andthe process of students growing and developing into members of the community, whether definedas the academic or professional community.The context of this paper and its reflection on the use of outcomes to design and operate anengineering program is the proposal for significant changes in the ABET criteria. Discussionsamongst the ASEE community have included webinars, a virtual conference, and a town hallmeeting at the 2016 ASEE conference.4 The goal of this paper is to provide an example of howoutcomes have been used as a driver and motivator for innovative change in engineeringeducation.ValuesThe outcomes currently defined in Criterion 3 are a clear statement of the values the broadengineering community holds, such as use of foundational
structure. This property distinguishes it from other prior attempts atdeveloping sociotechnical-based assignments in the literature, which have primarily focused on asingle course-context.The process of writing and implementing the assignment followed by the authors’ reflection andanalysis required for this paper elucidated many findings that are relevant to other efforts tointegrate sociotechnical concepts into core engineering science and design courses. Specifically,we identified barriers to sociotechnical integration which include addressing the diverse needsand objectives of our courses, managing different instructor backgrounds and biases, usingappropriate terminology which avoids reinforcing the dualism we are trying to address
paper draws on a qualitative dataset of student responses to biweekly “reflection questions”integrated into routine course activity in a pilot implementation of a Wright State-likeEngineering Mathematics course. Alongside auto-ethnographic data from the course instructorand coordinator, this dataset illustrates the transformations involved in the scale-making process,and enables tracing the consequences of these transformations for the identities of people andsocial collectives involved in the course.IntroductionThis paper reports on the results of a study of an implementation of the Wright State Model forEngineering Mathematics at one university. Consistent with the LEES call for proposals, weadopt a human science theoretical approach to the
applied, transformative, purposive knowledge and growth.51, 52Because professionalization is also an important goal in engineering education, our listculminates with several goals that build from affective, ethical, and cognitive foundations to themore specific abilities we expect of graduating engineering students. Each student and program instructor will be able to 1. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their rights and responsibilities to themselves, others, society, and the natural world 2. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their habits and growth, as well as others’, and the implications of
organization oftheir major fields and learning to think like practitioners in those fields, undergraduates shouldalso learn from a properly constructed major program of study “the necessarily partial vision” ofthe field and critically reflect on “the successes and limitations of any particular approach toknowledge” (p. 535).Interdisciplinary Evaluation. Despite the increase in the number of interdisciplinary programs oncollege and university campuses36, some have argued that methods and criteria to evaluate theeffectiveness of these programs are lacking or weak4,37. In order to “perform” interdisciplinaritysuccessfully, students and faculty need to be able to evaluate the effectiveness ofinterdisciplinary work. The seeds of interdisciplinary
engineers work with great autonomy, graduating engineers must have themetacognitive skills necessary to negotiate the problems they encounter in practice.Recently graduated engineers agree with the importance of problem solving abilities on the job.Passow (2012) found that problem solving was one of the top ABET competencies thatgraduated engineers value. This same study found that life-long learning was ranked in themiddle in terms of perceived importance, but the study also found that life-long learning can bepositively tied to the highest ranked competencies, including problem solving.In Schon’s (1983) work on the “reflective practitioner,” he describes that professionalsconsistently face “messy” problems that require reflecting on one’s actions
thinking needs further attention.2The complexity in defining and understanding critical thinking is one of the major challenges forengineering educators and students.25-27 Hicks, Bumbaco, and Douglas argued that exploration ofinterconnection between different philosophical concepts, in particular critical thinking,reflective practice, and adaptive expertise, may help educators to better understand and applyeach concept.28 Yet, some scholars critique the traditional viewpoints on critical thinking. Clarisand Riley identified four major themes that engineers generally have given too little attention, orno attention at all: power/knowledge relationships, transgressive validity, reflection andreflexivity, and praxis and relationality.29In this paper
