Paper ID #37304What Engineering Leaders Lead: The Career Outcomes of an EngineeringLeadership Program’s Alumni CommunityDr. James N. Magarian, Massachusetts Institute of Technology James Magarian, PhD, is a Sr. Lecturer and Associate Academic Director with the Gordon-MIT En- gineering Leadership (GEL) Program. He joined MIT and GEL after nearly a decade in industry as a mechanical engineer and engineering manager in aerospace/defense. His research focuses on engineering workforce formation and the education-careers transition.Dr. Reza S. Rahaman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Dr. Rahaman returned to MIT in 2018 after
-peak.Eileen Milligan, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAlexander Rokosz, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyElizabeth Schanne, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyDr. Reza S. Rahaman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Dr. Rahaman returned to MIT in 2018 after a 29 year career in the Consumer Packaged Goods, Pharmaceuticals, and Agricultural Chemical Industries to lead the four School of Engineering Technical Leadership and Communication (TLC) Programs – the Gordon-MIT Program in Engineering Leadership (GEL), the Undergraduate Practice Opportunities Program (UPOP), the Graduate Engineering Leadership Program (GradEL), and the School of Engineering Communication Lab. Immediately prior to MIT, Reza was the Vice
-making andconflict management practices thereby enhancing productivity. In addition, support systems forinclusivity and accountability such as the responsibility matrix, team building ice breakers oractivities, and action items trackers facilitated trust management and relationship building [24].Furthermore, team management artefacts such as project schedule(s), task list(s), meeting notes,procurement and budget tracker(s) supported students’ efficient time management practices.While the project schedule facilitated planning of design project activities, the task listsfacilitated work transparency; meeting notes enabled progress tracking of tasks, and theprocurement tracker allowed for cost transparency of design project purchases. The
satisfaction regardless of the venue. The typical way to show results from a 5-point Likert scale is to show the values indistribution bars. Visualizing in this way is helpful for research when measuring impact but lesshelpful to inform decisions on actions to take based on the results. In this work, we convert theresponses into a percentage to support program benchmarking and facilitate goal setting and thenuse that to assign a letter grade. We then convert the results from each student to a percentage bysumming up all the scores given by the student and dividing by 35 (i.e., seven items x five-pointscale). For example, a student who responds to the PS items with 5's to six items and 4 to oneitem, provides a score of 34 out of 35 possible points
. Mumford, S. J. Zaccaro, K. Y. Levin, A. L. Korotkin, and M. B. Hein, “Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional interpretation,” The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 245-287, 1991, doi: 10.1016/1048-9843(91)90016-U.[3] F. J. Yammarino, E. Salas, A. Serban, K. Shirreffs, and M. L. Shuffler, “Collectivistic leadership approaches: putting the ‘we’ in leadership science and practice,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 382-402, 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1754- 9434.2012.01467.x.[4] D. V. Day, P. Gronn, and E. Salas, “Leadership capacity in teams,” The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 857-880, 2004, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua
positive and negative outcomes of behavior – for example, how not toact, cause-and-effect relationships between actions and outcomes, etc. – we can all learn fromother people’s mistakes.4.8 MotivationsParticipants were explicitly asked “What motivates you as a mentor/mentee in your professionalrelationship with S. Mattucci?”, and intrinsic value was identified in almost all participantresponses (80% code presence), where instrumental (30%) and attainment (10%) werementioned less frequently. Instrumental value was often related to how the outcomes of amentorship relationship led to skill development, benefits and impacts on work – which areusually a precursor to attainment value in the form of career progression and growth.Interestingly, four of
://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/status-of-the-canadian-consulting- engineering-industry/ (accessed Mar. 12, 2023).[17] N. Malhotra, “The Nature of Knowledge and the Entry Mode Decision,” Organization Studies, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 935–959, Jul. 2003, doi: 10.1177/0170840603024006006.[18] N. Malhotra and T. Morris, “Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms,” Journal of Management Studies, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 895–922, 2009, doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 6486.2009.00826.x.[19] S. Pantic-Dragisic and E. Borg, “Creating the mobile engineer: a study of a training program for engineering consultants,” EJTD, vol. 42, no. 7/8, pp. 381–399, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1108/EJTD-12-2017-0117.[20] S. Pantic-Dragisic and J. Söderlund, “Swift transition and knowledge
