employees’ well- being, professional development and performance. Her work has been published in peer reviewed journals and presented in several international conferences.Dr. Gunter Bombaerts, Eindhoven University of Technology Gunter Bombaerts is Assistant Professor for Philosophy and Ethics of Technology at Eindhoven Univer- sity of Technology, the Netherlands. His research fields include ethics in engineering education (moti- vation, deep learning, competence measurement), comparative ethics and questions concerning applied ethics in the field of energy ethics, in particular on participation and innovation. He is coordinating the TU/e USE program and is teacher of USE courses (amongst which the USE basic course on History
argue that culturalresponsiveness, as well as a commitment to research that actively benefits marginalizedcommunities, are two core components of quality in qualitative research that were not originallyidentified by Walther et al.In the remainder of this paper, we use their six validation types—theoretical validation,procedural validation, communicative validation, pragmatic validation, ethical validation, andprocess reliability—as an organizational framework. Under each validation type, we describehow researchers can maintain cultural responsiveness during three phases: the conceptualizationphase, the data generation phase, and the data handling phase. To identify additional validationstrategies beyond Walther et al.’s framework, we conducted
teamworkskills, improving communication and project management skills, and practicing ethical behavior.All undergraduate students must participate in at least two semester-long three credit hourprojects. Projects vary widely in focus, including Service Learning, Entrepreneurial, ProductDevelopment and others; some projects have participating external sponsors. We are collectingdata on ca. 36 - 40 teams each semester, enrolling approximately 400 students.We have developed several strategies for assessing teamwork effectiveness: (1) a self-assessmentof the extent to which each student feels that they have developed teamwork competencies, (2) aKnowledge Test of teamwork concepts drawn from the vast literature on teamwork, (3) a TeamExcellence and Trust
prompted by a one page scenario that frames an interdisciplinary, complex, societalproblem related to engineering. Examples of scenarios include a discussion of the FukushimaDaiichi nuclear reactor incident and the use of offshore wind power. The student discussion isthen scored by an instructor using the EPS rubric. The EPS rubric assesses student performancethrough indicators associated with an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams,understanding of professional and ethical responsibility, ability to communicate effectively,understanding of the impact of engineering solutions, recognition of and ability to engage in life-long learning, and knowledge of contemporary issues.Collaborators from ABET, Norwich University, University of Idaho
instructors at four Canadianinstitutions.Although there is research on engineering ethics education3,4,5,6, there is a gap in examining howengineering instructors view the inclusion of ethics and the other hallmarks of STSE in their ownteaching. This research was designed to help fill this gap in the field, focusing on three keyresearch questions: (1) How do undergraduate engineering instructors describe their teachinggoals and practices?; (2) How do undergraduate engineering instructors describe their teachinggoals and practices with respect to exploring the relationship between engineering, society andthe environment (i.e. STSE)?; and (3) What are the specific challenges or enabling factors inexploring the relationship between engineering, society
Page 25.70.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 A Model for the Development of Personal and Professional Social Responsibility for EngineersAbstractImportant attributes for engineering professionals include an understanding of the global andsocietal impacts of engineering projects and a well-developed professional and ethical code ofresponsibility; these attributes must be developed in engineering students. Furthermore, the roleof an engineer is becoming increasingly global, requiring an international perspective and cross-cultural skills. The core foundation for these skills can be found in a well-developed sense ofsocial responsibility, contextualized by the
engineering Ph.D. studentsrequires relevancy to the research field of students. Among other inferences, we see that giventhe time-strapped situation of most Ph.D. engineering students, instruction that relates closely toin-progress work is meaningful and thus, an anchor to attention and improvement. To improvefluency and flow, in writing and speaking, a topical focus on ethical issues has served to linkspecialized technical information to broader social communication that ultimately helps connectsstudents to greater communication opportunities.IntroductionPh.D. engineering students and faculty alike understand the critical need to communicateeffectively in order to lead research projects, teach, mentor, write papers and proposals, and togenerally
… automatically are gonna go on all the good trips and travel and learn aboutscholarship information ahead of time. So that was my first real thrust into how I wantedto do… engineering….” Page 12.387.7In both of the African American students’ cases, there was also exposure and interest inthe engineering field early in their academic careers. However, disciplined study habitshad to evolve through a maturation process that may have temporarily impeded academicsuccess. The stories of the African Caribbean students illustrate that the discipline waspresent during their secondary education and their success is attributed to coming tocollege with that work ethic in
. Discussion.The field of engineering education has long focused on instilling a set of core ethicalprinciples in developing engineers28, 29, 30. Guided by the U.S. Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET), undergraduate engineering programs aim to helpstudents develop “an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility”31. Ingeneral, however, engineering ethics have emphasized principles such as accountabilityto the client—defined as the people or organizations who have retained the engineer’sservices, not as the broader public for whom a given product or innovation will result ineither benefit or harm30. Some have critiqued this approach as insufficient for producingengineers who think critically about the social implications of
