Paper ID #25550Institutional Variations in Ethics and Societal Impacts Education: Practicesand Sufficiency Perceptions Among Engineering EducatorsDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Environ- mental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE). She has served as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education in the CEAE Department, as well as the ABET assessment coordinator. Professor Bielefeldt was also the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living- learning
Paper ID #27406Just Add Context? Analyzing Student Perceptions of Decontextualized andContextualized Engineering Problems and their Use of Storytelling toCreate ContextDr. Nicole Farkas Mogul, University of Maryland, College Park Nicole Mogul is a professor of engineering ethics and Assistant Director of the Science, Technology and Society at the University of Maryland, College Park. Co-author, David Tomblin is the Director of the Science, Technology and Society Program of College Park Scholars at the University of Maryland, College Park. Co-author, Tim Reedy, is a graduate assistant in the Science, Technology and Society
currently facilitates an interdisciplinary project entitled ”Developing Reflective Engineers through Artful Methods.” His scholarly interests include both teaching and research in engineering education, art in engineering, social justice in engineering, care ethics in engineering, humanitarian engineering, engineering ethics, and computer modeling of electric power and renewable energy systems.Ms. Ngan T.T. Nguyen, Texas Tech University Ngan Nguyen is a research assistant and doctoral student in the Department of Curriculum and Instruc- tion at Texas Tech University. Her research is focused on fostering the learning experiences of Asian international graduate students in higher education.Dr. Roman Taraban, Texas Tech
and community development. Dedicated to promoted social justice and peace in the engineering profession. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019Work In Progress: The Sky’s the Limit: Drones for Social GoodAbstractA full semester course, with a focus on engineering design to promote social good, wasdeveloped for second-year engineering students. The course, The Sky’s the Limit: Drones forSocial Good, engages students with drone technology as well as the awareness of the needs,challenges, and resources of diverse communities and how drones can serve these communities.Humanities, ethics, and human centered design are explored in the context of engineering, andinterwoven throughout the semester. The
literature that establishes the state-of-theart in liberal education for engineers, the aims of the research and analysis presented here aremore modest: to provide an initial sketch of the intellectual common ground of LEES and toassess the extent to which the fears and aspirations outlined above have been realized.After describing the approach used to analyze the corpus of work presented at the 2018 AnnualConference, this paper identifies 4 themes that constitute the intellectual common ground of andpossible future directions for research in LEES: (1) integration, (2) diversity and inclusion, (3)communication, and (4) the LEES-STS-engineering ethics relationship. Because these themesoverlap, a final section of the paper is devoted to papers that
Engineering Literacy/Philosophy of Engineering(TELPhE) and (b) Liberal Education and Liberal Education/Engineering and Society (LEES).Seven other divisions have also participated significantly in the scholarly discourse about STS inASEE: 1. Engineering Ethics 2. Educational Research and Methods 3. K-12 and Pre-College 4. First Year Programs 5. Multidisciplinary Engineering 6. Engineering Technology 7. Engineering and Public Policy The Technological Literacy Constituent Committee, which was
: ethics, cultural adaptability, innovation,leadership, and civic & public engagement.The College of Engineering describes the PLI as a program designed to assist in the developmentof engineering students’ professional skills by providing students with a broad array ofworkshops, presentations, and experiential opportunities. These events introduce students toprofessional development through required extracurricular activities. PLI sessions are mostlytaught by industry leaders, with some involvement from faculty and staff who specialize in thefive focus areas. Over a typical 4-year undergraduate plan of study, students are required toattend 11 sessions distributed across the five focus areas. Additionally, students who wish tobroaden their
Paper ID #27424Toward a Globalized Engineering Education: Comparing Dominant Imagesof Engineering Education in the United States and ChinaDr. Qin Zhu, Colorado School of Mines Qin Zhu is an Assistant Professor in the Ethics Across Campus Program and the Division of Humanities, Arts & Social Sciences at Colorado School of Mines, where he is co-directing the Daniels Fund Program in Professional Ethics Education that provides support for faculty to integrate ethics into applied science and engineering curricula. Qin serves as a graduate faculty member in the Master’s Program in Natural Resources and Energy Policy at
