) experience is examined sharing critical aspects of content,assessment, and pedagogical differentiation. Features of the three-year experience includescaffolded and repetitive instances of engineering design practice for live performance withincremental leadership, formative “just-in-time” instruction, and the use of public critique.IntroductionPreparing high-quality and work-ready engineering graduates in support of societal needs is anessential goal for any school/college of engineering. In educational institutions where researchand the development of engineering research scholars is a priority, the “how” of engineeringeducation can become a source of great debate. The definition and debate of educationalpriorities (Duderstadt, 2007) and
Past President and Wise Woman of the Organization for the Study of Communication, Language, and Gender. She has received career achievement awards from ICA, NCA, the Central States Communication Association, and Purdue University where she was a Distinguished University Professor in communication and engineer- ing education (by courtesy) and Endowed Chair and Director of the Susan Bulkeley Butler Center for Leadership Excellence. Her primary research areas are organizational communication, career, work-life, resilience, feminist/gender, and design. Her grants have focused on ethics, institutional transformation, and diversity-equity-inclusion-belongingness in the professional formation of engineers.Dr. Sean M
; and 6) Socio-ecojustice. The work by Pedretti and Nazir provides a strongtheoretical framework that has significantly influenced this research study.The Application/Design Current focuses on solving problems through the design of newtechnology or the modification of existing technology, and is a strong fit for engineeringprograms, given the emphasis on engineering design in the undergraduate curriculum. ThisCurrent focuses on problem-solving skills, experiments, design-build activities and other creativeapproaches. A criticism of the Application/Design Current is that it suggests we assume thatthere is always a need for a technology; where some problems are not best addressed by atechnological fix. In engineering programs, students are
students from underrepresentedpopulations face in engineering learning spaces. Having these discussions during lecture or in thecontext of the course can also address the issue of stereotype threat [4] faced by certain culturalstudent groups, which is known to impact student success. Further, intentionally incorporatingthese exercises into the course design communicates to students a strong desire to create aninclusive learning environment. Walden et al. recommended based on research that for creatingan inclusive atmosphere for diversity and equity within engineering education, it is important tohave a positive academic culture for people from excluded identity groups [5]. Additionally,diversity, equity and inclusion within engineering education
. Notwithstanding,the current general education curriculum in Taiwan still lacks engineering and humanitiesintegrated courses specifically designed for the College of Engineering, such as coursesrelated to engineering practice and corresponding cross-cultural socio-political systems. As aresult, students’ learning experiences are like a hodgepodge, lacking effectiveinterdisciplinary learning. Only a few engineering ethics courses are offered by professorsfrom the School of Engineering and School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, but theyface human resource, professional, and teaching bottlenecks.Universities in Korea started offering engineering and humanities integrated courses as partof engineering curricula or liberal education around 2000. Like
this paper is to examine the impacts of different mindsets on the way educatorsapproach their teaching and research. Although the results from this four-person study are notgeneralizable to engineering or education faculty more broadly, gaining a better understanding ofthe problem-solving-relevant mindsets of these individuals can add greater detail andunderstanding to concepts explored in previously established literature.This paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we describe the background and literaturerelevant to our study. Next, we describe our methods for collecting and analyzing the interviewtranscript data. The Findings section describes the mindsets and themes we found in the databased on the analysis process. It is
an adjunct professor of Microbiology at a Hispanic-serving community college in Miami, Florida. As an educator, they utilized equitable teaching practices and encouraged student agency to ensure positive learning outcomes. Their doctoral research focuses on so- cial responsibility in science and engineering, with special emphasis placed on the importance of science communication and policy advocacy. They are also interested in the intersection of institutional culture and transformational change towards cultivating more inclusive and equitable access for underrepresented minority students in STEM fields. Outside of their research, they are the President of the Policy Advocacy in Science and Engineering (PASE