they believe each engineering undergraduate degreeprogram should be able to cultivate in their students, including: (a) an ability to apply knowledgeof mathematics, science and engineering, (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, aswell as to analyze and interpret data, (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process tomeet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political,ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability, (e) an ability to identify,formulate, and solve engineering problems, and (g) an ability to communicate effectively (ABETCriterion 3. Student Outcomes (a-k)). We argue that all of these skills are essential componentsof the argumentation process
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Figure 12: LSA and LDA Ten Topic Extraction for 1995-1999.The six topic extraction for the 1995-1999 also show distance learning and informationtechnology to play a role in this period. LDA extracted Distance Project Courses while LSAextracted Distance Technologies. Both methods extracted project based design as LDA extractedDistance Project Courses and LSA extracted Project Design/Computers. Traditionalengineering training was demonstrated by LDA extracting Design Courses/Assessment whileLSA extracting University Courses, Teaching Techniques, Technologies/Environment. Othertopics of interest observed were Reliability Engineering, emphasis on environment consideration,and ethics. The results are illustrated in Figure
. 2Third, the networks in which employees are embedded have shifted, becoming more cross-organizational and distributed in nature. This can facilitate learning and knowledge sharing,but can also create barriers for studying the many informal and formal networks that transcendconventional structures. Many of these networks also span geographic and/or culturalboundaries. Spanning these boundaries not only necessitates using various technologies forcommunication but can also involve differences in language and other communicative practices,technical training, ethical grounding, and regulatory environments. The use of social mediaplatforms like LinkedIn is also reshaping what it means to be a professional and engage intechnical work. Rather than
males.IntroductionAn important consideration for curriculum change and improvement is to identify the desirableattributes of a graduating engineer. While calling for significant reforms in engineeringeducation, the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) recommends the Engineer of 2020have: strong analytical skills; practical ingenuity; creativity; communication; business andmanagement knowledge; leadership; high ethical standards and professionalism; dynamism,agility, resilience, and flexibility; and the habit of lifelong learning1. Other organizations havedeveloped similar lists. For example, in a study pertaining to computer science majors,employers and teaching staff rated the following attributes as highly important: analysis skills,application of
graduate level education. ABET, formerly the AccreditationBoard for Engineering and Technology, Criterion 3 outcomes a-k recommend that engineering Page 22.454.2programs must demonstrate that their graduates have: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering, (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data, (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs, (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams, (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems, (f) an understanding of professional and ethical
performance, butdata analysis is ongoing (due to ethics considerations the data were only recently released foranalysis). A major weakness of the blended model is the capacity of students for self-directedlearning and so we have identified a need for the course to address metacognitive outcomes – inessence, the course needs to provide support to help students “learn how to learn”. Some studentsstated that they could not learn using online content and “needed to be taught,” as if this is aninherent fact rather than a skill that can be developed. In particular, sections who traditionallystruggle with this course did not find the online content effective for learning and were lesssatisfied with the blended model. Future course offerings may include a
engineering and business foci. This paper presents the pilot comparativeresearch results from implementation of the two domain specific indices. Methodologically, theengineering global preparedness index (EGPI) was designed, reliability and validity tested firstand then from these results the instrument was adapted a second time to reflect business-focuseditems. The following seven subscales were utilized in creation of the two global preparednessindices. Ethic of Responsibility: Deep personal and care concern for people in all parts of the world; sees moral responsibility to improve conditions and take action. Cultural Pluralism: Appreciation of diversity of cultures and dispositions: belief that all have
AC 2009-1032: THE IMPACT OF REFLECTIONS IN SERVICE LEARNING ANDOTHER UNDERGRADUATE TEAM PROJECT LEARNINGMargaret Huyck, Illinois Institute of Technology Margaret Huyck is Professor in the Institute of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology. Her areas of expertise include adult development and program evaluation. She has been working with the IPRO Program at IIT for many years. She was a co-PI on an NSF CCLI-1 grant for adapting an EPICS Service Learning Pathway at IIT; and is the PI for a collaborative project funded with an NSF CCLI-2 grant to measure and identify best practices in multidisciplinary teamwork and awareness of ethical issues.Kristin Bryant, Illinois Institute of Technology
Paper ID #14697Exploring Interviews as Validity Evidence for the Engineering ProfessionalResponsibility AssessmentDr. 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
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 Journal of Engineering
illustrate how some images of the field of engineeringwere developed at a larger cultural level at these schools. In some cases these images were sodominant that students at a school forced themselves to do reconciling work in order to identifythe aspects of their engineering identities that did not fit within these images. At Suburban Page 13.1113.13Private University the dominant image of engineering fostered a culture of great expectations.Technical Public Institution students found themselves working in strong teams of engineeringstudents and developing a strong sense of ethics. Students at Urban Private University sought todevelop a sense of
