. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Creating an Engineering Action Plan for EthicsAbstractThe purpose of this research was to develop a classroom project module that supported studentsin developing an action plan for ethics. The module connects ABET criteria related to ethics andevolving research in ethics in other disciplines. The module was implemented in the context of alarger project in a junior level heat transfer course. A student survey was developed andmeasured student perceptions of learning objectives. Students reported they found the activitieshelpful for building the skill of ethics action planning, particularly the ability to explore multiplesolution paths. The results indicate this type of action
Paper ID #31429Appropriate and Ethical Finite Element Analysis in MechanicalEngineering: Learning Best Practices through SimulationDr. Benjamin B Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA, USA). His pedagogical areas of interest include active learning ap- proaches, ethics, and best practices as they relate to
courses. Students who attended theworkshops and prepared the research paper were offered extra credits for their courses. Theworkshop topics covered how to find relevant previous research, introduction to engineeringstandards, ethics, lifelong learning and how to write a research paper. After completion of theworkshop, a survey was conducted to assess the outcome. The survey questions were dividedinto four areas: research experience, lifelong learning, ethics, and engineering standards as thesetopics were covered in the workshop. The survey used a five-point Likert scale to collectresponses from the participants. Each survey question sought a response about how importantthey thought a skill or concept was and how satisfied they were with the
constructionof the new knowledge in the current subject. An attempt is made in this paper to map some of theengineering courses using the concept mapping tool Cmap [2].Concept map developmentIdentifying a focus question is paramount in the construction of the concept maps [1]. For mostof the engineering courses, the focus question can be ‘how to design in engineering ’? The nextstep is to identify a few concepts that are pertinent to the question. In engineering design, we usemath and science to find solutions for engineering problems. But in the process of arriving atsolutions to problems, we should be conscious and consider questions of ethics, safety, empathy,human interface, and other values. The above values are informed, for the most part, by
solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors. 3. An ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences. 4. An ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgements, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and social contexts. 5. An ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives. 6. An ability to develop and conduct appropriate
2 4.08 environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainabilityD. An ability to function on 20 27 9 1 2 4.05 multidisciplinary teamsE. An ability to identify, formulate, 23 29 5 1 4.28 and solve engineering problemsF. An understanding of professional 14 20 16 7 1 3.67 and ethical responsibilityG. An ability to communicate 22 21 11 3 1 4.03 effectivelyH. The broad education necessary to understand the impact
one Other Disciplines exam. The NCEES has guides listingknowledge areas related to each discipline and a range of the number of questions that eachknowledge area may have on the exam. We developed this review course for the Mechanicalexam, although the structure is easily applicable to the other discipline-specific or OtherDiscipline exams. The knowledge areas for the Mechanical exam include Mathematics;Probability and Statistics; Computational Tools; Ethics and Professional Practice; EngineeringEconomics; Electricity and Magnetism; Statics; Dynamics, Kinematics and Vibrations;Mechanics of Materials; Material Properties and Processing; Fluid Mechanics; Thermodynamics;Heat Transfer; Measurements, Instrumentation and Controls; and Mechanical
changes to the language and definitions pertaining to all Criteria heavily influenced the development ofPerformance Indicators and their subsequent Barometric Assessments. The most challenging aspects of this aredescribed below.The first is the definition, and rather inclusive aspects, of Engineering Design. The legacy student outcome (c) requiredthat engineering design, “meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social,political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability”. The use of the term “such as” as adeterminer indicates that only a subset of need and constraints is required. The new Student Outcome states,“engineering design solutions must meet specified needs with
course, as is technical and plane stress. The realistic constraints reading related to laboratory experience such as economic lifelong learning and will include material factors, safety, ethical responsibility. testing, analyzing, and reliability, aesthetics, troubleshooting. ethics, and social impact. How Design Courses ProgressSurvey MethodIn order to quantitively measure the success and achievements of the implementation of adesigned-based project that challenges freshman students to