adaptability inprofessional life. What is more, he introduced interesting questions about automation and labor,some that could help students engage the ethical and moral dimensions of robotics. Yet, thenarrative he constructed is ultimately from the perspective of the business owner who profitsfrom technological unemployment. It may be the case that questions about the negative intendedand unintended consequences of STEM might be difficult for teachers to navigate and may evenappear contradictory if the goal is to inspire entry into affiliate careers.Considering her students’ age and interests, Deborah proposed that an older student or a roboticsteam might be appropriate guest speakers. She explained her rationale, I would probably have another
, including the ethics of science and technology, environmental science, technology and decision-making, and radiation, health, and policy. Her research has ranged over risk assessment and communication, green design, bioelectromagnetics, education in general, and pedagogy for modern-day literacy, such as scientific, environmental, and global literacy, and engineering ethics. Dr. Nair chaired the national Global Learning Leadership Council of the American Association of Col- leges & Universities (AAC&U) from 2010 to 2013 and is currently a member of the Global Advisory Committee. She is also on the advisory panel of the Center for Engineering, Ethics & Society (CEES) of the National Academy of Engineering
and based on active learning activities. More recently, she started work on engineering education research that aims to effectively incorporate socio-technical thinking in required technical courses. Her discipline research is focused on the production of stabilized biosolids, its use as a fertilizer and its impact on environmental pollution concerning organic contaminants. She recently has started work on Amazonic mercury contamination due to illegal mining.Dr. David Tomblin, University of Maryland, College Park David is the director of the Science, Technology and Society program at the University of Maryland, Col- lege Park. He works with STEM majors on the ethical and social dimensions of science and technology
demonstration. The connection between the quote and the text drawn comes from the role ethics play in science. The quote comes as Victor has realized the consequences of animating his creation. Ethics are important when researching in science because there are things that should not be done. There has to be boundaries for research so that whatever is being researched is used for the right reasons. Atomic technology is a perfect example of a double edged sword. On one hand, atomic energy is clean, medicines using radioactive markers are extremely useful in research, and may be useful in making discoveries in astronomy. However, the original research had a much more violent use. By splitting an atom to create a nuclear chain
Communication in Engineering (Routledge, 2014). In 2016, Dr. Leydens won the Exemplar in Engineering Ethics Education Award from the Na- tional Academy of Engineering, along with CSM colleagues Juan C. Lucena and Kathryn Johnson, for a cross-disciplinary suite of courses that enact macroethics by making social justice visible in engineering education. In 2017, he and two co-authors won the Best Paper Award in the Minorities in Engineering Division at the American Society for Engineering Education annual conference. Dr. Leydens’ recent research, with co-author Juan C. Lucena, focused on rendering visible the social justice dimensions in- herent in three components of the engineering curriculum—in engineering sciences
, together withpolicy, to address societal ills resulting from natural disasters, man-made disasters,irresponsible and non-sustainable consumption of resources, pollution and contamination,and lack of opportunity. This program trains students to pursue practical solutions thatproactively promote peace and reduce the potential for disputes in a world plagued withproblems that require unconventional thinking to overcome. Students are exposed toinnovative approaches toward addressing multidimensional problems in addition togaining skill in economic, social, environmental, political, ethical, legal, cultural, andhistorical aspects associated with the effort of building enduring peace. This paper willdetail the elements that constitute a peace
how that learning supports transfer of learning from school into professional practice as well as exploring students’ conceptions of diversity and its importance within engineering fields.Dr. Nathan E. Canney, CYS Structural Engineers Inc. Dr. Canney conducts research focused on engineering education, specifically the development of social responsibility in engineering students. Other areas of interest include ethics, service learning, and sus- tainability education. Dr. Canney received 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
