Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carl Fayerweather, University of Toledo; Sorin Cioc, University of Toledo; Douglas Oliver, University of Toledo

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

information watching my colleagues presenting their projects. (Average = 3.8) 7. The debate made the project more effective than a traditional student presentation. (Average = 3.8) 8. I worked harder, knowing that the students would vote on my team's effectiveness. (Average = 3.7) 9. This project should be adopted as a permanent component of future thermodynamics classes. (Average = 3.9) 10. I consider this design project to be an excellent experience. (Average = 3.7) Page 11.1001.9Appendix B: Selected Statement Responses Graphically Represented 1. Com pare d to a s tandard

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kristen Tull, Lafayette College; Sharon Jones, Lafayette College

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

on society. Theprimary difficulties are the lack of a textbook in this area, and the constant need to keep abreastof rapidly changing engineering policy topics. It is also becoming more difficult to coverengineering public policy at anything other than the federal level because of the vast amount ofinformation. And, it is important for the instructor to maintain a classroom environment thatrespects differing political perspectives, and in fact, highlights the many aspects other thanpolitics that affect technology policy.References1. Kraft, M. and Furlong, S. (2004). Public Policy: Politics, Analysis, and Alternatives, CQ Press, Washington D.C.2. Easton, Thomas A. (2005). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Science

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Devon, Pennsylvania State University; Elizabeth Kisenwether, Pennsylvania State University; Richard Schuhmann, Pennsylvania State University; Robert Pangborn, Pennsylvania State University; Kim Barron, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

(as well as with Japan and South Korea), both for importing inexpensivemanufactured goods that lowers U.S. inflation, and for return flows of dollars that finance theU.S.’s federal deficit. U.S. corporations, like those of other countries, have also been quick tosee value in investing in China’s manufacturing base and pursuing opportunities in its domesticmarket.9A further corrective to the alarmist view was recently published in a well researched report byGereffi and Wadha at Duke University, “Typical articles have stated that in 2004 the United States graduated roughly 70,000 undergraduate engineers, while China graduated 600,000 and India 350,000. Our study has determined that these are inappropriate comparisons. These

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carole Womeldorf, Ohio University-Athens

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

, many students will have the chanceto put their work where their heart is. There is a lot of work needed by our society in the areas ofinfrastructure, energy generation, health and environmental safety, to name just a few.Engineering graduates who possess the technical knowledge, a willingness to tackle toughquestions, and improved awareness of themselves and the world around them are our best hopefor the future. REFERENCES1. Gunn, Alastair S., and Vesilind, P. Aarne, HOLD PARAMOUNT: The Engineer’s Responsibility to Society, Brooks/Cole-Thompson Learning, Pacific Grove CA, 2003.2. Wyatt, Sarah, “Extending Inquiry-Based Learning to Include Original Experimentation,” THE JOURNAL

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Douglas Sicker, University of Colorado-Boulder; Tom Lookabaugh, University of Colorado-Boulder

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

, anonymous survey stage. 1. How many SFTP conferences have you attended and when? How did you attend them (in person or through distance education)? 2. What is your background (education, professional)? 3. What did you expect to get out of the conference(s)? Were your expectations met? 4. Was the conference an efficient use of your time? Would there be any way to make it more efficient? 5. How relevant was the conference to your education at CU and to your anticipated career? How well did the conferences tie into your coursework? Page 11.575.4 6. Is the conference format effective? What might make it more effective