Engineering from the University of Colorado Boulder. Dr. Canney currently works as a Senior Project Manager for Taylor Devices, Inc. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Using a Values Lens to Examine Engineers’ Workplace ExperiencesIntroductionThe development of a skilled and robust U.S. engineering workforce is more crucial than ever asnumerous social, environmental, and health crises unravel on a national and global stage [1]. Yet,productivity and retention remain prominent concerns for the engineering profession [2] [3].Studies have addressed these issues by focusing on the persistence of a “skills and knowledge”gap, noting how engineers’ preparation
attractive for the best and the brightest.”—National Academy of Engineering, “The Engineer of 2020” [1].A series of reports throughout the latter decades of the 20th Century criticized STEM educationin the United States for failing to meet demands to remain globally competitive [2]. Such callsincreased in urgency as a series of technologically advancing events of the mid-1990s leveled theglobal playing field in economic and technological leadership – a leveling that authors such asThomas Friedman described as a “Flat World” [3-6]. Looking toward this more competitive,interconnected future, particularly with new developments in the STEM education and workforcein China and India, in 2004 the U.S. National Academy of Engineering
group discussion, listening/paraphrasing, observation, imagination/creativity, and critical thinking. Another key themeidentified was “Appreciating Others’ Perspectives”, in which students expressed appreciation ofthe differences in perspective that VTS discussions tend naturally to draw out. This findinghighlights the potential of VTS as a tool for promoting and supporting diversity in engineering.Based on these data and a brief, associated survey, we learned that students found VTS to behighly effective at helping them become more reflective and was one of the most effectivemethods we have attempted for the development of reflective thinking in graduate engineering.1 IntroductionAs a multidisciplinary team of educators, we have been pursuing
Cornell University and a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from the University of Virginia. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Work in Progress: Departmental Analysis of Factors of Engineering CultureIntroductionEngineering culture is described as unique compared to other academic disciplines. A 2010 studyby Godfrey and Parker described engineering culture as one that has an expectation of harshnesscoupled with continuous struggles [1]. Rigor and competition within engineering programsperpetuates a perception of a “meritocracy of difficulty” [2] where student success can bedescribed as “being able to take it” [1]. “Horrific” workloads create an environment of
and one‘control’ group, plus interviews with 14 engineering alumni. Among engineering alumni whohad received at least one exemplary ethics educational experience, 58% rated the level that theybelieved they were adequately prepared through their education to face ethical issues in theirwork at 8-10 (on a scale of 1 to 10), and 49% rated their preparation to consider societal issues at8-10; only 1% and 4% rated these at 4 or less, respectively. These averages differed acrossinstitutions (e.g., average for ethical issues 8.2 at a religiously-affiliated R2 institution versus 6.3at a Public R2 institution). Alumni described courses in college (undergraduate or graduate), ifany, that impacted their understanding of the role of engineering and/or
steeple and calculated the height using trigonometry. Then, to check the estimate, the engineer climbed to the top of the steeple, lowered a string until it touched the ground, climbed back down and measured the length of the string. The engineer compared the measurement to the estimate, calculated the standard error, and drafted a report documenting the methods and results. The sociologist bought the sexton a beer in the local pub and he told her how high the church steeple was" [1, p. 36].As early as the first year of an engineering curriculum, students begin their socialization intoengineering culture, in which they learn the rules and norms of the profession [2-4]. For students,this entry into professional
introductory physics classusing item response theory. In addition to the methodological (concept mapping for scaledevelopment) and theoretical implications (participatory framework) of this study, its practicalimplications include examining the efficacy of STEM education programs in cultivating specificattitudes and persistence traits as conceptualized by the STEM community.IntroductionAs evidenced in the landmark study by Seymour and Hewitt [1], since the mid-1980s, enrollmentand retention in science and mathematics related fields have decreased. This study has been atrailblazer in starting a movement that has gained national and international attention andtriggered a renaissance in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)education
researcher in the Tufts Center for Engineering Education Outreach and the Insti- tute for Research on Learning and Instruction. She holds a Ph.D. in engineering education from Virginia Tech and a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Tufts University. Her research interests are focused on in- terdisciplinary curriculum development in engineering education and the political, economic, and societal dimensions of curricular change. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Contextualization as Virtue in Engineering EducationAbstractHow do we combat the “culture of disengagement” [1] in engineering education? How do weeffectively prepare students for the sociotechnical
