communication skills via dialog with peers and facilitators (giving and receiving feedback, active listening, collaborative learning). • Practice compassionate behaviors towards oneself and others. • Develop and evaluate a plan for maintaining a balance of both reflection and action for future advocacy efforts.Guiding FrameworkThe course is built from a guiding framework for effective and enduring advocacy, which we havedefined as the work we do to transform our world’s systems and cultures in ways that we believewill make life, love, and liberation more possible. Inspiration for the framework comes from ourown experiences, current leaders [9], and past advocates for social change through education[10, 11]. The four steps that make up
two and how that impacts how they think ofthemselves and their learning. The narratives presented in this paper were collected as part of a weeklyone-hour reflection seminar that all students in the program are required to enroll in each semester. One ofthe goals of the course is to give students the opportunity to think about the connections between theirliberal arts courses and the general liberal arts university experiences, with what they are learning in theirengineering specific courses and experiences. In an attempt to create a student-centered body ofknowledge that initiates the dissolution of the techno-social dualism prevalent in engineering education,we present here student narratives and a discussion based on these narratives to
liberatory pedagogy in bell hooks’ Teaching to Transgress. Ibegin by summarizing some key ideas from the book and subsequent calls for more liberatorypedagogies in engineering education. Next, I provide some context for my specific course as wellas my positionality. I discuss the course redesign along four themes: creating a community oflearning, transgressing against objectivity and apoliticism in engineering, promoting legitimacyand intellectual authority, and centering critical reflection. Finally, I conclude by reflecting onmy successes and challenges, and providing some lessons learned about “teaching to transgress”in an engineering technology and society course that I hope will be useful to instructors ofsimilar courses.BackgroundTeaching to
ofdesigning and building technologies. However, they do this within the context of unique placesand among distinct milieu that reflects its own engineering culture [8]. Thus, engineering cultureand the development of engineering identity is inextricably tied to the places that reproduce itand contains within it specific organizational patterns, embedded norms and routines, sharedbeliefs, and values that often mediate how students engage with faculty, staff, and one another.In short, culture cannot be decoupled from the place in which it is experienced and imparted.Extant research delineates visible manifestations of culture as “ways of doing things” within theclassroom and laboratory spaces—which often prioritizes the teaching and development
, gender and sexuality studies(WGSS) or ethnic studies empowers minoritized engineering students to develop criticalconsciousness relative to the culture of engineering. Our work investigates the influence of twosuch courses on student attitudes and motivation by gathering both qualitative and quantitativedata from students in two STEM-themed courses in WGSS and ethnic studies, “Gender andSTEM” and “Race and Technology.” We argue that in these courses students acquire skills thatenable them to critically reflect on both the socially constructed nature of STEM and on thehistorical patterns within engineering culture that exacerbate existing inequities and injusticedespite claims of “neutral” objectivity. In preliminary data, students report that
silenced and highlighted inthe process of shaping hybrid pedagogies and engineering by reflecting on and assessing thenature of “hybridity,” “innovation,” and “design” in engineering education. Introduction During the late 2000s, the South Korean government identified the need to prioritizescience and technology policy in the university sector, specifically in the area of informationand communication technologies, with the aim of developing global leaders. A concerningissue of a "crisis in science and engineering fields" was identified, whereby many youngstudents were disinclined to pursue science and technology careers. In response, thegovernment initiated an effort to attract talented young
does engineering? Who is engineering done for? Asengineering is increasingly associated with cutting edge technology and innovative advances incomplex and/or large scale systems, these are questions that merit reflection. These trends tend todisproportionately benefit those in wealthy sectors of society. Simultaneously, those with theleast economic wealth are often negatively impacted. But, engineering doesn’t have to continuealong this path. It is instructive to reflect on the fact that engineering encompasses technologiesand designs that have served much of the human population for ages. Engineering to meet basichuman needs, such as working with the natural world toward sustainable food gatheringpractices, building homes and infrastructure
