strategies advanced in the engineeringeducation literature produce higher levels of student engagement [19]. Students also read fourshort classroom scenarios that described examples of interactive engagement. These scenarioswere aligned with the following ABET student outcomes: c) an ability to design a system,component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic,environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability;d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams; e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solveengineering problems; k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering toolsnecessary for engineering practice. Students were then asked
engineering design projects for a servicelearning project. The research questions to be studied were as follows: What influence does theuse of Design Heuristic Cards have on freshmen engineering students’ design strategies? Whataspects blocked creative processes during engineering students’ design strategies? The researchexposed to two undergraduate students to the principles of qualitative research, the concept ofcoding for inter-reliability of interpreted information, the importance of Institutional ReviewBoard considerations and ethical handling of information, and ensured that the REU studentswere communicating and cross-talking ideas and concepts during emergent themes.Assessment of Students’ ExperiencesAn independent evaluator assessed students
(Analytical thinking, complex reasoning) 70.4% 27.8% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% Initiative (Self-starter, productive) 64.2% 34.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% Prioritizing/Planning/Organizing 51.9% 37.0% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% Professionalism (Responsible, accountable, dependable) 73.6% 24.5% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% Integrity (Honesty, ethics, fairness) 87.0% 13.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Attitude/Cooperation 90.7% 9.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Communications (Verbal, written, collaborative, teamwork) 75.9% 20.4
material, component, orsystem.Learn from Failure - Recognize unsuccessful outcomes due to faulty 52.6%equipment, parts, code, construction, process, or design, and then re-engineer effective solutions.Ethics in the Lab - Behave with highest ethical standards, including 44.7%reporting information objectively and interacting with integrity.Models - Identify the strengths and limitations of theoretical models as 36.8%predictors of real world behaviors. This may include evaluating whethera theory adequately describes a physical event and establishing orvalidating a relationship between measured data and underlyingphysical principles.Psychomotor - Demonstrate competence in selection, modification, and
ethically responsible ways. Students are involved more, and teachers control less. 3. Content is used to build a knowledge base, to develop learning skills, and to foster student self-awareness of their abilities. Teaching approaches accounts for students’ learning strategies and prior knowledge. 4. Together, students and teachers create motivating learning environments that encourage students to accept responsibility for their learning. 5. Assessments are implemented to promote learning and to develop self and peer assessment skills, not to evaluate performance primarily.In a meta-analysis of 119 studies, across grades K-20, Cornelius-White found that learner-centered variables such as incorporation of higher-order
short, the predominate interests behind the choice of minority engineering students were,predictably, math skill, love of science and family influence. However, the highest performingstudents were also motivated by good career opportunities (the “hunger factor”), the bent towardmaking and fixing things, and the desire to improve the world.Success in EngineeringThe second question put to them was “What does it take to be successful in your engineeringprogram?” The top three responses were (see figure 2): (1) Dedication and motivation, from 49.3% of students: “Dedication and motivation because there is a lot to learn and a lot to do;” “Commitment;” “Determination.” (2) Effort and hard work, from 31.3%: “It takes a very strong work ethic
. With great effort to haveno interference in these discussions, the PI or a dedicated undergraduate assistant attended thesesessions and took notes. The undergraduate assistant was also critical in providing support andmaintaining order and timeliness among the students on a day-to-day basis, as well as facilitatingvarious activities, workshops, and events that occurred during the program. The seminars andworkshops that were offered throughout the program were presented by experts in theirrespective fields. The subjects of the seminars included twice-exceptional education and thecreative product. Workshops were presented on responsible conduct of research and ethics,graduate school and preparing for the GRE exam, and technical writing. These
National Science Foundation. We wouldalso like to thank The ASU Polytechnic School and the evaluation team for supporting datacollection and participation in this research.Bibliography!1. Walther, Joachim, Pawley, Alice L and Sochacka, Nicki Wendy (2015) ‘Exploring Ethical Validation as a KeyConsideration in Interpretive Research Quality’, in 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle,Washington, ASEE Conferences. [online] Available from: https://peer.asee.org/24063!2. Fontana, A. and Frey, J. H. (2005) ‘The interview’, in The Sage handbook of qualitative research, pp. 695–727.!3. Roulston, K (2010) Reflective Interviewing: A Guide to Theory and Practice, SAGE Publications. [online]Available from: http://books.google.com/books?id
Engineering Curriculum Abstract In addition to providing the technical expertise required to solve 21st century problems, theengineers of 2020 will be expected to adapt to a continuously evolving environment while oper-ating outside the limits of their discipline and remaining ethically grounded. Their undergraduatetraining must therefore be designed to nurture engineers to transcend traditional disciplinaryboundaries, and to communicate, transfer knowledge, and collaborate across technical and non-technical boundaries. One approach to this challenge is to incorporate biomimicry or bio-inspireddesign into the engineering curriculum. Our research aims to create instructional resources thatprovide exposure to the abundance of design examples that