manifests in engineering education by drawing primarily from literature inengineering ethics on responsibility and civic virtue. Second, we use this framework tounderstand engineering students’ perceptions of the roles and responsibilities of engineers withincommunities. We conducted semi-structured interviews with eleven first-year engineeringstudents whom we recruited from a mandatory first-year engineering course at a large Mid-Western land grant university in the United States. We identified three themes from theinterviews: (1) the awareness of how engineers can serve their communities, (2) the belief thatengineers should serve their communities, and (3) the distinction between personal andprofessional civic responsibility. We distilled these
see ERCs as an under-utilized opportunity for longitudinal research in both EWDand DCI. This ability to trace individuals and patterns over time is an invaluable knowledgeresource, especially as we seek to develop an infrastructure of roadways and pathways for EWD.Figure 1 shows an impressionistic schematic of what we envision: an interconnected system ofsystems where the same individual who participates in an informal summer camp or otheroutreach activity has access to further learning through formal K-12 experiences, 2 and/or 4-yearundergraduate degrees, Trades, graduate degrees and professional workforce learningopportunities... with seamless transitions among them. These are pathways - not pipelines, whichmay leak with no recovery19
strongertechnical communication skills. In the early 2000s, engineering professional societies reportedunderdeveloped writing and presentation skills in entry-level job candidates while, at the sametime, stressing the time spent in a typical engineer’s day on communication tasks [1, 2]. At thesame time, ABET adopted new criteria for evaluating and accrediting engineering programs [3].The criteria focused on developing “soft skills” including teamwork, ethics, and effectivecommunication, among others. The importance of soft skills has only grown in the interveningyears. Among ABET’s student outcomes as listed in 2019-2020 is “an ability to apply written,oral, and graphical communication in broadly-defined technical and non-technical environments;and an
consistency across teams. Each sectioncomprises multiple project teams. A common design process, where interactions withcommunity partners is central, guides students through the design process. Once a project isdelivered, a new project is identified by students, their faculty mentor(s) and communitypartner(s). Example projects include assistive technology, database software for human servicesagencies, and energy-efficient and affordable housing solutions [1-3].Spring 2020 move to onlineLike many campuses, Purdue University moved online in March of 2020 and sent students homewhere possible. This began an odyssey that would last into 2021. The major milestones areshown in Figure 1. Before the formal announcement, the staff prepared plans to move to
central component of the value for the community partners. Thisdiffers from many of the early adopters of service-learning, where the service was typicallydefined as time spent within the community or in the partner organization [1]. Nearly 90% of thestudents studied in Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning [2] were from placement-basedapproaches. It is not surprising, therefore, that many of the models for community-engagedlearning were designed with placement-based approaches in mind. While such models can beuseful in engineering, they lack the context of the project experience that adds dimensions notaddressed in earlier models. A project deliverable is central to many engineering experiences,while the project process, including activities
(www.craftofscientificwriting.com) and the Assertion-Evidence Approach (www.assertion- evidence.com). American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Engineering Communication and Engineering Criteria 2000: Assessing the Impact Through Papers Presented at the ASEE Annual Conference Optimism and energy (with a pinch of anxiety) characterized the Liberal EducationDivision (LED)1 at the beginning of a new millennium. The enormously influential AccreditationBoard for Engineering and Technology (ABET) put forward a radically redesigned process andnew criteria for accreditation, which came to be known as “EC2000.” The new process focusedon educational outcomes rather than credit
following questions: How have investigators defined engineeringjudgment? What cognitive processes do students engage to make engineering judgments? Howdo communication tasks shape students’ engineering judgments? Finally, how is engineeringjudgment shaped by engineer identity?1. IntroductionBeginning with the 2019-2020 academic year, ABET [1] added the ability to “use engineeringjudgment to draw conclusions” (p. 6) as an explicit outcome for graduates of engineeringprograms. Notably, while engineering judgment has been an implicit component of curricula formany years, little research has been done to date to define more concretely what the term meansor how students develop engineering judgement in undergraduate education. This gap in
