idea of possible selvesand identity play to examine this process.Interactive Response and InteractionsFrom our early observations of the students’ use of the portfolios, we could see that identitywork and play occur in a variety of contexts, mediated by individual reflections as well as theresponses and interactions of other individuals. These observations informed our categorizationof “Interactive Response” (IR) as a site of learning mediated by diverse interactions with bothpeople (instructors, peers, friends/family, clients) and symbolic artifacts (e.g., professional codesof ethics). In this conception of IR, we pick up on Hattie and Timperley’s broader notion offeedback as provided by multiple “agent[s]”[8] in response to a particular
citingRussell Bishop’s44 argument that “story telling is a useful and culturally appropriate way ofrepresenting the ‘diversities of truth’ within which the story teller rather than the researcherretains control.” (p. 145) Thus the methodology we employ in this project, when used ethically,holds substantial power to help illuminate the experience of race and gender in engineeringeducation.Problems with using narrativesHowever, there is a problematic aspect to white researchers (as I am and as a number – althoughnot all – of my research team are) studying people of color and their stories. Some key problemsmight be summarized as: appropriation and often theft of cultural artifacts and knowledge bynon-Native or white researchers; the application of
addition to conducting research, students participated in weekly seminars on topicsrelated to diabetes (basic research, clinical treatment, public health, and healthcare policy),weekly ethics seminars, and off-campus tours of research and clinical facilities. These activitieswere designed to expose students to the broad health impact of the diabetes and the importanceof research related to the treatment and potential cure of this disease and related complications.Sample Since the launch of the REU in 2009 at the Midwest research university, there have beena total of 50 student participants. This study focused on two of the 13 students who participatedin an REU in 2012. Eleven of the 13 students were enrolled in either four-year
alsorepresented a third of the tools used to describe engineering, and included blueprints, modelingand diagrams. Design tools include items like rulers and compasses, and seemed to be toolsrelated to creating the planning tools of blueprints and diagrams; design tools formed about afifth of the mentions of tools across all participants. “Constructive” tools include objects likepipe wrenches and glue guns, and, surprisingly to us, made up just over a tenth of all the kinds oftools discussed in the pre-interviews.Six of our 19 participants mentioned something having to do with values in their interview. Webroke engineering values into six different values: precision and accuracy, creativity, logic andpracticality, progress, efficiency and ethics and
and celebration. The team designed their own logo, advertised their presentation,bought pizza for themselves and the TA (though the TA abstained for ethical reasons), andpresented their new knowledge for over two hours.6 Discussion The students in our control IE sections and our control IM sections began the semester assimilar populations of students. The students had similar prerequisites and displayed comparablelevels of domain knowledge prior to entering the course as demonstrated by the DLCI. Thestudents’ motivations were similar as well. Some students were motivated by grades or by theirenjoyment of learning, but most were motivated by their desire to pursue a career in electricaland computer engineering or general interest in
needs of the stakeholders at aforefront, taking into account diverse social, cultural and ethical considerations. In today’sglobally competitive economy, it is more important than ever to develop effective design skillswithin the undergraduate years. However, before effective design learning experiences todevelop the skills necessary for human-centered design can be created, an understanding of theways in which students experience human-centered design is needed. This paper provides anoverview of a phenomenographic study that explores students’ understanding of human-centereddesign, presents the resulting outcomes space, and discusses the educational implications of thefindings.MotivationDesign has long been a core function of engineers
,and international projects in the engineering workplace. Research methods in studyingengineering practice included mixed quantitative and qualitative online surveys,interviews with practicing engineers, and case studies of engineering firms. We foundthat effective engineers value communication, problem-solving, teamwork, ethics, life-long learning, and business skills. Many of them note that their undergraduate educationdid not always prepare them well in these areas. Because of these two misalignments, wehypothesize that potential engineering talent goes underdeveloped at important stages ofeducational pathways as students move from high school to college. We believe thatincorporating these findings into an interactive special session would
as the Advisory Board for the NAE Frontiers of Engineering Education.Dr. Larry J. Shuman, University of Pittsburgh Larry Shuman is senior associate dean for academic affairs and distinguished service professor of in- dustrial engineering, Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh. His research focuses on improving the engineering educational experience, emphasizing assessment of learning and problem solving abilities, and studying the ethical behavior of engineers and engineering managers. He was the principal investigator for a seven university NSF sponsored study on Models and Modeling that focused on using MEAs in engineering classrooms. Dr. Shuman is the founding editor of Advances in Engineer
indicated three of the four top areas were either learned on the job or had beenforgotten since formal education: 1) software and design patterns, 2) object-oriented conceptsand technology, and 3) requirements gathering and analysis. Other top areas learned on the jobincluded analysis and design methods; testing, verification, and quality assurance; projectmanagement; confirmation and release management; human-computer interaction/userinterfaces; and databases.Business and art topics of high importance in the respondents’ careers, but which were learnedon the job, included 1) ethics and professionalism, 2) technical writing, 3) giving presentations toan audience, and 4) leadership. Today, this need for a well-rounded, project-based
ofstudent responses and the ethical debate of how we, as researchers, were to react to theirresponses, we grouped individual reactions to stressors items into their factor components ofphysiological, emotional, and behavioral, transforming them into an individual item each. Wealso added questions centered on personal, family, peer, and institutional (university) supportbecause we posit that these types of support may mitigate negative affects due to stress.Gratitude (6 Items). The gratitude construct is a six-item single factor subscale adopted from theCollege Student Subjective Wellbeing Questionnaire (CSSWQ) [39]. We chose to only includethe gratitude subscale due to its relatively short length, validity evidence, and lack of overlapwith other
definition.With growing attention from industry 16, 17 and in the literature 7 given to professional skills,accreditation organizations began to include these skills in their outcomes. The AccreditationBoard for Engineering and Technology (ABET) engineering criteria began to explicitly requireprofessional skills as student outcomes in 2001 18 and has continued to include them in revisionssince 15. ABET came to see these skills as needed by all engineering graduates. The following sixof the eleven outcomes specified in the ABET engineering criteria fit within the literature list ofprofessional skills 7: an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams (3.d) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility (3.f) an ability to
. Should theuniversity instead not engage in the debate and attempt to influence and moderate the wayuniversities are compared and consequently ranked?The authors argue strongly that universities must attempt to ensure that they are measured andcompared against a set of meaningful measures that captures the full extent of what theycontribute. This is particularly true for engineering and technology education because of thegrowing awareness of importance of the social and ethical dimensions to engineering andtechnology education.Typical Critiques of University Rankings and ComparisonsClearly there have been many well-intentioned attempts at ranking and comparisons. But, it isalso true that other approaches exist that seem to be weak in their
- A.D. Welliver Fellow, in 1999.Walter Peters, University of South Carolina WALLY PETERS is Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Director of the Laboratory for Sustainable Solutions, and Faculty Associate in the School of the Environment. His research interests include sustainable design, industrial ecology, complex systems, and environmental/earth ethics. Page 11.1290.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006