toward opposition to fracking and the 4th-year students were equally split in support of andopposition to fracking. The reason for this difference is unclear, but perhaps reflects differencesin cohort predispositions. The 4th-year students may exercise more critical thinking, or may havepre-professional experiences to draw from. The 1st-year students are predominately non-STEMmajors, and perhaps more influenced by the abundance and accessibility of opposition literature. Page 26.725.5Regardless, the activity appears to be effective in facilitating students’ opinion formation, whilethey gain factual knowledge. The third
. The reason for this is to provide students with aconsistent vocabulary and a consistent set of general expectations as they experience variouscourses and instructors in the program. The rubric’s aim is to avoid the students’ commoncomplaint that graded aspects vary from class to class as well as to avoid their incorrectperception that writing as an engineer is a moving target, one that changes at the whim of theperson asking for the piece of writing. In addition, the rubric follows the format of rubrics usedin many of UMD’s required writing classes and reflects lessons learned from the writing studiesfaculty.The difficulty of creating a writing guide that is specific enough to help students and generalenough to address differing audience and
distinct from sex. Connellnotes that gender is not a supposedly biologically-obvious division between men and women, butinstead the way human society collectively makes relevant these reproductive distinctions Page 26.1007.5between human bodies in a social context. For us, the context is engineering education. In its simplest form, gender reflects the set of characteristics, behaviors, and practices that we think ofas “feminine” or “masculine” – characteristics that any individual biological male or female mayor may not embody.Race, like gender, is not a biological category but a social one. And unlike sex, race has nobiological basis, despite a
lectureAlthough the first author was mindful that the FYS audience drew from all of the majors acrosscampus (liberal arts and non-liberal arts) and needed to address the nature and value of criticalthinking, the choice of the subject matter and its treatment reflected the usual direction of theconversation about the discipline of the liberal arts in engineering. As a case study of theapplication of critical thinking, the lecture delves into conspiracy theories regarding the collapseof the World Trade Center Towers on 9-11. The opportunity to prepare for the plenary lecturegave the first author the motivation to seriously consider the efforts by a handful of engineersand architects to reopen the investigation of the collapse as part of the 9-11 Truth
with disruptive, accusatory or off-topicsituations in presentations.The final exercise in the seminar course requires the student to present a mini-seminar of theirown to the class, with the rest of the class as audience and reminding them about (and sometimesdemanding of them) technique usage. While this is not time consuming, it does demand that thestudents draw on past classes and not just fall into old habits.Methods:Assessments were carried out throughout the course of the classes, at the end of each class, at thethrough student self-reflection exercises and end of semester class evaluations and comments.Additionally, the UIUC Instructor and Course Evaluation System (ICES) anonymous reviewsand ratings were incorporated. Although these are
reflect what is known from other surveys, where it has beenobserved for some time that Blackboard—the early entrant and dominator of the field—has hadits market share reduced to about 50%4; thus we feel confident that our sample represents theworld of on-line course management.Having established the current state of societal impact coursework and of distance learning, thesurvey went on to ask about future preferences. A number of trends were clear in the responses.Of the respondents who offered an opinion, 31.4% would be interested or very interested inprocuring an on-line, stand-alone course on the history of engineering and technology, while62% would be interested in procuring new online material or modules that could be incorporatedinto
rated thediscussion as shown in Table 2. Both sets of feedback reflect positively on the session.One of the results of this panel discussion was to point out that while the cultural perception ofthe different fields are often quite diverse in practice there are similarities to build upon. Theparticipants discussed related concepts such as determining the need for new projects to benefithumanity versus developing the design of such projects. While clearly related, the differencesbetween the knowledge, skill sets, and problem solving approaches of the two sides pointed outthat serious communication issues can develop. It is possible that while working toward thesame goal, the different paradigms of the two sides could lead them to