program is actively involving business andindustry experts in the development of their curricular activities. Yet, while faculty andadministrators argue that the new curriculum has immense value for advancing undergraduateeducation, they simultaneously worry that such collaborations will circumspect thetransdisciplinary goals of their curriculum. As one academic stakeholder reflected, the degreeprogram has the potential to transform how the university thinks about individual learning plansfor undergraduates that exist outside of traditional disciplinary frameworks, but it also “shouldn’tbecome a pipeline for business and industry.”Alongside this tension—and partly in response to it—the authors of this paper were hired toconduct an external
particular, thearchetypal figure of Victor Frankenstein offers students a model of a negative “possible self” thatcautions against rogue engineering practices. The paper analyzes themes from Shelley’s novel asthey were used in courses in science, technology, and society (STS) to foster ethical reflection onthe perils of practicing irresponsible, presumptuous, unaccountable, and biased techno-science.IntroductionMary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is widely regarded as a foundational work of early sciencefiction that cautions against misguided and unethical science and engineering. As such, the novelshould be poised to help engineering undergraduates cultivate moral imagination and acommitment to socially responsible techno-science. Along this line, a
Jamboard 3:00 Policy, Research, Practice RoomsDAY 3:00 – Facilitated conversation: Building on the Breakouts, Stacey Large-group Chat/ONE 3:30 Sexton Shareout Jamboard 3:30 – Break 3:45 3:45 – Doing equity work in a politically charged environment: Facilitated Chat 4:45 Dynamics between the personal and systemic Discussion 4:45 – Closing Reflections: Applying the policy landscape to Closing
HurricaneKatrina and (3) the student selected research project on an engineered system that negativelyimpacted their local community. For each case, we discuss the learning goals of the givenactivity, how the activity was enacted for the class, and finally draw connections between theactivity and the theories of power it emphasized. After presenting the details of each case weshare our reflections on each of them as instructors. Our reflections explore what went well witheach activity, what challenges it had, and what we might change for future implementations.Study ContextThe three cases reported here all happened in a year-long senior capstone course for a multipledisciplinary engineering degree at a Mid Atlantic University with a large engineering
impact of technology on geopolitics and society, in order to furtheranalyze and reflect on what engineering education should teach, whom it should serve, andthe ideology and value system behind it.To achieve the goals, it is not enough to simply learn Western textbooks and knowledge.Instead, we should use non-Western experiences, research, and perspectives to re-understandthe impact of the Cold War and neoliberalism on East Asian technological development,national governance, and labor structures. A dialogue-based classroom, as this paper argues,would be a possible pedagogical approach for teaching global engineering competency,especially in a non-Western context, and only then can we prevent engineering education inEast Asia and globally from
conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and donot necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. 1Fisher identified significant gender differences in major selection for male- and female-identifiedstudents in computing based on individuals’ attention to “computing with a purpose” [9].However, it is important that we recall Slaton’s cautions against the operation of essentialismwithin this approach to diversity and inclusion and not predicate calls for change on a “naturaldifference” in approaches to engineering, rather we call for a change in values for liberation [10].Our department is at the beginning of a multi-year journey of
including untold stories throughout the history of computing andalgorithms, identity and intersectionality in engineering, designs from engineering that have highsocietal impact, the LGBTQ+ experience in engineering, engineering and mental health, andcultural diversity within engineering. Each module gives a brief overview of the topic, followedby an associated assignment. We made all of these modules available to the students in thecourse and told them to choose one to complete. Each student engaged with their selectedmodule in four specific ways: (1) watching a relevant video; (2) reading and annotating aprovided article; (3) responding in a written reflection to a set of specific prompts relevant to themodule; and (4) conducting an interview
prepare students to dedicate themselves todiversity that values the richness of human society as a divine gift and to pursue justice bymaking an action-oriented response to the needs of the world.[12]” Given the uniquely holisticaims of the LUM community, the practice of reflection laying at the core of the Jesuit traditioninvigorates all corners of the university to respond to nationwide calls for social, political, andeconomic justice.At present, LUM’s strategic plan places a strong emphasis on DEI through the recruitment ofstudents and faculty from underrepresented groups and the creation of more inclusive classroomsand curricula. The university’s stated diversity aims include “awareness of the structural sources,consequences, and