. ● Principle 3 promotes varying activities that increase interest and self-regulation. For example, integrating weekly reflective writing prompts.Studies suggest that incorporating these principles into course design increases learning andengagement for all students [5, 6]. Despite these wide-ranging benefits, research about implementing UDL in science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields primarily focuses on accessibility,including the use of technology accommodations, due to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)and Web Content Accessibility (WCAG) requirements for online learning environments [7].From the ASEE archive, one paper authored by Monemi, Pan, & Varnado (2009) suggested theuse of UDL for course design
and Mold Making program, leadingto an Associate of Applied Science degree.Identifying linkage to outcomes such as these is fairly common at the program and course level.In this study, the relevant skills are integrated at the assignment level as well. In courses whereassignments did not support these skills, assignments were added or modified as appropriate.For example: communication, critical thinking, and teamwork were integrated into laboratory(machining) sections through the use of individual and team based projects. These projectsrequired written plans, written evaluations at the conclusion, a reflective paper to cementlearning, and a presentation to the class and others.This paper will provide a detailed description of how this
researcher-practitioner divide is essential to progress. Page 23.1367.22 Approach2.1 Overall Study DesignOur overall study design was a multiple methods approach consisting of (1) a mostly closed-ended survey of thermodynamics instructors at ABET-accredited engineering programs in theUS; (2) open-ended surveys/reflections of practitioner collaborator-consultants, recruited fromamong survey participants to implement engineering education innovations in theirthermodynamics courses; (3) open-ended surveys/reflections of student participants in courseswhere engineering education innovations were implemented; and (4) qualitative analysis ofstudent work in
insights not only into what engineering students gain fromHumanities immersion, but also what their engineering approaches may bring to this field.BackgroundLast year, these approaches were studied more formally through a paper delivered in a science and theatrepanel at a theatre studies conference, a setting that provided insights from scholars on the other side of thescience/theatre divide. This study used Kolb’s learning styles inventory as its theoretical framework toanalyze specific behaviours and strategies found in the Representing Science on Stage classroom. Kolbclassifies learners along two basic dimensions of abstract-concrete and active-reflective learningto generate four general profiles: the converger, diverger, assilimator and
editorial alsoaimed to increase engagement with interdisciplinarity. In line with those objectives and trends,this paper discusses grounded theory development via metaphors, an approach that has not beenwidely engaged in engineering education, and highlights its challenges. In doing so, the paperalso raises larger questions about theory in engineering education research. The aims of thisarticle are threefold: 1) to demonstrate how new metaphors can contribute to grounded theorydevelopment, 2) to explain the significance of such approaches, and 3) to identify challenges ofintroducing grounded theories and new metaphors in engineering education research.This paper follows others who have reflected on their own research studies,9 and calls
held up as an exemplar demonstrating the difficulties inherent in assessingthe graduate attributes, particularly the ones that reflect the professional or workplace skills ofengineers. Some consider lifelong learning an outcome best measured a priori: in other words, itis cogitated as an aptitude that students will best epitomize once they are graduated and workingas professional engineers. However, the knowledge, skills, behaviours, attitudes and values thatengender lifelong learning are indeed present in our students, and one of the most effective waysto activate and observe this attribute is to engage students in discussions regarding theirexperiences and perceptions of their learning. This paper presents the findings from a
minority students interviewed “believedthat teachers perceive white and Asian students to be smart[er] and hence more likely to excel inCS classes. Such perception of the faculty prevented minority students from asking questions inclass or approaching the faculty for help.” (p. 131)Additionally, Redmond’s [8] case study – in which they re-structured Stanford’s computerscience department to become more inclusive – found that one of the largest impacts on a womanmaintaining interest in computer science is how early she took her introductory computingcoursework. Thus, if women and minorities are mandated to take these introductory coursesearlier in their undergraduate curriculum, retention rates would likely increase. This sentimentwas reflected
American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Focus on Social Learning in a First-Year Technical Writing Class: a Canadian Case-Study The University of British Columbia, CanadaAbstract: Incorporation of writing assignments into the first-year curriculum is a keyopportunity for engineering educators. The topics of sustainable consumption and design,environmental issues and global engineering were introduced into a first-year engineeringcommunication course in the Faculty of Applied Science at the University of British Columbia,Vancouver. This successful initiative was further expanded to include writing reflection papers,proposals and research reports on community service learning