for unobtrusive research12 informed by conventionalcontent analysis13. Using this method, we examined each organization’s group name anddescription in the ASA database to identify keywords associated with working definitions ofinvolvement categories. As additional database entries were reviewed, these working definitionswere continuously revised and adapted to reflect the organizations contained within eachcategory; in some cases, new categories were developed or organizations were re-categorized toreflect emerging trends in the data. In some cases, organizations could not be categorized basedon the ASA database information alone; for these groups, the “About” section of theirorganization website was used for classification. In total, 432 of
, indicating that more than half of the Page 24.291.6students' assessment were in agreement with those of the instructor. Although this percentageis moderate, it is an indication that the assessment skills of students are improving. Weconsider this to be a significant.The average score obtained from the students' reflective journals was 4.6. This average classscore was obtained not from actual presentations, but from the self-assessment part of thejournal. The low value of the self-assessed presentation skills score obtained at the end of thesemester is similar to the peer-assessed score of 4.7 at the beginning of the semester. Thisresult indicates that
, Music, Art, Architecture, Culture conference:“Crystallizing Topology in Molecular Visualizations [14].Similarly applicable to engineering careers, Albert’s reason 3 is that “the preparation for ascientific career one receives in graduate school leaves the individual competitive for a [brief]period only” and that “[t]he study of humanities … rewards the student with the skills needed forself-critical reflection, adaptability, and self-teaching … needed to be an independent learner”[11]. Reason 4 is teamwork and communication. Reasons 8 and 10 link science and technology,along with another component of the SMR course that has not received much attention in thepresent paper thus far: Medicine. Albert points out that “Humanities study helps you
implications the authors would liketo address. Are students who take courses via internet-based learning technologies moreprone to cheating and plagiarism than those in traditional learning environments? Dostudents feel they are gaining the required knowledge in their courses and laboratorysessions to become successful engineers? Do their expectations of what will be asked ofthem on homework and exams reflect what is seen in industry? Are instructors of internetbased learning courses satisfied with the quality of work being submitted by theirstudents?This paper will discuss the opinions of undergraduate students, graduate students, andfaculty members regarding the ethical and societal implications of internet-basedengineering education. By discussing
this metaphor’spredominance, including: 1) what theoretical or methodological advantages and disadvantagesdoes this metaphor afford researchers? and 2) how does it highlight or mask the livedexperiences of women working in engineering academic contexts? In addition, we ask perhapsmore controversially how the reluctance to release pipeline theory from its hegemonic strongholdmight reflect engineering education’s larger disciplinary reluctance to review their currentstructure and reconstruct themselves into institutions that are more egalitarian? Page 22.684.2This paper critically explores the discourse of “pipeline” as an aim to (re)introduce
communication skillsin the existing engineering curricula. Communication instruction has always been an important part of theuniversity education process but this current initiative strives to focus on the study and improvement of technicalcommunication skills throughout engineering coursework requirements. This reflects the need of employers forengineers with strong communication skills and the desire of our students to improve these skills. Three engineeringcourses have been targeted for the initiative: ENGR 1201 (Fundamentals of Engineering), ET 2371 (Metals andCeramics), and ENGR 1171 (Engineering Ethics). The first two courses have a laboratory component with writtenlaboratory reports and oral presentations while the third is a course created in
characteristicsof engineers in the future. Writing in the year of 2020, when engineering education yet againfaces looming paradigm shift driven in part by a global pandemic and major powers’ adjustmentin attitudes and strategies to globalization, we attempt to reassess visions of “engineers for thefuture,” as reflected through policy discourses in the United States and China, two major playersin global engineering education. For this purpose, we present a careful reading of recent policydocuments published by the US National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and the ChineseMinistry of Education (MoE).The NAE (2018) report Understanding the Educational and Career Pathways of Engineersresulted from a study commissioned by the Academy to “understand
: majority and minority power. Because the characters that show compassion do not have happy endings in the novel, are readers led to believe that power is only given to those who display more animalistic behavior? In any case, it is important to keep in mind that a power figure in the novel ended up dead: Joe Dale. Therefore it is certainly plausible to say that if given enough time, minority figures can eventually overthrow the majority. Readers must reflect on both issues carefully before coming to concrete conclusions. Does this novel foreshadow a possible future? Where will modern society end up in the future? These are questions that will remain unanswered until humans truly understand the power