, andSociety Department (EDS) at the Colorado School of Mines. We discuss interventions that takeplace across the curriculum, including our first-year introduction to engineering design course,integrating design throughout an engineering curriculum via a design spine, and how we considerproblem framing as a core component of our ABET accreditation performance indicators. Ratherthan attempting to provide a series of “problem-framing best practices,” we seek instead topromote a deeper conversation on how engineering educators perceive and frame engineeringproblem solving, the assessment of student learning of sociotechnical integration, andengineering judgment post-graduation.BackgroundEDS offers a range of academic programs emphasizing design and
compromisedon innovative research outcomes of their unique ideas by setting up the parameters of physicalequipment in a way that allowed other lab members to collect data as well. Similar tensions were observed in work practices of lab B where asking for help orguidance did not necessarily translate into lab members perceiving their work as interdependentespecially in ways that would elicit certain expectations from each other. A graduate student whowas new in the lab commented on asking other people for help: "Because I am less experiencedin the code... I could go to my advisor or someone that worked with a similar code earlier... If Imentioned my problem, they could say, ‘I did do that earlier and I can help you with that.’" Butwhile discussing
competencies. ABET, the European Network forEngineering Education (ENAEE), and the Federation of Engineering Institutions in Asia and thePacific (FEIAP) highlight the need for engineers to recognize and account for the impacts ofengineering practice and design in broad contexts that impact human and environmentalconditions throughout their guidelines. ABET (2021) mandates that engineering graduates have“an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs withconsideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social,environmental, and economic factors,” and “an ability to recognize ethical and professionalresponsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must
individuals, whowere either organizers or participants, augmented with end-of-program feedback, we provide a rich description ofthe program's planning, activities, and impact. Specifically, our study draws from engineering education research,bridging the gap between research and practice to answer three research questions related to the program: (1) Howdid the program design enable a more effective understanding of interdisciplinary problem-sets? (2) How didparticipants experience the interdisciplinary work of the program? (3) Did the program affect participants' impact oninterdisciplinary problem-sets after the program? Our findings highlight the benefits of interdisciplinary, holistic,and hands-on approaches to AI education and provide insights for
early career engineers. In particular, risk awareness resulted fromperceptions of crisis triggers the needs of career resilience; internal and external resources ofsupport help boost resilience; and positive adaption signals the completion of resilience for earlycareer engineers. This study extends understandings of resilience for early career engineers inbroader cultural contexts. The paper also discusses implications of the research findings foruniversities to create a more congenial environment for the development of career resilience andsuccessful transition of engineering graduates to the workplace.Keywords: career resilience; early career engineers; career adaption1. IntroductionFor early career engineers, the transition from university
, just as a conflict ofinterest statement might be appended to disclose potential financial entanglements.Within the confines of a conference such as this one, enacting a new practice might look likecreating multiple tracks for diversity work — one that focuses on introductory materialsdesigned to educate potential allies and other interested parties and another for advanced workthat speaks to those people already thoroughly immersed in the subject matter. Beyond this, wemust also consider how different methods and methodologies might become more common inour work. A key theme was making sure that the people who will be impacted by the researchare present in planning and administration of research. As such, using a method like
aimed at promoting student narratives through audio-based methods.Dr. Cassandra McCall, Utah State University Cassandra McCall, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering Education Department and Co-Director of the Institute for Interdisciplinary Transition Services at Utah State University. Her research centers the intersection identity formation, engineering culture, and disability studies. Her work has received several awards including best paper awards from the Journal of Engineering Education and the Australasian Journal of Engineering Education. She holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech as well as M.S. and B.S. degrees in civil engineering from the South Dakota School of Mines and
ABETstudent outcomes via our program’s targeted performance indicators.IntroductionEngineering education has faced enduring criticism for being overly focused on the narrowlytechnical dimensions of engineering practice, ill preparing engineering graduates for their futurework. “Sociotechnical” approaches to engineering education have arisen as one category ofresponses to this perceived narrowness. Advocates claim sociotechnical approaches: providestudents a more robust framework for engaging professional engineering practice, enhancelearning through increased engagement, and result in more satisfying overall educationalexperiences. Faculty members in the Department of Engineering, Design & Society at theColorado School of Mines have been leaders
