Paper ID #26697Tensions in Applying a Design-Thinking Approach to Address Barriers to In-creasing Diversity and Inclusion in a Large, Legacy Engineering ProgramSean Eddington, Purdue University, West Lafayette Sean Eddington (Ph.D., Purdue University) will be an assistant professor of Communication Studies at Kansas State University beginning Fall 2019. Sean’s primary research interests exist at the intersec- tions of organizational communication, new media, gender, and organizing. Within engineering contexts, Sean has examined career issues within the engineering discipline regarding (1) new faculty experiences
Mindstorms shouldnot be surprising, given its popularity among engineering educators and teachers. As Eguchi [1]explains, the kit has been around in one iteration or another for two decades, allowing it time tobecome one of the most marketed and accessible tools for educational robotics. Despite itspopularity, there has been little empirical work on Mindstorms as a cultural artifact. Given itspopularity, what is the cultural significance of Mindstorms in education? And, how does thisshape its meanings and uses in the classroom?To give partial answers to these questions, this paper uses ethnographic data from three NewYork State public elementary schools to analyze the technocultural forms and uses ofMindstorms. The concept of technoculture is meant
, Pacific Islanders) in STEM fields and the STEM workforce [1]. STEM ispredominantly white, with more than 50% enrollment in post-secondary institutions conferringundergraduate and graduate degrees as of 2014 compared other an ethnic and racial groupcombined [1][2][3]. Lower representation can be contributed to numerous factors, including alack of institutional commitment, a lack of representation throughout students’ upbringing,inappropriate cultural recruitment/outreach efforts, educational discrepancies throughout PK-12,and social expectations among others [4]. In addition, it is observed that females pursue STEM ata lower rate than males, especially females of color, and it is disproportionate in engineeringfields [1]. For the United States to
addition to thestudents in the program, family members were invited to participate in the activities so that itbecame more of a family affair than simply a student-only program. Twelve students participatedin the program that was remotely delivered over a period of two months. A pre-program survey ofthe participants was performed before the start of the program and a post-program survey wasconducted after the program. Additional details of the program, the surveys, and the measuredlearning outcomes will be presented in this paper along with plans for program expansion.IntroductionPhiladelphia has the highest poverty rate among the largest 10 cities in the country[1]. Reflectiveof the high poverty rate, Philadelphia residents are more likely than
community, (iii) to promote STEM to under-served communities close to SCU. In additionto the ELSJ learning objectives, this course was designed with the hope that students would also:• Develop educational materials and hands-on STEM activities as a service to the community• Develop project/time management, organizational, and leadership skills.• Develop effective listening/collaboration skills while working with community partners.• Recognize and understand ethical responsibilities of engineers.In the lecture component of the class, students are introduced to concepts that can help themwhen performing their outreach. Specifically, there is a nine-lecture sequence where thefollowing material is discussed:Lecture 1: Introductions, Course
engineering communication and integration of process safety into a unit operations course.Melanie E. Miller, University of Kentucky Melanie Miller, M.S., (She/her/hers) is a Counseling Psychology Ph.D. student at the University of Ken- tucky. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 1 Understanding the Relationship Between Mental Health Concerns and Help-Seeking Attitudes and Behaviors Among Engineering StudentsBackgroundCollege can be a stressful time in a person’s life. For many students, their college years
Downy calls “scalable scholarship”—projects in support of marginalized epistemologiesthat can be scaled up from ideation to practice in ways that unsettle and displace the dominantepistemological paradigm of engineering education.[1]This paper is a work in progress. It marks the beginning of a much lengthier project thatdocuments the key positionality of engineering educators for change, and how they are sociallysituated in places where they can connect social movements with industrial transitions, andparticipate in the production of “undone sciences” that address “a structured absence thatemerges from relations of inequality.”[2] In this paper, we offer a brief glimpse into ethnographicdata we collected virtually through interviews
they need to communicate theirmeaning-making and its value to others? The purpose of this paper is to describe a newlyrequired course, The Art of Telling Your Story, for undergraduates in biomedical engineering atone highly selective STEM-focused university. In this course, students develop and sharepowerful stories of events that transformed them in some meaningful way. The course instructorand students engage in joint dialogues around these stories that build self-concept and that helpthem to see themselves as being entrepreneurially minded. Preliminary findings suggest thatstudents: 1) thoroughly enjoy the course, but more importantly, 2) explore their unique identities,and 3) improve their self-concept clarity. In this paper, we describe
education.IntroductionTechnologies are the means by which the ends of domination are achieved. Engineers have beenmajor players in the enactment of violence in the name of imperialist, nationalist, and capitalistcauses by designing technologies that have enabled, for instance, mass incarceration in the UnitedStates and ethnic cleansing by genocide in Nazi Germany. The importance of technologicaladvances to systems of oppression and domination make engineers uniquely vulnerable to – evenunwittingly – supporting such systems.Technologies are often developed or deployed with political ends – are artifacts of and withpolitics, as Langdon Winner [1] established – and context matters. Scientists and engineers inSpain’s Francoist regime might rather be seen as pawns, forced by