thinking and reflection on their work's impact. This study emphasizes the needfor comprehensive education and training tailored to scientists and engineers to address complexsocietal challenges effectively and responsibly in their professional roles.Keywords: social responsibility, engineering ethics, engineering formation, undergraduateresearch, Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)1. IntroductionSociety is facing challenging problems that threaten both the present and future of justice, peace,sustainability, and the overall well-being of humanity. Given that the responsibility of scientistsand engineers implies a duty to address those challenges for society [1], how could research-intensive universities prioritize transformative
organize the divisionsare not exclusive. The reflect differences in emphasis rather than the existence of separateknowledge domains.1 The number of divisions vs. constituent committees and interest groups seems to fluctuate based on the context inwhich the list is generated (ASEE website vs. PEER). By some counts, there are 55 divisions. In any case, theproportion of “Engineering and. . .” divisions remains essentially the same. 2 This paper focuses on four “Engineering and. . .”divisions that explicitly connectengineering with expertise that is relevant to engineers but not typically required in engineeringeducation
explanations and understanding of howmajority and underrepresented group members in a College of Engineering felt exclusion andinclusion and what visions they could produce from their collective sensemaking. Qualitativecausal mapping provides DT facilitators with a tool to listen for, plan, and mark passages to drawout explicit and implicit linkages that might not be conscious or intentional. In the case of the DTfacilitator in our study, he displayed strategies to encourage causal expressions such as pullingdata from past sessions and encouraging reflection, digging below the surface meanings of talkto underlying feeling (longing for inclusion, confusion with why people do not act in particularways), and expressions of curiosity). The DT session
students develop a sense of agency,deeper relationality, and inclusive leadership practices. We present how these outcomes arehighly important for effecting change both as a part of Access and in other spaces studentsoccupy.In this paper, we begin by introducing background information on both Access and put the workof the NF team in conversation with other educational change initiatives. We then describe themethods we have used in this work. Next, we present the results of our analysis and reflect onthese results in the discussion section. Finally, we use the conclusion section of this paper todiscuss implications for other practitioners and motivate future research possibilities.II. BackgroundIn this section, we first describe how Access is
Emily Macdonald-Roach is an MASc student in Engineering Education at the University of Toronto. Her research interests include engineering identity formation, engineering culture, and equity, diversity, and inclusion in engineering career paths.Ms. Saskia van Beers, University of Toronto Saskia van Beers (she/her) is a MASc. student in Engineering Education at the University of Toronto. She holds a BASc in Engineering Science from the University of Toronto. Her research focuses on understanding how Canadian engineers reflect on the impact that their social location has had on their career.Sasha-Ann Eleanor Nixon, University of Toronto ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Why would
4Dignity and well-being: Narratives of modifying the culture of engineering education to improve mental health among underrepresented STEM studentsown individual findings and how they were interpreted to form the study’s overall findings, but they alsoreviewed and approved this conference paper. The framework also required deep ongoing self-reflectivity by the primary investigator about how her own myriad identities, including being an adjunctfaculty member, affected her perception and interpretation of the participants’ own emerging newknowledge about their experiences in engineering education (Nodelman, 2013). Arts-based research(ABR) methods (Leavy, 2017) use creative practices in social research because of their
National Science Foundation projects in the engineering education realm, researching engineering career trajectories, student motivation, and learning. Sreyoshi has been recognized as a Fellow at the Academy for Teaching Excellence at Virginia Tech (VTGrATE) and a Fellow at the Global Perspectives Program (GPP) and was inducted to the Yale Bouchet Honor Society during her time at Virginia Tech. She has also been honored as an Engaged Ad- vocate in 2022 and an Emerging Leader in Technology (New ELiTE) in 2021 by the Society of Women Engineers. Views expressed in this paper are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those of organizations she is associated with. Learn more about Sreyoshi’s impact
strategies as either necessary to succeed or even as desirable depending on theextent to which they have internalized dominant narratives about the irrelevance of sexual andgender identity to STEM, a reflection of the ways LGBTQ people are prone to minimize harmfulexperiences pertaining to sexual and gender identity [21]. However, each of these strategiesintroduces additional psychological and emotional burden that can interfere with the cognitiveresources needed to maintain motivation and succeed in a STEM major.The most immediate of these consequences is that LGBTQ people are much more likely toconsider leaving, and to leave, STEM than their cisgender, heterosexual counterparts [1-3]. Inaddition to this attrition, regardless of whether they leave