of the Center for Educational Networks and Impacts at the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT). Her research interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, liberatory maker spaces, and a RED grant to increase pathways in ECE for the professional formation of engineers.Dr. David Gray, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Gray receieved his B.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Virginia Tech in 2000. He then earned a M.S. and a Ph.D. in Materials Science and Engineering from Virginia Tech in
be able to move beyond it in engineeringeducation. Here, the focus is on the circumstances that led to the emergence and prevalence of theterm in two different contexts: (1) the discourse community of speakers of English as representedin the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) and (2) the discourse community of engineeringeducation as reflected in papers published by the American Society for Engineering Education(ASEE) in the period 1996-2020. The combination of these two perspectives reveals that (1) theconversation on soft skills is by no means limited to engineering education; (2) interest in thetopic has increased dramatically since 1996; and (3) implementation of the EC2000 accreditationcriteria provided the impetus for the dramatic
Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Successes and challenges in supporting undergraduate peer educators to notice and respond to equity considerations within design teamsAbstractWe describe and analyze our efforts to support Learning Assistants (LAs)—undergraduate peereducators who simultaneously take a 3-credit pedagogy course—in fostering equitable teamdynamics and collaboration within a project-based engineering design course. Tonso andothers have shown that (a) inequities can “live” in mundane interactions such as those amongstudents within design teams and (b) those inequities both reflect and (re)produce broadercultural patterns and narratives (e.g. Wolfe & Powell, 2009; Tonso, 1996, 2006a, 2006b;McLoughlin, 2005). LAs could
passiveobserver or blaming circumstance doesn’t help one’s situation and that shying away fromchallenges (avoidant-performance orientation) won’t lead to growth. This section was alsointended for students to reflect and think critically about their current mindset and approach tolearning, and identify areas where they can improve. This section supports the notion that onecan change their mindset by highlighting scientific evidence from the fields of neuroplasticityand epigenetics. The inner engineering section relates closely to the ideas of mindfulness. It highlightedthe importance of closely monitoring one’s thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations throughmetacognitive monitoring. The researcher discussed how prevalent the mind wandering
educationresearch [13]. Figure 1 leverages this model to show how the engineering and labor theory ofchange fits into this study of engineering graduate students engaging in a strike. The modelconnects Mejia et al.’s critical consciousness model [17], which engages Freire’s principles ofcritical pedagogy [18], with Hassan’s model of learning-assessment interactions [19]. “Mejia etal.’s model is represented in the center of this model, showing relationships between theory,action, reflection, and concepts of scholarship, praxis, concientização, and liberation that resultfrom their overlap. Hassan’s model of learning-assessment interactions is overlaid, with theoverlap taking the form of reflection as an assessment method and action as a learning method”[13
in order to gain insight into the largerand multi-faceted culture in which these experiences take place5. This approach places value onthe subjectivity of the researcher, acknowledging the inherent bi-directional influences betweenthis individual and the culture they are studying. The autoethnography herein focuses on onestudent’s experiences of identity formation and reflection spurred by his involvement in aresearch project about engineers’ imaginaries of “the public.” These experiences are discussedin three journal entries and analyzed with the lens of identity formation described below.Through this research, the student was able to gain a deeper understanding of experiencesfoundational to his personal and professional identities as well
inequities they sought to address.Freire characterized this as “false generosity”—as charity offered that does not empower, butinstead fosters dependency. While such aid may help individuals, it also sustains inequities [10].Addressing inequality in engineering education means interrogating the origins of inequalities.Efforts to unravel those systems requires the knowledge of decolonization and engaging indecolonizing methodologies [11]. This is important to reflect on because when organizationsenter a community, they often act in colonizing ways and extend oppressive systemsmasquerading as aid. Decolonizing methodologies center community knowledge and needs andforeground the community’s own purposes.Such work is effortful and time consuming, but