). For Gee,discourse becomes a kind of tool to fashion a social identity. Like Fairclough’s account, it is bothlanguage used and social practice, but the focus is less on the interplay of discourse andindividual on a macro scale and more on individuals themselves. It shifts from a sociologicalaccount to a psychological one [10]. Thus, we see resonance with this theoretical understandingof discourse and our methodological approach, wherein we seek to understand how engineeringstudents use text (in the form of EDMAIC assignments) to position themselves as not simplyengineers but empathetic individuals as well.Empathy. Empathy is an important ability and skill, especially with the continued emphasis onhuman-centered design and social justice
Engineering, Design, and Society. She holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering and international studies from Rose- Hulman Institute of Technology, and an M.S. and PhD in STS from Virginia Tech. She conducts research on engineering practice and pedagogy around the world, exploring its origins, purposes, and potential futures. Marie’s interest in values and engagement in professional cultures also extends to innovation and its experts. With Matthew Wisnioski and Eric Hintz, Marie co-edited Does America Need More Innovators? (MIT Press, 2019).Emily York, James Madison University I am an Assistant Professor in the School of Integrated Sciences at James Madison University (JMU). Drawing on the fields of Science and
University of Maryland. She has expertise in physics education research and engineering education research. Her work involves designing and researching contexts for learning (for students, educators, and faculty) within higher education. Her research draws from perspectives in anthropology, cultural psychology, and the learning sciences to focus on the role of culture and ideology in science learning and educational change. Her research interests include how to: (a) disrupt problematic cultural narratives in STEM (e.g. brilliance narratives, meritocracy, and individualistic competition); (b) cultivate equity-minded approaches in ed- ucational spheres, where educators take responsibility for racialized inequities in
and non-technical dimensions of engineering and transformingengineering education so that it more effectively prepares graduates for workplace success.Previous research suggested that interest in “Engineering and …” permeates ASEE and isconcentrated in but not limited to the division most closely associated with the topic. This paperdescribes a transferable method that combines quantitative and qualitative methods to identifyareas of convergence using papers published in the Leadership Development (LEAD) and theEngineering Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ENT) as evidence. These areas of convergenceare: (1) program design and effectiveness, (2) individual capabilities (including traits andthinking tools), (3) teams and groups, and (4
, EA runs directly against most cases for “Engineering as an altruistic STEM career” [1].EA doesn’t pose a higher good of civic involvement or service against the temptation tomaximize elevated personal earnings. Most surprisingly, EA advocates often treat empathy, acentral focus of much current engineering education research, as a mere shortcoming in decision-making, misdirecting altruistic impulses to causes that are emotionally engaging but logicallysubordinate to causes with more proven need or measurable benefit to be discovered by “runningthe numbers.” This paper looks at the prominence of effective altruism among STEMprofessionals, considers its tensions with practices in empathic and socially engaged engineeringeducation, and treats
prototyping[7].We, on the other hand, redesigned the course to focus on what engineering faculty identified asrelevant aspects of writing in the field of engineering: problem statements, research and literaturereviews, project proposals, progress reports, and scientific poster design, with additional focus onintegrating UX design and data visualization in the students’ projects. The cross-disciplinarity inour team is key to our methodology as it has enriched the impact of student learning in theENGL 210 course. Indeed, for our reorganization to be successful, we needed three components:knowledge of best writing practices, knowledge of the engineering discipline, and effectivecourse/curricular planning.Our first meeting in summer 2021 was a challenge
teaches advanced undergraduate laboratory courses and manages the senior capstone program in the Micron School. He ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Building a Communication-Integrated Curriculum in Materials ScienceAbstractWith the need to meet ABET outcomes around professional skills, such as communication andteamwork, engineering programs have long explored approaches to ensure their graduates areable to participate in the workplace in ways that employers demand. While approaches vary andsuccess depends on a number of factors, research demonstrates that an integrated approach toprofessional skill development is the most impactful for student learning. How can anengineering program build an