Paper ID #44107Whistle While You Work: Drivers and Impacts of Happiness at Work forEngineersMr. Seth Claberon Sullivan, Texas A&M University Seth Sullivan is the Director of the Zachry Leadership Program in the College of Engineering at Texas A&M University. Prior to joining the university, he worked in consulting in the private sector and as an analyst in the U.S. Government. Heˆa C™s earned ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Whistle While You Work: Antecedents and Impacts of Happiness at Work for EngineersAbstract This research explores the
pedagogical intervention offered rich dividends,particularly in learning about decision-making. It was also evident that the perception ofincorporating research design and critical thinking expanded the student’s imagination of thesignificance of such skills in engineering education. However, more research needs to takeplace on how leadership skills can be developed even as decision-making and criticalthinking are taught. There needs to be further inquiry into what counts as leadership amongstengineers, and how these skills can be included through further pedagogical interventionswithin engineering education.References[1] M. A. Mulyani, S. Yusuf, P. Siregar, J. Nurihsan, A. Razzaq and M. Anshari, "Fourth Industrial Revolution and Educational
division division nal Co-construct Construct rs o Self-authorship Pe knowledge knowledge Discover community al Participate s s ion with guidance Pr of e COP Beginner practice Master & and discourse expertise Belonging LID r
Leadership, “Engineering Leadership Certificate Student Handbook,” Rice University, 2014.[5] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman, 2001.[6] L. J. Zachary, The Mentee’s Guide: Making Mentoring Work for You. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass, 2009.[7] D. Allen, Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity, revised ed. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2015.[8] K. Klenke, Qualitative Research in the Study of Leadership. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group, 2008.[9] S. R. Komives, J. E. Owen, S. D. Longerbeam, F. C. Mainella, and L. Osteen, “Developing a leadership identity: a grounded theory
., works for Communication across the Curriculum (CxC) at Louisiana State University (LSU). She is a Ph.D. candidate in LSUˆa C™s cultural geography and anthropology program, and has over 10 years of qualitative research and teaching ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Celebrating 20 Years of the Engineering Communication Studio at Louisiana State UniversityAbstractThis practice paper reviews the 20-year history of the Engineering Communication Studio(Studio) at Louisiana State University (LSU), highlighting its role in improving communicationskills among engineering students to promote leadership, teamwork, and understanding ethicaland professional
from merely reacting tochallenges to actively learning and growing from them. Ultimately, this approach shifts themindset from reactive problem-solving to personal development and continuous learning. Beyond these alignments, in terms of connection to industry and leadership, personalmastery does have a presence in industry. Literature noting that current engineering education isnot producing leadership qualities in engineers [30] suggests that something must be done tomeet the U.S.’s leadership needs. With many of the traditional organizations within industrytransitioning to learning organizations, likely to meet the demands of the Fourth IndustrialRevolution as learning is the “currency of survival” [8, p.1], lifelong learning remains
UniversityResearch and Evaluation and Assessment Services, which we especially acknowledge.References[1] K. L. Meyers, S. E. Silliman, N. L. Gedde, and M. W. Ohland, “A Comparison of Engineering Students' Reflections on Their First‐Year Experiences.” Journal of Engineering Education, 99(2), 169-178. 2010.[2] L. Santiago, Retention in a first-year program: Factors influencing student interest in engineering. In 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2013. pp. 23-1045.[3] I. V. Ramteke, and J. Ansari, “Stress and Anxiety among first-year and final-year engineering students.” Stress, 3(4), 17-21. 2016.[4] Q. Tahmina, “Does Peer Mentoring Help Students be Successful in an Introductory Engineering Course?” In 2019 ASEE Annual Conference
. Weisenfeld, “Leveraging faculty knowledge, experience, and training for leadership education in engineering undergraduate curricula,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 950–969, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2022.2043243.[11] D. R. Graham, D. E. Crawley, and B. R. Mendelsohn, “Engineering leadership education: A snapshot review of international good practice”.[12] S. A. Bjorklund and C. L. Colbeck, “The View from the Top: Leaders’ Perspectives on a Decade of Change in Engineering Education,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 13–19, 2001, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00562.x.[13] B. Wambeke, J. Sloan, T. Frank, and D. DePorres, “Student-to-Industry Interaction in a Civil Engineering Field Course: Benefits for