careers to solvesocietal challenges that mitigate and prepare for climate change and its global implications forsustainability. Attached below is the survey instrument developed and currently undergoing validatingand reliability testing.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1635534. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.ReferencesABET. (2013). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2014 - 2015. Retrieved from http://www.abet.org/eac-criteria-2014-2015/Allenby, B., Murphy, C., Allen, D., & Davidson, C. (2009
those they serve, but it should not be the only component.This advice ranges in tone from “should consider” to “would have to change”. They all express aconditional sense of what to do if the cameras are adopted, but with a variety of levels offorcefulness. The groups affected by these recommendations range from the police, government,and jurors, reflecting students’ embrace of the multi-stakeholder approach to understandingsociotechnical situations. Another category of recommendations focuses on research andmindset. For example, some students urge leaders to stay open-minded, e.g., “It will be importantfor the city council to try to employ interpretive flexibility when research[ing] and anticipatingthe potential responses to the
opportunities for both revelation and reflection. Here we consider therole of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) within ABET, both in thepresent and historically, and examine how we came to inhabit our particular governancepractices within our present organizational structure. Governance refers to the decision-makingprocesses and procedures of an organization, formal and informal, official and unofficial. We areinterested in how power is mediated among stakeholders in these processes, who is given voice,and what is revealed about the values and self-understanding of the profession throughout.We employ organizational theory and historical analysis to trace the changes in governancestructures in ABET and in the wider engineering
is … about how their students are now looking at engineering and science… some of it is reflection …This method of evaluation can serve as a sort of post-test of how the teacher’s research experienceimpacted his/her teaching and the students’ engagement in the material. This is not to say REUsand RETs are models for how Broader Impacts could be measured as they also come with flaws.That is, Principal Investigators need multiple forms of evidence to suggest that REUs lead tostudents enrolling in graduate studies. Additionally, assessing the impact an RET and/or REU hadon its participants would require the Principal Investigator to embed this as a research question inthe overall project scope.Panel of Reviewers’ Knowledge of Broader
(PSRDM).20 Two of the eight dimensions were selected as the focus of thecurrent study: analyze and professional connectedness. Analyze reflects the attitudes ofindividuals about the importance of including social and human dimensions in engineering,going beyond solely technical factors. All five EPRA items to assess the analyze dimension wereused (Table 1). Professional connectedness gauges attitudes toward applying one’s technicalskills to help people and society. Four items from among the larger number of 19 items in EPRAwere selected to assess professional connectedness (Table 1). Students responded to the itemsusing a 1 to 7 scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. One of the items for each dimensionwas negatively worded, and
Mechanical 5.12 Trevor M MPU Civil 5.52 Tucker M LPU Civil 5.48 Wynne F LPU Architectural 5.88In these semi-structured interview, students were asked questions about their college courses,significant events, thoughts on social responsibility, and how these are related to their views oftheir future profession as engineers. These questions had the general goal of eliciting thestudents’ reflections on their time in college overall and their intentions for a future in theengineering profession. One question in particular, Question 4, that was located somewhat
part of thisprofession. Without many experiences in classes or through co-curricular activities that showhow personal and professional experiences can be integrated, students are likely tocompartmentalize those senses of social responsibility. Those who do have significantopportunities to consider how their personal goals positively impact their work will go throughan evaluative and reflective process, visualized below, to take stock of how they can live theirpersonal social responsibility goals through their profession. Thus, Canney and Bielefeldt argue,the professional connectedness realm of social responsibility development requires engineers toconsider the opportunity costs and benefits of their decisions. For example, working to