Paper ID #42737Navigating Epistemological Borders: Considerations for Team Teaching atthe Intersection of Humanities and STEMXueni Fan, Texas Tech University Xueni Fan is currently a graduate student in the Doctor of Education program, specializing in instructional technology at Texas Tech University. Holding a Master’s degree in applied linguistics, Fan’s research focuses on qualitative research methods, interdisciplinary studies, online learner engagement, and interprofessional education in the medical field.Dr. Joshua M. Cruz, Texas Tech University Joshua Cruz is an assistant professor of education at Texas Tech
conclusions [12]. While natural processes act without political/social intent, people practice science within a social context that is immersed in cultures infused with political and social power differentials. The questions asked, priorities assigned, interpretation of data, and presentation of results are all deeply subjective. Conversely, SE respects and values varied ways of knowing and, therefore, the sharing of power over what and how engineers should research, design, and implement. ● Meritocratic: Meritocracy is the false assumption that the system as it currently exists is fair and just. The meritocratic narrative purports that equal reward is always provided by the system for equal effort within it and that the
oftechnical skills immediately transferrable to the workplace [9], [10], [11], [12].Current engineering education research on identity and sense of belonging has identified severalengineering mindsets such as technical narrowness, meritocracy, the perceived “value neutrality”of engineering practice, and the profession’s pervasive identification with corporate-militaryvalues which can directly and indirectly perpetuate inequities for engineering undergraduates [1],[2]. The razor-sharp emphasis on technical education at the cost of developing human-centeredengineers and the insistence that engineering is a value-neutral practice leads to what is known asthe socio-technical divide. The danger of this divide is that it reinforces deeply embeddedcultural
are positive outcomes of critical reflection, they do not on their own predict interventionand transformative critical action. Themes of resilience and perseverance are highlyindividualized and not necessarily correlated with liberatory action—they could even reflectstudent acceptance of and assimilation into the status quo.A stronger reflection of critical consciousness may be the way students describe the professionalwork they will do as being focused on making “impactful change,” “designing for everyone”(noting that this is distinct from historical practice), and increasing the inclusivity andaccessibility of engineering processes and products. These comments indicate that students feelinclined toward action as a result of the
is often described as “horrific” and “living hell” (Godfrey & Parker, 2010, p.12). Mental health impacts of such a culture merit further study.The limited research on mental health completed specifically in engineering education used quantitativemethods (Cross & Jensen, 2018; Danowitz & Beddoes, 2020; Jensen & Cross, 2020) and shows thatengineering students experience higher rates of mental health issues like panic disorders, PTSD, anxiety,and depression compared to students in other majors regardless of identity. However, rates of mentalhealth disorders climb substantially for both white women and women of color, but also for bisexualwomen, who have panic disorder at eleven times the national average (Danowitz & Beddoes
, graduating in May 2023 and a Graduate Research Assistant in the Center for Engineering Education at the University of Texas at Austin. Their research revolves around investigating how LGBTQ+ students resist the hos- tile culture of engineering and, more broadly, STEM. They mentor a group of LGBTQ+ undergraduate engineers and investigate the collective resistance by LGBTQ+ students through student driven organiza- tions with them. They are especially interested in rethinking ways in which DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) can be approached to be more inclusive and effective. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Modeled Professionalism, Identity Concealment, and Silence: The Role
stronger advising practices: How Black males’ experiences at HPWIs advance a more caring and wholeness-promoting framework for graduate advising. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 123(10), 31-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681211059018Burt, B. A., Williams, K. L., & Palmer, G. J. M. (2019). It Takes a Village: The Role of Emic and Etic Adaptive Strengths in the Persistence of Black Men in Engineering Graduate Programs. American Educational Research Journal, 56(1), 39-74. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218789595Burt, B. A., Williams, K. L., & Smith, W. A. (2018). Into the Storm: Ecological and Sociological Impediments to Black Males’ Persistence in Engineering
advance our efforts in sociotechnical integration with a form ofunderstanding and practice that best aligns with category 4 of the framework provided by Smithet al: with social and technical dimensions of a given phenomenon not only mutually shaped, butfully mutually constituted. What we came up with was a surprisingly discrete model of facultyprofessional development for our department, whose faculty identifies primarily as scholars in a)engineering and design education or b) the social sciences. This model extends from the team-teaching efforts described above but goes further to require instructional teams to define“integrated lessons” building upon each of their mutual disciplinary instructional traditions.Our proposed instructional