using yoga and/ormeditation to cope with mental health challenges during the pandemic. The research questionsaddressed in this paper are: 1) What are the demographic characteristics of students who used yogaand/or meditation to cope with mental health challenges of the 2020 novel coronavirus pandemic?and 2) Does the mental health of the students who used these strategies differ in any from themental health of students who did not use yoga and meditation coping strategies? Based on 669responses from students at 140 different universities, we found that there were 20 survey items forwhich the yoga/meditation group fared statistically significantly differently than the non-yoga/meditation group. These 20 items appeared in the screens for
with disabilities in engineering. I join the call for greaterattention to the cultural and structural barriers to full participation evidenced by this and otherresearch.IntroductionEngineering education and engineering work that does not include robust representation from thevery publics it purports to serve is both inherently exclusionary and intellectually and creativelyimpoverished [1-3]. For decades, social scientists and engineering education scholars havedocumented the under-representation of women and people of color in science, technology,engineering, and math-related fields, and, more recent work has extended that investigation toinclude sexual and gender minorities [e.g., 4-7, 20]. However, the experiences and voices ofpersons with
, what their strike participation encompassed, andwhat broader relationships they see between their position as engineering students, unionorganizing, and engineering as a discipline.Members of the Graduate Employees’ Organization, American Federation of Teachers local3550 (GEO) engaged in a strike from September 8th to September 16th, 2020, striking for a safeand just pandemic response at a large public university [1]. Strike demands centered on safetyand justice relating to both COVID-19 and policing. These demands centered common goodelements around a universal right to work remotely during a pandemic, improvements to parentand caregiver accommodations, the waiving of fees levied on the international studentcommunity, extensions to degree
’ abilities and tendencies to empathize with and for members. Moreover, we hope thatthis work will provide a foundation for future research focused on how empathy can promotemore effective engineering design teams.Keywords: Empathy; Design Projects; Teamwork; Team Dynamics; Team DevelopmentIntroductionProviding students with effective collaboration skills is a core and required feature of accreditedundergraduate and graduate engineering programs. Thus, it is important to understand factorsthat contribute to more effective teaming experiences. One defining feature of effectiveintergroup relationships (and, thus, teams) is empathy [1-3] but relatively few studies inengineering education have focused on how students in engineering empathize with
persistence among diverse students.Placing STEM history and cultures directly in the critical frameworks of WGS may help providethese populations with epistemological and personal insights that boost a sense of belonging inengineering and support their persistence.Numerous studies have addressed aspects of the complex question of student under-representation. The National Academies’ Beyond Bias investigated the factors contributing tounderrepresentation, and determined that biases and structural disadvantages overwhelm talentedwomen and other would-be engineering students. “Women who are interested in science andengineering careers are lost at every education transition,” and “the problem is not simply thepipeline” [1].Concern over the proper
,environmental pollution, food, education, and so on. These obstacles require the attention ofprofessionals who know what technology can do, can work as or with engineers, and who havethe necessary socio-political inclinations and capabilities.” This program was both a naturaloutgrowth of Lafayette College’s founding principles of liberal education and consistent with thetrends in engineering education in the 1960s, which also impacted other institutions [1].Our campus newspaper greeted the new program with enthusiasm: “It will explore the nature androles of engineering, the problem solving skills employed by engineers, and the socio-politicalissues involved in the direction and control of technology,” student journalists wrote in 1970 [2].Since its
with properly selected NGOs they might be ready todeliver. Moving beyond the dangers and perils of trips to "save the poor," the HumanitarianEngineering (HE) program at Colorado School of Mines (Mines) is developing newinteractions with socially responsible and accountable NGOs to ensure that communities areempowered through engineering projects for sustainable community development. To ensurethat these projects can better serve and empower communities, this paper shows 1) howengineers can map their partnerships with NGOs; 2) how to develop engineering designcourses where students learn human-centred problem definition and explore designchallenges with NGO partners; and 3) how to develop relationships with NGOs so studentscan have community
