effects of differing design pedagogies on retention and motivation, the dynamics of cross-disciplinary collaboration in both academic and industry design environments, and gender and identity in engineering.Dr. Rachel Riedner, George Washington University Rachel Riedner is Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Professor of Writing and of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at the George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Engineering judgment and decision making in undergraduate student writingAbstractThe exploration of engineering judgment in undergraduate education should be grounded at
technical writing program aregraduating, which suggests it is time to formally evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Thispaper focuses on the assessment tools built into the program to provide immediate feedback tostudents. A follow-up paper will capture the longitudinal study that measures writingimprovement in ME students.ResearchProcess approach to writing – In response to feedback from employers and alumni themselves,many technical and business writing programs have adopted a process approach to writingbelieving incremental drafting is best suited to produce high-quality, usable documents for theworkplace. A typical approach might include drafting, peer reviews, instructor feedback via aconference, a visit to the college writing center
communication.Specifically, we conducted a title search for “communication or writing or speaking orpresentations” and then examined the papers individually to determine whether they serve one ormore of four functions: (1) develop or assess the communication abilities of engineering students, (2) assess student attitudes and experiences in communication courses, (3) analyze pedagogical strategies or curriculum design processes for teaching engineering students to communicate, or (4) provide fundamental understanding of engineering writing and speaking. The search function in PEER makes it possible to identify trends across the divisions ofASEE and over time, but this function is far from perfect. A strategy like the title search
. Provide at least one change that the team could make to improve its performance moving forward. Free Write 6 10/29/20 Please submit a 5-minute free write entry in your journal. Set up a 5-minute timer on your phone/computer and write freely for the allotted time. Use the time to reflect on what you’re learning (and/or frustrated by) in this class, or other classes. Suggested Prompt: How do you feel that the Lerman Technique is working out for us? Free Write 7 11/12/20 How has participating in the in-class peer critique process
practice-based knowledge and writing knowledge andemphasized the importance of visualization tools in learning certain concepts.An Engineering Way of DoingAn engineering way of doing appeared most frequently across the interviews, and three relatedcodes emerged: being a student; hardness, rigor, and quality; and how classes should be taught.First, being a student captures participants’ beliefs about how engineering students should act,including approaches to classes, as well as reflections about their experiences being anengineering student during the pandemic. Each participant reflected on their approach to classesduring the pandemic. For example, participant 1001M described his work style as “get ahead,stay ahead” and did not feel his peers were
to think about experiences they had working in teams in othersituations and contexts. With these experiences in mind, students were asked to individuallybrainstorm attributes of an ideal team member by writing down as many attributes as they could,with each attribute written on a separate sticky note. The brainstorming session lastedapproximately five minutes. Reflection Brainstorm Introduce the Map attributes to Identify Identify attributes Share identifiedattributes of an definition of three elements of top 15 self and peers attributes with ideal team teamwork as a virtuous teamwork
them what events should be remembered, how theyshould be remembered, and why they should be remembered [14]. Parents instill in theirchildren habits and methods for remembering that help propagate important aspects of theirculture. Indeed, the “I” often internalizes values and beliefs from important others, including notonly parents but also friends and mentors [15], [18]. As Thorne puts it, “families and friendscollude in self-making” [16], [10].Life stories can also be influenced by more intentional interventions. Studies have shown thatpeople who write their life stories can experience an increase in self‐esteem [17], improvedmental health and well-being [18], [19], and a greater sense of agency and control over their lives[20]. For example
one of the six ethical frameworksthey had been peer-taught in class OR an engineering professional organization’s code of ethicsinto their papers and presentations (or both). They also had the option to use other ethicsresources in addition to the aforementioned requirements. Students were not required toincorporate the same ethical frameworks for the end-of-semester writing assignment andpresentation that they had taught to the class for the first presentation—in fact, such arequirement would have been difficult since the teams had been scrambled and reassigned for thesecond half of the semester. Thus, the team members were all “specialists” in differentframeworks, necessitating team discussions and decisions about which codes and/or