in October, 2014. Per Board of Trustee approval, the BS Engineering Science programwould have three specializations: biomedical, computer, and environmental engineering. Per theDirector of the University Core Curriculum, the curriculum would include twelve liberal artscourses (36 semester cr hr). But other program aspects were undefined. As an engineeringgraduate of a sister Jesuit University and an engineering ethics textbook author, she believed thatthe combination of engineering and social justice was an obvious foundation for a program.Jesuit universities have emphasized social justice since the Jesuits’ General Congregation 32 in1975, when “the promotion of justice” was declared central to the Society of Jesus’ mission [13,14]. LUC
that these trends largelyfollow the overall enrollments in engineering programs at Lafayette, with increased shares of ABEngineering degrees awarded in the mid-1980s and 2000s.In the early 1980s, preceding and coincident with these large enrollments, the college’s first yearIntroduction to Engineering course was taught by one of the two founders of the AB inEngineering program, a charismatic and dynamic professor. This professor retired in 1988, and atthe same time the Introduction to Engineering course was replaced by a sophomore level courseon engineering professionalism and ethics. That students were no longer being introduced to themajor during their first year by an enthusiastic faculty member in a required class may havecontributed to
Paper ID #26815What You Need to Succeed: Examining Culture and Capital in BiomedicalEngineering Undergraduate EducationDanielle Corple, Purdue University Danielle Corple received her Ph.D. from the Brian Lamb School of Communication at Purdue University. This fall, she will be an assistant professor at Wheaton College in Illinois. She studies organizational communication, diversity and inclusion, ethics, and social change.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Carla B. Zoltowski is an assistant professor of engineering practice in the Schools of Electrical and Com
University, West Lafayette Carla B. Zoltowski is an assistant professor of engineering practice in the Schools of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering and (by courtesy) Engineering Education and Director of the Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP) Program at Purdue University. She holds a B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. in Engineer- ing Education, all from Purdue. Prior to this she was Co-Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue where she was responsible for developing curriculum and assessment tools and overseeing the research efforts within EPICS. Her research interests include the professional formation of engineers, diversity, inclusion, and equity in engineering, human-centered design, engineering ethics, and
dismissing student dissent, we connect student resistance to ourleveraging of power, and in the process consider how this resistance came about, and how it canbe viewed as productive rather than counterproductive to the overall change effort. In shiftingour perspective to view students’ resistance to change as meaningful and justified reactions tosituations we put them in, we can begin to question our implicit assumptions about what is fairand ethical in curricular design and innovation in engineering education.Background: Local ContextFor Year 2 (Y2) pilot implementation of Engineering Math, the decision was made to make theclass mandatory for all students entering the college who, based on an standard incoming mathplacement exam among other
are not well-studied in the engineering education literature.In related work, in order to facilitate the integration of ethics into the engineering curriculum,Nair and Bulleit [13] propose identifying ethical philosophies that are compatible with theexisting “engineering way of thinking” (EWT). Though we see engineering ethics as related butdistinct from our interests in sociotechnical integration, we look to this work as an example ofbringing together historically disparate considerations such as ethics and the technical side ofengineering work.Engineering ways of thinking were also analyzed in a case study by Godfrey on engineeringculture in an Australian university that had previously undergone a curriculum and culturaloverhaul. Godfrey
. Leydens won the Exemplar in Engineering Ethics Educa- tion Award from the National Academy of Engineering, along with CSM colleagues Juan C. Lucena and Kathryn Johnson, for a cross-disciplinary suite of courses that enact macroethics by making social justice visible in engineering education. In 2017, he and two co-authors won the Best Paper Award in the Mi- norities in Engineering Division at the American Society for Engineering Education annual conference. With co-author Juan C. Lucena, Dr. Leydens’ most recent book is Engineering Justice: Transforming En- gineering Education and Practice (Wiley-IEEE Press, 2018). His current research grant project explores how to foster and assess sociotechnical thinking in
enhanced by ensuring a scaffolded and recursive process forePortfolio creation that incorporates ongoing dialogue with mentors and peers.Introduction We learn by doing, if we reflect on what we have done. — John DeweyAuthentic experiences combined with reflection and continual integration acrosstime and contexts are essential for deep, transferable learning, development ofexpertise, and ethical development. Ambrose [1] identifies these elements as coreprinciples from the learning sciences that should be foundations for high qualityundergraduate engineering education. A well-designed curriculum, among otherthings, has "authentic experiential learning opportunities to