integrated elements of social justice and CP through differentavenues as part of our goal to establish a DLS. First, we promoted a sense of equity starting fromthe recruitment process until the final presentation. This sense of equity was reflected in ourapproach to reaching out to each student individually without demonstrating privileges to aspecific group of students. We also created a learning environment where tutors and studentscould talk to each other easily throughout the course. This open line of communication seemedto have a strong relationship to the sense of community and collaboration within the classroom.Second, students were able to take decisions in some assignments. Decisions regarding creatingteams, agreeing on due dates, scoping
important part ofengineering research and practice.Finding ways to normalize mistakes and failures, and make them safe to perform in public,enables a number of learning enhancements. Foremost, it allows us a much less complicatedmeans of understanding what our students are learning and what they find challenging. Butperhaps more importantly, when mistakes seem safe, it enables students to practice seeingmistakes and feedback as helpful and nonthreatening. A learner’s constructive attitude towardmistakes is a major component of current pedagogical concerns such as growth mindset,mastery-based learning motivation, reflection and resiliency 16–19. Improvisatory educationmethods provide us with a very promising strategy toward scaffolding a value for
approach reflects a foundationalmisalignment in educational philosophies resulting in what might provocatively be characterizedas “bait-and-switch.” The bait-and-switch characterization reflects a mismatch between theengagement logics embedded in most K-12 engineering education and the exclusionary logicsunderlying most university engineering education. While we acknowledge from the start thatuniversity engineering programs are increasingly emphasizing student engagement, the rapidexpansion of K-12 engineering programs has outpaced reforms in higher education aroundengagement, thereby magnifying the problems associated with engineering bait-and-switchexplored in this paper.In popular vernacular, bait-and-switch is often associated with fraud or
) hierarchy of needs. We selected these two scholars’ diagrams for referencebecause they closely reflect the goals of our conceptual framework for engineering thriving. Forexample, both Norrish’s and Maslow’s diagrams are based on the theories of optimal humanfunctioning, connect several competencies studied in depth by other researchers, are measurable,and apply to educational settings. Figure 2 illustrates these two diagrams of human thriving.Figure 2. Visual representation of Positive Education, adapted from Norrish (2013) andMaslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, adapted from Maslow (1970).Next, we reviewed Norrish’s and Maslow’s justifications for their visual frameworks of humanthriving and adapted the aspects that best applied to our conceptual
three key features: a specializedknowledge base, self-regulation, and a commitment to public service— [1-3] elements that havebeen historically codified into a set of ethical guidelines [1, 4, 5]. While these guidelines—Professional Codes of Ethics—may help engineers appreciate what not to do [4, 5], they areinsufficiently specific to guide novice engineers through ethically ambiguous situations. As early20th century artefacts, they also tend to reproduce structural inequities embedded in the history ofthe profession, and thus fail to reflect the experiences of historically underrepresented groups ofengineers [6-14]. The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board’s (CEAB) pairing of ethics andequity [15] demands that we look beyond the codes to
Page 24.495.7other verbal disfluencies, as I could muster. Many readers may find this transcription methodunnecessary and even a display of poor judgment on my part as a “scholar.” I must thereforejustify this transcription as based on a methodology that aims to show, rather than summarize,how the interview participant talked about their experience, providing some idea of the difficultiesin relating this information during the interview, and really provide the reader with some sense ofthe reflection the participant had to undergo to describe their experience. I thought that my choiceof transcription method fell in line with the overall goal of this paper. I wrote this paper to showwhy events like the KDS are valuable tools for engineers to
ofrevisions based on (a) conversations with the engineering faculty teaching the course, (b)analysis of several grading rubrics used for assessment of writing in the disciplines, andengineering writing in particular26, and (c) a pilot of using the designed rubric on students’writing projects. The heavy weight on formatting (25%) reflects the importance of being able tofollow instructions, an area that has been shown to be problematic for students. The final rubric(see Appendix A) included the following categories: completeness (20%), formatting (25%),data/results presentation (25%) and appropriateness of writing for intended audience (30%).Note that this rubric is only intended to measure the areas of organization, design/format andmechanics/style