technique that uses art to foster visual literacythrough facilitated group discussion, has been shown to promote the development of skills thattransfer to other domains. In this paper, we report findings from our use of VTS in anexperimental graduate course in environmental engineering that aims to foster students’capacities for reflection. Using data from writing samples with methods of thematic analysis, weexplore students’ perceptions of their own learning from the VTS portion of this semester-longcourse called Developing Reflective Engineers through Artful Methods. One significant themeidentified was “Knowledge/Skills”, in which students identified specific knowledge gained orskills developed through their VTS experience, including skills of
full of variety with the salient point being a passion for teaching and helping all individuals overcome common communication challenges.Mr. Michael Alley, Pennsylvania State University Michael Alley is a professor of teaching for engineering communications at Pennsylvania State Univer- sity. He is the author of The Craft of Scientific Writing (Springer, 2018) and The Craft of Scientific Presentations (Springer-Verlag, 2013). He is also founder of the popular websites Writing as an Engineer or Scientist (www.craftofscientificwriting.com) and the Assertion-Evidence Approach (www.assertion- evidence.com).Lori B. Miraldi, Pennsylvania State University Director of the Engineering Ambassadors Program College of
-student partnershipsembolden students to read and write (both code and written word) with computer science,science and technology studies, and anti-racist feminist studies. Ultimately, the author outlinesthe importance for computing education researchers and practitioners to draw upon the field’sinterdisciplinarity to center justice within computing education research.2. Literature ReviewCritiques of how computer science educators have approached equity are especially relevantbecause of the national scale, funding, and deployment of computer science education initiatives.Although national initiatives (e.g., CSforAll) orient their missions around the language of equity,access, and (under)representation, these initiatives tend to have
highlighted? 2) How is HC employed as a tool for theory building and/or data analysis and interpretation, and what issues in engineering education, and specifically engineering ethics education, have been addressed using the lens of HC? and 3) What gaps can we identify in the literature on HC—again, specifically those related to ethics education—and what opportunities do these present for future research on HC and engineering ethics education?After describing our methods, we present our analysis of publications that engage with HC fromthe ASEE PEER database. We then discuss the implications of our findings, highlighting howHC may be unavoidable but could be productively repurposed in more holistic curriculumreform that
provide a personalized “real-world” experience of policy/diplomacy, thestudents are invited to participate in an optional fellowship application process.Individually students propose a list of three potential fellowships to their classmates.From the comprehensive brainstormed list, each student selects a single topic andpresents a Pechu Kucha describing “why” they are qualified for this opportunity andshould be selected for a fellowship. Then students begin the process of completing a draftversion of an application. The draft paper is graded by a peer, and returned to the studentto use as part of the final submission for a fellowship. Because some fellowshipopportunities fall outside of the cycle of the class meeting, the instructor allows some
national exemplar in teaching engineering ethics. Her book Extracting Accountability: Engineers and Corporate Social Responsibility will be published by The MIT Press in 2021. She is also the co-editor of Energy and Ethics? (Wiley-Blackwell, 2019) and the author of Mining Coal and Undermining Gender: Rhythms of Work and Family in the American West (Rutgers University Press, 2014). She regularly pub- lishes in peer-reviewed journals in anthropology, science and technology studies, engineering studies, and engineering education. Her research has been funded by the National Science Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the British Academy.Dr. Juan C. Lucena, Colorado School of Mines Juan Lucena is
dualism, and the meritocracy ideology (for further details on theseideologies read: [13], [14]). Cech found that the need to meet accreditation requirements and be considered,“legitimate purveyors of knowledge” [10, p. 64] can put pressure on even the most ethically andpedagogically innovative of schools to fall into the same culture of disengagement. The study found thatwhile all four of the engineering programs studied showed a decrease in the perceived importance of publicwelfare amongst students as they progressed through their time in school, programs perceived by studentsas focusing on ethical and social issues, with a general education and writing skills emphasis, and a focuson policy implications overall found ethical responsibilities
