short courses and research gatherings to facilitate discussion within an emergingcommunity of educators and practitioners (e.g., the Fourth Annual Conference on ScienceDiplomacy scheduled for 14 September 2018).A limited number of institutions have also begun to offer courses on science diplomacyincluding: Tufts [8]; Columbia [9]; and NYU [10], among others. Recently, SUNY has created amassively online open course (MOOC) in science diplomacy with a specialization in health [11],and in February 2017, the AAAS launched the, “SciDipEd page… as a platform to bring togethereducators and students in the United States and around the world interested in science diplomacyeducation,” [12]. In 2017 a monograph originally prepared in French was translated
practiceIntroductionEngineering work relies on effective collaboration and communication among diverse groups ofengineers and scientists, and engagement in partnership with broader constituencies (managers,technicians, end users, among others). There is a long-standing expectation that graduates fromengineering programs be proficient communicators and team members, and outcomes relevantto communication and teaming survived the recent re-visioning of ABET criterion 3 (Graduateswill have … “an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provideleadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meetobjectives” and “an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences”). As would beexpected, a
week for 7 weeks, students convened in a makerspace todesign and build individual projects using various power tools. The post-workshop surveysindicated that 26 of the 40 students were “very likely” to try soldering again on their own and 33out of 40 students “strongly agreed” with the statement “I believe the build group helped toincrease my tool knowledge, basic making skills, and confidence to participate in the design andbuilding portion of team based engineering projects” [9].The Carpentries is a nonprofit organization that teaches data science skills to researchers. Theirpaper for the 2018 ASEE Annual Conference reports that short (1-2 hour) workshops are anefficient way to help people who have little to no prior experience explore
to change to environmental awareness. He is a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), Chi Epsilon (XE), Institute for P-12 Engineering Research and Learning (INSPIRE), and Engineering Education Graduate Student Association (ENEGSA).Miss Jessica Erin Sprowl Jessica Sprowl is currently a graduate student at Purdue University, pursuing a master’s degree in School Counseling. She earned her B.S. in mathematics teaching from Purdue University, Fort Wayne, in 2009. She worked as a high school math teacher for two years before returning to Purdue to continue her ed- ucation. She is actively involved in Chi Sigma Iota, an international honor society in the field of school counseling. She is also
disciplinarities ofher own research and teaching. Her graduate training is in STS, and her research has analyzedinter- and transdisciplinary collaborations between engineers, artists, and scientists [19]. She ismotivated by the potential for interdisciplinary engagement to change engineers’ outlooks ontheir education and profession. Her experiences as an instructor of STS-based core courses forengineering and computer science students have helped to shape her outlook on teaching and herapproach to this paper.Lastly, Dr. Desen Ozkan’s graduate background is in engineering education, specifically inunderstanding how faculty developed and maintained interdisciplinarity amid universitystructures. She focused on interdisciplinary design courses that used human
] analyzed the “low-choice culture” of engineering curricula, particularly incontrast to other fields of study. In the context of new research demonstrating the value of selfdetermination or autonomy for students in motivating learning, enhancing self-efficacy, andsupporting persistence, the relative inflexibility of engineering curricula stood out starkly. Withinindividual courses, studies have shown the “power of choice” to positively influence studentoutcomes, for example, when students may choose from among a menu of design projects[45, 46], and recommendations have been made for the design of self-determination supportiveengineering-student learning experiences [47, 48]. However, Forbes, et al.,’s statistical analysis ofthe curricula at 46
certaincircumstances encourage deeper learning.34 The paradox is important to engineering educationpolicymakers, practitioners, and researchers both in the West and China, as it seems to challengeconstructivist theories (e.g., active learning and cooperative learning) dominant in Westernengineering education and it thus invites Western engineering faculty to think about how to Page 24.497.14better teach Chinese students. It is also significant for Chinese policymakers and educators whohave attempted to “borrow” Western constructivist pedagogies as potential “best practices.” Insummary, there remains a large and unpredictable challenge whether switching to