the global community, and have become more prominent at this culturalmoment. In an effort to address the topics of social justice, equity, and inclusion manyuniversities and groups of faculty and students have focused on ways to educate STEM studentand faculty populations.There is a complex and continually developing body of literature discussing and reflecting onreform efforts both in engineering education and more broadly. This literature can simplisticallybe classified into three general types: (1) calls for action that explain and provide evidenceconcerning the needs for reforms [1], e.g. , [2]; (2) research describing the reform process e.g. ,[3], [4], and; (3) research examining why most reform efforts fail [5], [6].This third type of
engineeringexpertise as unique. A series of short essays encourage students to analyze engineering as aprofession and consider their own roles as citizen engineers with the power to intervene as non-experts in engineering activities that impact society.In this first iteration of the course, one of the authors served as a participant-observer andethnographer focused on student learning. The observer witnessed student engagement withcourse topics and with one another, and interviewed all the students in the class (n=5)individually. Using the observer’s analysis of his observation notes and interview responses, andusing the instructors’ analysis of student work and course feedback, we reflect on the outcomesof this first iteration of the course and consider
to create such opportunities, Dr. Zastavker’s re- cent work involves questions pertaining to students’ motivational attitudes and their learning journeys in a variety of educational environments. One of the founding faculty at Olin College, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from science to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creat- ing curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests, motivation, and desire to persist in
-analysis and reflection. Emig describes the simple act ofreading one’s own writing as a valuable learning moment in which “information from the pro-cess is immediately and visibly available as that portion of the product already written.” Review-ing a set of writings collected over time, then, creates an opportunity to extend the learning pro-cess. Both instructors and students benefit from the act of collecting artifacts because they repre-sent the changes and growth that accompany learning. When integrated in a purposeful way ap-propriate to a given discipline, WTL deepens student understanding, improves student engage-ment, increases retention, and makes students active participants in the learning process10,11.1.2 WTL and computational
Sky’s the Limit: Drones for Social Good courseincludes critical aspects that relate to multiple engineering disciplines, which allows students toidentify the connections between drones and their particular engineering concentration. Thecourse is also multi-disciplinary and encourages critical social reflection. Students consider abroad range of applications of drones with the goal of promoting social good. The courseculminates in an entrepreneurial project that incorporates knowledge and skills from severalengineering disciplines in the context of engineering for social good.Research has found that female, Black, and/or Latinx engineering students are drawn to pursuingcareers that they identify as promoting social justice and a greater social
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Reflecting on #EngineersShowUp: Outcomes and Lessons from Organizing a Campaign among Engineering EducatorsAbstractIn an open dialogue format, participants and organizers of #EngineersShowUp report on theorganizing work, actions, discourse, and reflections emerging from an NSF-funded week ofaction campaign that occurred from February 23rd - 29th, 2020. Participants helping to organizeand take part included students, faculty, administrators, postdoctoral researchers and othersconnected to the world of engineering education. The intention of this week of action (directlyfollowing E-Week) was three fold. First, we aimed to test approaches from social movementsand assess
mechanical,electrical, or industrial engineering degrees. Upon further explanation, the alumni clarified thatwhat they meant by this statement was that they did not use their disciplinary expertise. Theydid, however, emphasize the ways that the abilities they acquired in their engineering education-- namely technical problem solving, critical thinking, communication, and teamwork -- werewhat allowed them to succeed as engineers. To the surprise of our current students, the panelistsall agreed that one of the most useful classes they took was public speaking. Recognizing theneed for a broad curriculum that reflects the diversity of skills engineers require, including thosewithin the liberal arts, we have started a new major in General Engineering. In
structures and examine alternative ideologies.In the narrative I sketch of the lesson plan evolution, I draw on the lesson plans, notes takenduring class and pictures of board work, and reflections written after the class. Where students’ideas were similar in pattern across many semesters, I take the liberty of synthesizing them into asingle list. Where ideas changed markedly either due to some idiosyncrasy or in response to achange in the lesson plan, I note that. I start with a section on review of relevant constructsbefore launching into course context and lesson plan evolution.BackgroundIn this paper, I draw on two constructs to organize my narrative. One, responsive teaching,comes from research on teacher education. The second is two related