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
] writes, “In the Nazi regimethe technology served both the purposes of the state and the ethical values of the technologicalprofessionals.” This brings Katz to the question, “how does an engineer know that the values[they] embod[y] through [their] technological products are good values that will lead to a betterworld?”The contemporary use of technologies such as facial recognition and predictive algorithms in thecontext of law enforcement and incarceration make Katz’s question both relevant and urgent.Software such as the predictive policing tool PredPol reinforces biases within U.S. lawenforcement [5]; as one study noted, “PredPol is a tool for that aids law enforcement as itcurrently exists, and around the country, law enforcement targets
engineering identities“must negotiate the roles they play within the community of engineering as a discipline, ingroups with their peers, and within the classroom.” Tonso [25] describes identity development as“a complicated process through which campus engineer identities (cultural knowledge learned oncampus) provided a lens of meaning through which to “recognize” (or not) performances ofengineer selves as engineers.” Particularly for women and students of color, engineering identitycan be very malleable and susceptible to change, with persistence and career plans able to be“strongly swayed” by even small interactions or experiences as undergraduates [29].Institutions themselves foster engineering identity development through displays of solidarity
policies, indicating that individuals create behaviorpatterns or have consistent justifications and logic. The most significant types of pressures toviolate workplace policies included peer behavior, wanting to seem better that they are, andsomeone telling them to do it. On the opposite side, conditions that caused them to hesitate toviolate workplace policies included negative consequences, fear of getting caught, and it wouldrequire more work or money later.Incidents of less-than-exemplary behaviors of engineers may lead us to question the adequacy ofthe educational preparation of engineers during college. A majority of engineering facultybelieved that the ethics and/or societal impacts education of undergraduate and graduate studentsin their
isbased on one such bank of questions pertaining to ABET, including an effort to capture thesubject’s attitude towards accreditation, general accreditation practices at their institution, andtheir opinion on known issues such as PEV training and consistency. We are preparing a separatearticle, slated for a peer-reviewed journal, which reports more directly on the issue of howacademic institutions and their programs responded to EC 2000, and a more robust account ofhow assessment and accreditation are practiced at engineering schools today. We note that eachinterviewer was given full discretion regarding how to direct their questions and where to focustheir interviews. We deemed 200 of our 277 interviews to have substantial content related toABET
alumni more likely to be employed full time in non-engineeringareas than white alumni. Gender differences were minimal in the first ten years aftergraduation, but became pronounced after ten years at which point salaries were 25%higher for men than for women with similar experience. Men were also 25% more likely,at the ten-year mark, to be promoted to senior managerial roles than their female peers.Finally, white men expressed the highest levels of job satisfaction and Black and femalegraduates leaned more toward pursuing graduate education than their peers. Morerecently, Sheri Sheppard’s large-scale school to work transition surveys have put careerpath analysis on the engineering education research map.11 Briefly, Sheppard and herteam used two
transition totheir careers. Students setting out for college campuses, getting out of the comfort of the familyfor the first time in life is itself a giant leap in their maturing. Then the experiential learningcoming from open discussions, making deep, meaningful connections, and dispute managementin classes and dorms all significantly contribute to shaping them as responsible future citizens.Students learn not only from the faculty but from their peers. They learn about themselves, theiridentities, their interest, their character, school pride, conflict resolution, emotional intelligence,and a whole host of things. However, even with all its benefits, this residential experience is notaccessible to all groups of students due to its high price tag
Science.Dr. Jon A. Leydens, Colorado School of Mines Jon A. Leydens is Professor of Engineering Education Research in the Division of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences at the Colorado School of Mines, USA. Dr. Leydens’ research and teaching interests are in engineering education, communication, and social justice. Dr. Leydens is author or co-author of 40 peer-reviewed papers, co-author of Engineering and Sustainable Community Development (Morgan and Claypool, 2010), and editor of Sociotechnical Communication in Engineering (Routledge, 2014). In 2016, Dr. Leydens won the Exemplar in Engineering Ethics Education Award from the National Academy of Engineering, along with CSM colleagues Juan C. Lucena and Kathryn Johnson