. (1970). The servant as leader. Indianapolis, IN: The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership. 2. McClellan, Jeffrey L. (2013). Contributing to the development of student leadership through academic advising. Journal of Leadership Education, 12(1), 207-233. 3. Darroch, B. (2023). The impact of COVID-19 on student engagement in STEM disciplines: A critical analysis. Journal of Higher Education, 94(1), 112-138. 4. Douglas, H. M., Settles, I. H., Cech, E. A., Montgomery, G. M., Nadolsky, L. R., Hawkins, A. K., Ma, G., Davis, T. M., Elliott, K. C., Cheruvelil, K. S., & Grundy, Q. (2022). Disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 on marginalized and minoritized early- career academic scientists. PloS One, 17(9
lens of funds of identity in this studyallows for the exploration of leadership identity and engineering identity as related to Blackengineers' cultural identity. Leadership and engineering serve as professional identities that areclosely related to practical and institutional funds of identity, where this group's Black identityinfluences social and cultural funds of identity. Additionally, this work utilizes Ross et al.'s [27] lens regarding resilient identities. Intheir work, Ross et al. [27] considered how Black women in the engineering industry developand experience their identities. The researchers describe resilient identity as "a consistent view ofoneself in spite of contexts that threaten the congruency of those multiple
, A., R. Welch, S. Ressler, N. Dennis, D. Larson, C. Considine, T. Nilsson, J. O'Brien, and T. Lenox. 2008. “Exceed Teaching Workshop: Tenth Year Anniversary.” ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, (June). 10.18260/1-2--3963.[2] Estes, A., Ressler, S., Saviz, C., Barry, B., Considine, C., Coward, D., Dennis, N., Hamilton, S., Hurwitz, D., Kunberger, T., Lenox, T., Nilsson, T., Nolen, L., O’Brien, J., O’Neill, R., Saftner, D., Salyards, K., and Welch, R. 2018. “Celebrating 20 Years of the ExCEEd Teaching Workshop.” ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, (June). 10.18260/1-2--30180.[3] Hamilton, S. R., C. L. Considine, T. Kunberger, T. L. Nisson, L. Nolen, D. A. Saftner, and C. M. Saviz. 2023. “Developing faculty leaders
built their owndefinitions of leadership [12]. For instance, one of the more popular definitions “borrowed” fromcommunication research defines leadership as follows: “Leadership is not defined by a title orposition, but rather as a process that takes place between leaders, followers, and/or teammembers” [13]. The field of business has defined leadership as “the process of interactiveinfluence that occurs when, in a given context, some people accept someone as their leader toachieve common goals.” [14] Winston and Patterson [15] from organizational studies defineleadership in the following way: A leader is one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and influences one or more follower(s) who have diverse gifts, abilities, and
in US society [11]. Engineers work across industries and are at times the interface betweenmanagement and the production and operation of the organization. The development ofengineering as a profession and the focus of engineering education has been intertwined withcurrent national and international needs hence preparing and educating engineers to meet theneeds of the future is often a common theme in engineering program development, accreditationand reform [5][12], [13], [14]. Approaches to engineering education are variable across nationalborders and reflective of the national culture [13]. In the 1950’s engineering education in the USevolved into programs heavy with math and sciences [13] and most engineering programs haveretained this
, youth perceptions of leadership move past the traditionalleadership theories and more closely align with the contemporary theories.” [13, p.457].Interestingly, this does not agree with Komives et al.’s findings [5], which observed that studentslargely had traditional, hierarchical views of leadership when entering college.Leadership Identity DevelopmentThe process through which students develop their conceptualizations of leadership andleadership identity has been well developed in the literature. Most notably, Komives et al. [1]developed the leadership identity framework, which describes this process. In their LeadershipIdentity Development (LID) model, Komives et al. [1] conceptualized the creation of leadershipidentity into 6 stages; 1
curriculum toprovide a well-rounded education. Moreover, leadership training should extend beyondtheoretical instruction to include practical applications that demonstrate its relevance inreal-world contexts. As highlighted in the literature, integrating structured leadershipdevelopment programs into the curriculum can significantly enhance the comprehensiveeducation of engineering professionals, particularly by strengthening their leadership skills.References[1] D. Magrane, P. S. Morahan, S. Ambrose, and S. A. Dannels, "Competencies and Practices in Academic Engineering Leadership Development: Lessons From a National Survey," Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 10, p. 171, Sept. 2018, doi: 10.3390/socsci7100171.[2] S. J. Perry, E. M. Hunter, S
recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.ReferencesBarton, A. C., & Yang, K. (2000). The culture of power and science education: Learning fromMiguel. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the NationalAssociation for Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 871-889.Bowen, C. L., Thompson, L. L., Menezes, G. B., & Restrepo Nazar, C. (2022a).Work-In-Progress: Measuring Systemic Educational Wellness using the Eco-STEM EducationalEcosystem Health Survey. In 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Bowen, C. L., Heubach, S., & Dong, J. (2022b). Eco-STEM Tools: Changing the Culture ofTeaching and Learning in STEM. In 2022
leader? FACE aims to develop leadership skills, create opportunitiesfor students to engage in co- and extracurricular activities, and promote career and educationalgoal achievement within our engineering FYS to aid in retention of their programs.FACE is intentionally designed to align with leadership identity development models,particularly Komives et al.’s (2005) LID Model and Schell & Hughes’ (2016) EngineeringLeadership Identity Model [13], [14]. These frameworks emphasize that leadership identity iscultivated through structured experiences, reflection, and mentorship. Accordingly, FACEincorporates structured peer mentorship, self-assessment tools like CliftonStrengths, andleadership reflection activities to help students actively
development.References[1] “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2024 - 2025 - ABET.” Accessed: Nov.27, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2024-2025/#GC3[2] E. D. Lindsay, R. G. Hadgraft, F. Boyle, and R. Ulseth, “Disrupting EngineeringEducation,” in International Handbook of Engineering Education Research, 1st ed., New York:Routledge, 2023, pp. 115–133. doi: 10.4324/9781003287483-7.[3] B. J. Novoselich and D. B. Knight, “Measuring a moving target: Techniques forengineering leadership evaluation and assessment,” New Directions for Student Leadership, vol.2022, no. 173, pp. 63–71, 2022, doi: 10.1002/yd.20480.[4] S. Pitts, S. McGonagle, and S. W
, identifyingcomparative strengths and areas for improvement in learning across the curriculum at present. Toenable this comparison, we establish a thresholding convention shown on the graphs in Figure 2.While Figure 1 presents the factor (category) means, Figure 2’s graphs instead plot the means forall 29 individual items. The data in each of Figure 2’s eight graphs are identical, yet each separatelyhighlights the items composing a different one from among the factors. All of Figure 2’s graphsalso contain an identical triangular shaded region. With its hypotenuse matching the slope of thelinear best-fit line for the set of 29 mean self-efficacy scores, this shaded region is set to encompassthe bottom 20% of items in terms of growth (relative to outgoing self
%) 16 (28%) Yes 6 2x or 3x: 6 2x or 3x: 4 Biweekly: 12 Biweekly: 13 Weekly: 6 Weekly: 7 No 10To evaluate student engagement with their team with respect to their assigned roles, the Springsurvey had two questions: (1) Comment on whether the team appreciated the contributions youmade within your role(s) as defined by the team, and (2) Comment on whether yourcontributions to the project were limited or enhanced by your role(s). Table 9 shows thecondensed results for these questions from both Spring iterations. Table 9: Student Engagement with their Team with respect to their Assumed Roles Spring (107 responses
,students must be enrolled in the section that meets over the entirety of the semester.This course originated as a seven-week course, focused on providing students who had earned anexperiential learning grant the opportunity to use that experience to consider their personalleadership development and speak about their experience(s) externally. The course was extendedto the full semester, with additional topics added, in order to meet the professionalismrequirement for four majors. The first seven weeks of the course give students the opportunity toreflect on their experiences through a leadership lens and prepare to tell their story. The full termcourse provides students additional opportunities to build mentorship relationships, look at
competencies through engineering research group experiences,” Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 48–64, 2017.[2]A.-K. Carstensen and J. Bernhard, “Design science research – a powerful tool for improving methods in engineering education research,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 44, no. 1–2, pp. 85–102, 2019.[3]S. D. Snyder, “Vertically integrated projects and the importance of organisational culture amongst the student body,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 307–314, 2002.[4]K. Fowee Gasaway and A. Alexeenko, “Vertically integrated project-based method applied to small satellite technology development,” Acta Astronautica, vol. 216, pp. 275–281, 2024