in engineering education and its adverse realizations. Engineering issocio-technical in nature i.e. there is no engineering that is solely technical, and bydichotomizing or picking a side we break up a complex conceptualization into one that is neitherauthentic nor realistic. By sitting with tension as a guiding metaphorical framework for thisstudy, we attempt to break up the dualism that exposes itself in engineering education.Our discussions in this paper are informed by our ontology or sense of being. Such explorationsin ontology are not traditional to engineering. We bring in this construct from the liberal artsbecause of the lack of such a device in engineering scholarship. We discuss: 1) our conception ofthe soul of engineering
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 A Provisional History of the Idea of “Soft” vs. “Hard” Skills in Engineering Education soft adj. 1. not hard, firm, or rough. 2. not loud or bright. 3. gentle. 4. (too) sympathetic and kind. 5. weak, foolish. 6. (of drinks) nonalcoholic, 7. (of drugs) not highly addictive. soft option easy alternative. soft-pedal v. refrain from emphasizing --Oxford Mini Reference Dictionary and Thesaurus, p.598 disparage v. suggest that something is of little value or importance. syn. belittle, criticize, decry, denigrate, deprecate, minimize, run down, undervalue
Paper ID #32918A Sojourn of Engineering Identity Conflict: Exploring IdentityInterference Through a Performative LensDr. Cole Hatfield Joslyn, University of Texas at El Paso Cole Joslyn is an Assistant Professor of Practice in the Department of Engineering Education and Lead- ership at The University of Texas at El Paso. His research emphasizes humanizing engineering education, particularly 1) increasing Latinx students’ sense of belonging in engineering by a) integrating holistic, socio-culturally responsive practices and Latinx cultural assets and values into educational success strate- gies, and b) understanding how
learning curve for an organizationseeking to start such work is steep. Additionally, it is important to evaluate to what extent worktypified as community engaged work actually creates a participatory space of community-centered perspectives regarding roles, interests, worldviews, actions and outcomes. To this end,we developed a formative assessment tool using previously identified domains [1]. This tool,created in partnership between a university and an outreach group affiliated with the Air Force,allows organizations to evaluate existing projects and explore ways to develop on a path towardstrue community-engagement. The outreach group in this case undertakes significant STEMeducation within New Mexico, but in the past, a majority of the work has
Albany), Rafael Burgos-Mirabal (U Mass Amherst), Alan Cheville (Bucknell), Thomas DuPree (Univ. New Mexico), Soheil Fatehiboroujeni (Cornell), Jennifer Karlin (Minnesota State, Mankato), Donna Riley (Purdue)This paper is about ABET’s1 maverick evaluators and what it says about the limits ofaccreditation as a mode of governance in, which is to say it’s capacity to shape and control U.S.engineering education. The term maverick is not meant to be pejorative. As defined in theMerriam Webster dictionary, a maverick is “an independent individual who does not go alongwith a group or party”[1]. In the context of this study, it refers to an evaluator in ABET’sengineering accreditation process whose
Photography to Deepen Global Engineering CompetencyAbstractThis work in progress examines how engineering students going abroad visualize theirexperiences through photography and asks how do students learn to see themselves as engineersin a global context? The project is integrated into a first-year global engineering course andbuilds on published educational assessment research of this program [1, 2, 3]. Through lecturesand discussion sections that travel overseas for two weeks after exams, the course seeks toincrease students’ global engineering competency (GEC), assessed by several instrumentsincluding the Global Perspectives Inventory (GPI). In 2019, instructors designed a photoelicitation-reflection as a
account titled “A Century of ASEE and Liberal Education,”O. Allan Gianniny (1995) highlighted the recursive nature of attempts to optimize thecontribution of the humanities and social sciences (HSS) to engineering education [1]. Amongthe numerous reports on the improvement of engineering education, Gianniny cites WilliamWickenden’s 1930s Report of the Investigation of Engineering Education, 1923-1929. In thechairman’s report that introduces Vol. 1, Charles F. Scott expresses aspirations and concerns thatstrongly resemble those expressed over the last 20 years: “the functions of the engineer havebecome more complex and are interrelated with many activities of modern life…. The strictlytechnical activity is comprised in engineering but it is not a
young adults are shocking. Today, suicide ratesamong teens and young adults have reached their highest point in nearly two decades.Approximately 1100 college students commit suicide each year, making it the second-leadingcause of death among college students. Roughly 12% of college students report the occurrenceof suicide ideation during their four years in school, with 2.6% percent reporting persistentsuicide ideation [1]. Burnell reports on a recent study published in Depression and Anxiety thatsurveyed more than 67,000 college students from more than 100 institutions. The results showedthat one in five students have had thoughts of suicide, with 9% making an attempt and nearly20% reporting self-injury. Suicide rates for teenage girls ages 15