understanding different typesof disability, including hidden disabilities, to determine what is needed to overcome mobilitybarriers. Students are expected to gain competencies in identifying and assessing the physical,information, and communication needs of persons with disabilities in both standard andemergency situations and to know different techniques for providing situational assistance ontransport to people with different disabilities. Reading materials for this portion of the courseinclude the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) [7]. Thecompetency area contains an ethics component, which focuses on proper communicationsetiquette as well as awareness and tolerance for physical, social, ethnic, and cultural
teaching and advising duties at Olin, Dr. Wood serves as the Director of the Babson- Olin-Wellesley Three College Sustainability Certificate Program, the Director of Olin’s Grand Challenges Scholars Program, on the Catalyst Board of the open source journal Murmurations, and as a member of Olin’s Context and Ethics in Engineering Education Working Group. After graduating from Harvard University with a B.A. in Dramatic Literature, Dr. Wood worked pro- fessionally in theater and wrote and recorded two musical albums. She then returned to school to study engineering, earning a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Rutgers University. Dr. Wood then went on to earn a Master of Science in Engineering in Environmental and Water
conceptual and epistemological reasoning. Lately, he has been interested in engineering design thinking, how engineering students come to understand and practice design, and how engineering students think about ethics and social responsi- bility.Hannah SaboAndrew Elby, University of Maryland, College Park Andrew Elby’s work focuses on student and teacher epistemologies and how they couple to other cognitive machinery and help to drive behavior in learning environments. His academic training was in Physics and Philosophy before he turned to science (particularly physics) education research. More recently, he has started exploring engineering students’ disciplinary thinking and thinking about issues of equity and power
Diego Mark Peters received a Bachelors degree in Economics from Georgetown University and then pursued a business career in New York City, working in many of the major business disciplines. Over the past twenty years, Mark has worked and consulted for large corporations, professional organizations, hospitals, churches, and universities. Dr. Peters earned a Masters Degree from the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry and a Ph.D. in Leadership Studies from the University of San Diego. He has taught in a variety of disciplines including: Business Management, Organizational Leadership, Economics, Ethics, and Leadership Stud- ies, at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Dr. Peters has twice served on the
. Company Culture 8. Work/Life Balance 9. Time Management 6 10. Business Understanding 11. Career Planning – Mentor – Change – Future of Work? 12. Interpersonal Relationships – Superior and subordinate 13. Ethics 14. Communication – Written, Oral, Social Media 15. Processional Societies 16. Service/Outreach 17. Teams/ Leadership 18. Creativity 19. Connections 20. Creating ValueThis list is not exhaustive and might be seen to overlap somewhat with life skills. Being exposedto topics such as these not only prepares
during both the 3-hour research course and 1-hour seminar and were often a majorfocal point in students’ course projects, these issues did not emerge as a major theme across thepost-course concept maps. Some students included vulnerable populations on their concept mapsas something needing attention, and others noted it in their explanations, but its limitedappearance raises new questions for both the research team and the program about strategies tohelp students more effectively integrate these ethical concerns into their conceptualunderstanding. In part, as suggested by the results, concept maps alone may not be a sufficienttool to capture students’ understanding of a domain as complex as DRRM. At the same time, it ispossible that some
],worldview, ethical considerations, researcher bias [6], validity threats [6], and research quality[7] all broach on the complex underpinnings of positionality for engineering education research.However, the primary difference that appears is the consideration of the actual personal rootsthat a researcher has for the type of research conducted and its “quality”, and the peoplesresearched. Beyond initial considerations, this rooting of thought in relation to another’s lifeexperience surpasses reflexivity, which can be confused as being bound to the beginning and endof a study. The consideration of the rooting and internal exploration that exists in positionality isa continual consideration that spans beyond the work of research studies to explore a