, and culturallandscapes which shape and direct the problems and solutions generated by engineers. It is welldocumented that the practice of engineering requires heterogeneous interactions involving bothpeople and things - humans and technologies - yet often the focus of schooling remains on theinanimate equipment rather than the messy people [1]–[3]. Moreover, engineering courses whichinclude a focus on human interactions like communication and teamwork are undercut by theinaccurate and demeaning labeling of these as “soft” rather than “hard” skills to learn.This false divide between hard and soft, between the technical and social, is increasinglyoutdated and ineffective in preparing engineers to understand and address the
students. Secondarily, the empirical results suggest subtle shifts in thediscourse about what engineering is and, thus recognition of values that might underpin culturesof responsible innovation.Keywords: Content Analysis, Engineering Education, Engineering EthicsIntroduction Engineers are often taught that ethics means the adherence to codes of conduct, whichoffer guidance for handling difficult situations as professionals. On the other hand, someengineers learn about the principles of Responsible Conduct of Research and the rules thatdetermine good behavior [1]. Both of these approaches ask for engineers to learn, accept andconform to the values instantiated by external organizations. Those approaches are intended tosupport an
strong liberal artstradition. In this first year WFU Engineering course, students are introduced to the study andpractice of engineering with an emphasis on the human-centered design process. Within thiscourse, a semester-long module called “What is Engineering?” showcases (1) the intersection ofhistory and engineering to emphasize global and societal contexts, (2) foundational knowledge tosupport the development of one’s engineer identity (with historical contexts and engineerexemplars), and (3) the importance of courage as a virtue that is foundational to the practice ofengineering. Within this module, which has been under development the past four years,engineering, history, philosophy, and professional identity come to life. Engaging
Can a Body Do? How We Meet the Built World, the artist, design researcher, and OlinCollege professor Sara Hendren writes, “Engineering is not the science of the laboratory alone…It is fundamentally applied, which means its results live in the world. It belongs to people, notjust as ‘users’ but as protagonists of their dimensional lives” [1, p. 23]. Hendren’s invocation of avision of engineering as radically human-centered provided the philosophical and humanisticcore to our interdisciplinary teaching team as we embarked on designing a new course forfirst-year students at Boston College (BC). Our course, Making the Modern World: Design,Ethics, and Engineering (MMW), situated engineering practice and knowledge within its social,political, and
engineering cultureduring a time of crisis to examine possibilities for cultural change from a new lens. To that end,this study investigates three U.S. mechanical engineering student’s perspective on theirdepartment’s response to COVID-19 in order to understand the extent to which variousdimensions of engineering culture [1] impacted the response. This study aims to understand howstudents’ reported experiences map onto the dimensions of engineering culture as well as toassess the fit of the theoretical framework and inform codebook development for a largerresearch study.IntroductionIncreasing diversity in engineering has been a major focus in the U.S. for decades. Significantresources have been invested in improving diversity in engineering, but the
diverse promotion patterns as the product of individuals’ idiosyncratic interests,values, goals and competencies, leaving ourselves open to meritocratic explanations of career mobility. Incontrast, when we account for systemic inequities in organizations and society by critically examiningengineers’ careers in the aggregate, it is possible to gain insights into the “hidden curriculum”1 ofprofessional advancement. In this paper, we take the latter approach, adopting a critical secondaryanalysis of data originally collected for a project on situated workplace learning. The key contribution ofour analysis is to reframe the personal choice narrative of career advancement with a structuralexplanation of career stratification based on Jeannie Oakes
-related design processes and factors.Keywords: Engineering Education, Civil Engineering Design, Human-Centred Designing,Priming, Empathy, Social Consciousness, Personal Values, Engineering ValuesIntroductionMany have discussed the technocentric engineering curricula [1] – [5], that tend tomarginalise [3] and devalue [6],[7], the less technical and more ‘socially-involved’ aspects ofengineering, and have thus stood with Cech’s [2] call for the integration of public welfareconcern and social consciousness in engineering curricula.An aligning call/prompt for the integration of empathic [8] – [10], compassionate [11],‘socially-just’ [12],[13], and/or human-centred designing [14] – [18] in engineering curriculahave also risen. This is reflected in
, particularlyrelated to how they conceptualize engineers’ responsibilities to stakeholders [1]-[5] however, there has beenlimited (if any) discussion of engineering faculty’ experience of teaching CSR to students. Although CSRhas been identified as an important part of the undergraduate and graduate curriculums for the Mining,Petroleum and Geological Engineering Departments by both industry and professors, there seems to be adifference between student identification of CSR content and importance between the departments thatcould indicate a difference in teaching styles and possible effectiveness. Examining student and facultyperceptions of CSR is crucial, because discrepancies can exist between what faculty believe they areteaching and what students actually
assimilationist implications. Theauthor is particularly concerned by how such initiatives position themselves to universalize howcomputing should be taught and performed, echoing the legacies of educational institutions thatenforced cultural and epistemic hegemony upon marginalized students [1]. These nationalcomputing education initiatives are primed to magnify problematic notions of equity withinefforts to broaden participation, if not computing more generally. Because a thorough review ofwell-intentioned yet inequitable computer science equity initiatives is outside the scope of thispaper, this review will highlight three salient critiques.First, discourse in broadening participation tends to frame underrepresented studentsexploitatively. A common
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
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
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
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