more effective in educating themselves, will develop more creative solutions to problems, will practice more efficiently, and will be more competitive in the global economy [2]. Information literacy is just one of many professional skills that students need to succeed in both their academic and professional careers. Colwell outlines 14 such skills including oral and written communication, time management, ethical decisionmaking, and leadership [3]. The Bern Dibner library at NYU Tandon hosts between 20 and 30 workshops a semester on topics including data services, research skills, and information literacy. Over the
software forthe following categories.20 Table 3: ABET Criteria 3 - Student Outcomes a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data 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 solve engineering problems f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
Page 25.786.6 FindingsStatements of values, missions, goals, and expected outcomes were found on the websites of allorganizations included in this study. At the departmental level, ABET outcomes were prominentdiscourses on university websites. In addition, universities promoted creativity, leadership,service, knowledge creation, and flexibility as important engineering attributes or programoutcomes. Companies universally promoted service to customers on their websites and describeddeveloping and producing innovative products of quality and value. Many companies alsodescribed their ethical practices including valuing sustainability and protecting the environment.A focus on employees was found on many company websites with statements about
students in a graduatestudent vision: We aspire for graduates of our doctoral, master’s and certificate programs to achieve leadership and personal accomplishment in their professional pursuits. They will attain both depth and breadth of knowledge needed to advance the theory and practice of their chosen fields and will be adept at applying that knowledge. They will be committed to lifelong learning and to mentoring those who succeed them. They will be creative, embrace complexity, and productively challenge accepted paradigms and theories. They will be outstanding communicators and collaborators, able to build, work with, and lead diverse teams. Our graduates will be champions of constructive and ethical action who proceed with
this end, we gathered andanalyzed student reflections on their learning experiences in a collaborative engineering projectbetween the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the University of KwaZulu-Natal inSouth Africa.BackgroundThe Association of American Colleges and Universities’ LEAP (Liberal Education forAmerica’s Promise) initiative (2007) emphasizes global awareness and experience within its foursets of Essential Learning Outcomes that are critical for preparing university students for thetwenty-first century. The “personal and social responsibility” domain includes:• Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global• Intercultural knowledge and competence• Ethical reasoning and action• Foundations and skills for lifelong
responsibility is the desire to dosomething to meet societal needs. Vanzdoort discusses the micro levels of social responsibilitysuch as ethical codes for engineers and macro levels of social responsibility such as societaldecisions about technology. He states that knowledge of the social aspects of engineering isnecessary because of the environment in which engineers work [1]. Research also suggests thatthere is a need for global competence in the engineering profession. Lohmann, Rollins, and Hoeyresearched the importance of learning about cultures and issues worldwide [2]. Their studyconcluded that international study is key to becoming a successful global engineer. Thoughtechnical skills are necessary, they are not sufficient. To obtain ABET
. Her training is in nineteenth-century literature, but for the past 9 years she has taught engineering ethics, first-year en- gineering courses, and humanities for engineers. She has also worked with students and colleagues to develop role-playing games teaching engineering within its complex humanistic context. NOTE: this paper has co-authors.Dr. Leslie Dodson, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Leslie Dodson is a Faculty Teaching Fellow in Undergraduate Studies at WPI. She received her PhD from the University of Colorado-Boulder’s College of Engineering and Applied Science, ATLAS Institute. Her current research interests focus on the intersections of international development, human-centered de- sign and
]. Along a similar line, a potentialarea of future research will be to draw upon the tools and techniques from cognitive psychologyfor learning analytics. For example, a neuroscience research tool called portableelectroencephalogram, or EEG, has been used in cognition-based education research, forexample, on the relationship between brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes [56]. Thistool could be used in engineering education research to capture brain activities; the obtained newdata source could then be integrated with other student data to predict learning outcomes amongengineering students. Another area of challenge that needs to be addressed is creating ethical policies for usingdata analytics methods in research. The limited
(N=10)participating in an NSF-funded Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program at alarge research university. Positive learning outcomes gains pertained to communication skills,validation of career path, experimentation skills, valuing cross-disciplinary expertise and lifelonglearning, and gaining confidence in working independently. Low ranked learning outcomespertained to (a) leadership skills, (b) project management skills, (c) understanding ethical issues,and (d) identifying problems. Further, qualitative data analysis revealed that undergraduateresearchers faced a number of challenges and frustrations pertinent to (a) scheduling, (b) timemanagement, (c) running experiments with limited familiarity to instruments and
administered at thebeginning of the course to compile baseline information on students. The second survey wasadministered at the end of the course as a point of comparison. This survey included elaborateinformation such as the reason the student choose this program, academic background, workexperience, hobbies, short term and long term goals, expectations from the lab, area in which thestudent hopes to improve and the student’s perception of an ideal mentor. The students were alsoasked to rate themselves in various skills such as research skills, writing, presentation, softwareknowledge, hardware knowledge, website creation, leadership, professional ethics, mentoringskills, etc. To get a fair idea of the schedule of the student, the survey included