: Encourage students to think creatively by expressing engineering concepts, principles, or experiences through poetic language and imagery. 2. Exploring Metaphorical Thinking: Introduce students to the use of metaphor, simile, and other figurative language techniques to convey complex engineering ideas in a vivid and imaginative manner. 3. Developing Communication Skills: Improve students' ability to communicate technical information effectively by practicing concise and expressive language, which can be valuable in writing reports, proposals, and presentations. 4. Encouraging Reflective Practice: Promote self-reflection and deeper understanding of engineering concepts by encouraging students to explore
learned”. The reflective component is critical for students toconsider how elements of their design worked or failed to meet their design expectations.Likewise, as a pedagogical instrument, the reflective component of the presentation offers thestudent a formative opportunity to “rethink” how any future instance of similar design practicemight be enhanced.PedagogyCorrect content with fitting assessments can only have the greatest impact if aligned withstrategic and purposeful pedagogical approaches. The THTR59700 course is at the core activelearning-oriented and engages technical knowledge across students' academic advancement,keeping the developmental growth of students in mind. In particular, the pedagogicalframeworks that most clearly relay
engineering programs [3], but reflections and critical events werefocused on experience in the first-year engineering course at the institution. The first-yearengineering course is a design, build, test course that enables and encourages communicationbetween students on teams. The teams are broken up into small groups of four or five and taskedwith designing, building, and testing an engineering solution to a pre-conceived problem. Thisclassroom serves as an ideal setting for intervention, as the students are early in theircoursework. This chronological positioning yields students who are more focused oncommunication than mathematical analysis, which they may be less certain of, and makes anychanges more impactful, as they have three more years to
their interconnectednessmay be invisible to those in power. Tara noted that people who hold individualistic mindsetsmight be less receptive to seeing problems related to social justice and macroethics. “sometimes the attitude of the people in [this city] is a lot more individualistic, but they don’t understand the impact of the society on their life. So the privilege of living in a developed country, having your roads always working, your police not taking bribes, your systems always being in place, your infrastructure always being there, has made you not understand the impact of having people who can actually do these things in the future.” (p. 8)Individualism is also reflected in the culture Tara observed at the
class consciousness. This hegemonic adherence to businessprofessionalism is reflected in how Pawley has described the continual reproduction of anengineering education and workforce development that serves to “indoctrinate students into neoliberalism as the only possible mode of economic development. Their job will be to work in an industrial machine; we do not articulate alternative modes of thought or help students develop cognitive lenses to conceive of a way of being outside this neoliberal worldview” [13, p. 449].An imperative task in the (re)development of the US engineering workforce is to transform theconsciousness of those who take on the title of engineer to break away from the continuedideological imposition
student looking to take this course, and would it bedifferent if it was a student of color?” When answering this question, Ebo said that he does notthink that his advice would be different to a white student or student of color, but rather it wouldbe different for an international student. He said that his international student identity is what heunderstands, so he would only speak through that context.2: moving towards racial-ethnic identity examination in the U.S. context. After some periodof time, international students tend to start evolving their identities to fit into the U.S. context. Inthe interviews, students often reflected on a catalyst that required them to consider how theiridentity fits in the U.S. context.Positioning themselves
imaginative context invoked by the comparison may influenceaudience response. Implied comparisons are powerful modes of representation andcommunication but notoriously imprecise, in part because what is evoked depends a great deal onthe knowledge and prior experience of the audience. Analogical reasoning puts us in a position tobe more deliberate in our choice of analogies and more creative with respect to the rhetoricalstrategies we use. As the next section explains, our choice of rhetorical strategy should reflect thekind of relationship we wish to establish with the intended audience.III. A New Metaphor for the Discourse on Diversity: FromOration to ConversationBoth classical rhetoric and modern social psychology suggest that conversation is a