Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joel Haight, Pennsylvania State University; Richard Devon, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

explicitly. One class approached it as a problem in engineering design. The otheraddressed it in terms of the emergency preparedness and planning effort in New Orleans. Thelatter is certainly closer to public policy than engineering design is, but it still focused more onwhat happened rather than what was planned or what policies drove the planning.In fact, the unfolding events and coverage, which still continues, made a top down approachrather impractical. Yet both instructors found that a great many policy issues were raised by thestudents in their projects and these are summarized and reported here. This is, then, an inductiveand student centered approach to engineering and public policy. We report on a “found policy”equivalent to what is

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

outside of the classroomincluding a local planning commission meeting, and a field trip to Washington D.C. to meet withdecision makers involved in technology policy. The agenda for the 2004 trip to D.C. includedvisits at the EPA, Congressional Research Service (CRS), and with congressional staff members.There are also often relevant guest lectures on campus.Group Projects and DebatesThe last outcome relates to the student practice of their verbal, written, graphical, and teamworkskills with special emphasis on verbally communicating technical information. This is achievedthrough group projects, presentations, class debates, and peer reviews including a peer-review ofvideotaped presentations. To enhance the quality of these presentations and

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert Green, Mississippi State University; Jerry Emison, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

Associate Professor of Political Science and Public Administration at Mississippi State University. His research interests concern the effectiveness of public environmental institutions, professionalism in city planning and engineering, and environmental consequences of growth management. He is a registered professional engineer, a board-certified diplomate of the American Academy of Environmental Engineers and a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. Page 11.932.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Minding the Gap: An Introductory Course on

Conference Session

Building Blocks for Public Policy in Curricula

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alison Tramba, University of Virginia; Edmund Russell, University of Virginia; P. Paxton Marshall, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

2006-1046: PUBLIC POLICY AND ENGINEERING DESIGN: A CREATIVEPARTNERSHIP IN ENGINEERING EDUCATIONAlison Tramba, University of Virginia Alison Tramba is an undergraduate student in the School of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Virginia. She plans to graduate in May, 2007, with a double major in Systems Engineering and American Studies. An internship in Washington, DC, research at UVA, and participation in interdisciplinary projects with the School of Architecture have motivated her to pursue a career in policy regarding housing and infrastructure provisions. Alison is also a two-term representative to the university's Honor Committee.Edmund Russell, University of Virginia

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

forstudents and speaker to interact. In examining this issue, it is not surprising to find that some ofthe students are outgoing and have no reservation in approaching the speakers. Likewise, it isnot surprising to find that other students are too intimidated to engage the speakers. Nonetheless,we plan to examine ways of improving the interaction among the students and the speakers. Wewill return to this issue in the recommendation section later in the paper.The next set of written comments was in response to the experiences of distance educationstudents with SFTP (students watching recorded coverage of the events). There was a strongopinion that the video and sound was not done well. Among the concerns were: (1) issues withvideo quality, (2) issues

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

4.3 / 4.3 3.7 / 3.7 0.6 New Skills Indicates < |0.3| variation in perceived Indicates > 0.3 increase in perceived value over the 1993-2002 period value over the 1993-2002 periodStudents in entrepreneurship courses and the E-SHIP Minor develop these six skills across timein team projects, developing new products/ventures to meet market needs, and developingcomplete business plans as a team. In addition, the core courses in the E-SHIP Minor have aproblem-based learning foundation, incorporating activities and tasks to target these areas of skilldeficiency. This is one program where we can do studies of learning these six skills areas.Table B: Perception of the

Conference Session

Topical Public Policy Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Devin Stewart, National Academy of Engineering; Norman Fortenberry, National Academy of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

each are expected to be granted in fiscal year2007. The NSF also funded three Science of Learning Centers at a level of $22.7 million infiscal year 2006. For postsecondary education research in particular, funding is even more lacking. Thereis almost universal emphasis on examining issues most prominent in K-12 education. Thisemphasis is appropriate, given that learning at the K-12 levels provides the foundation for laterlearning. However, given that almost 70% of high school graduates continue on forpostsecondary education, it is clear that college-level education research cannot be ignored. Plans for a Transforming Engineering Education program, to be focused on engineeringeducation research, were proposed in the fiscal year 2006

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

question number nine, which got a value of 3.9.This question asked whether or not this project should be included in future classes.Most of the students gave a rating of “agree.” The other part of the class was, for themost part, split between “neutral” and “strongly agree.” This shows that approximately75% of the class agrees that this project should continue in the future.The remaining questions, all got at least an average rating of 3.7 which is close to theaverage of agree. However, the majority of the votes on each of the questions were for“agree”, and for all but one question, over half the class voted “agree.”Planned Changes for Next SemesterAs mentioned above, we will add a requirement that the opposing teams meet prior to thepresentations

Conference Session

Engineering and Public Policy Pioneering Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jacqueline Isaacs, Northeastern University; Christopher Bosso, Northeastern University; Carol Barry, University of Massachusetts-Lowell

Tagged Divisions

Engineering and Public Policy

NNI Strategic Plan (2004).Recommendation #9 was that the National Science and Technology Council, Committee onTechnology Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) “shoulddevelop a new funding strategy to ensure that the societal implications of nanoscale science andtechnology become an integral part of the NNI.” Much has been done to meet this goal. Indeed,supported by the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (PL 108-153:2003), the NSF primarily, but other agencies as well (e.g., EPA, the National Institute forOccupational Health and Safety), have committed substantial funding toward understanding thesocial and environmental implications of the nanoscale revolution.The intention for the course