design solutions that meet specified needs;(3) an ability to communicate effectively to a variety of audiences;(4) an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities and make sound judgments;(5) an ability to function on a team, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives;(6) an ability to develop and conduct experimentation to evaluate their own project; and,(7) an ability to research solutions to problems as needed.Many of these goals form a template to help students learn and evaluate their own progress. Ingeneral, students like structure but it is equally important to allow them the opportunity to bothsucceed and fail. Instructors act more as facilitators and evaluators then architects of theprojects. Students set their
typically female or male firstname but were otherwise identical. When asked to provide both quantitative and qualitativeassessment of qualifications of the two candidates, participating students gave the female resumelower quantitative marks and honed in on non-technical and language skills more so than they didin their evaluations of the male candidate. This paper presents the findings of this initial study andoutlines a path toward a more comprehensive look at gender-bias in engineering studentperceptions of qualifications.IntroductionIn the Fall of 2019, the author taught a required, senior-level mechanical engineering courseintended to develop student career readiness through discussions and guest lectures on topics suchas ethics, codes and
attendance, and offering research opportunity in thesummer or semester. The research experiences have helped attract more female and minoritystudents to mechanical engineering, expand scholars’ skill base, and provide successful paths forgraduate study [5-11]. Another successful component of the program is on community buildingtailored for commuting students, including an annual retreat, lunch with faculty members,workshops providing academic and professional development support. Since its inception in 2009, the program has supported more than 110 undergraduatestudents with diverse ethical and economic backgrounds. The program has achieved a retentionrate of 89% in the ME program. Among the 75 ME-STEM scholars who graduated, 32% arepursuing
laboratory classes (they are blended with lecture classes). The average unit allocation for laboratory courses is 4.6 units. The majority of laboratory courses centers around the mechanics of materials and thermo-fluids laboratory courses.f) Other Core Major Classes: Courses in this category are: 1) Introduction to Engineering orMechanical Engineering (Non-CAD), 2) Engineering Economics, Professionalism, and Ethics, 3)Soft-Skill Development, and 4) Electrical Engineering Related Classes. Here are some notableobservations from the 125 mechanical engineering curriculum: Forty-six programs have an electrical engineering or related course that is customized for non-electrical engineering majors, which has become a
Paper ID #29212Pre and Post Tenure: Perceptions of Requirements and Impediments forMechanical Engineering and Mechanical Engineering Technology FacultyDr. Benjamin B Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA, USA). His pedagogical areas of interest include active learning ap- proaches, ethics, and best
manual vs. online grading for solid models,” inProceedings of the ASEE 120th Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, June 23-26,2013.[3] T. Branoff, E. Wiebe and N. Hartman, “Integrating Constraint-Based CAD into an IntroductoryEngineering Graphics Course: Activities and Grading Strategies,” in Proceedings of the ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition, Nashville, TN, USA, June 22-25, 2003.[4] I. Chester, “Teaching for CAD Expertise,” Int’l Journal of Technology Design Education, Vol.17, pp. 23-35, 2007.[5] Nicomachean Ethics, by Aristotle. http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.2.ii.html,Accessed 1 February 2020.[6] D. Kolb, Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1).Englewood Cliffs, NJ
for both SLP and ME programs. As part of a goal-scenario framework,SLP students functioned as clinicians and were tasked with coming up with the fundamentalpurpose and design of custom therapeutic devices. ME students worked with SLP students todefine functional requirements and to develop specific solutions. ME students were also taskedwith defining an expedient and economic manufacturing method to realize the designs. Theproject was developed as part of a curriculum that supports ABET student outcomes:c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realisticconstraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,restructurability, and sustainability.d. An ability to
, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.”Student outcome (d) stated “an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams.” Student outcome(g) stated “an ability to communicate effectively.”In fall 2017, ABET Board of Delegate approved several major changes to the general criteriaproposed by the EAC [14] and the implementation of these changes started in 2019-2020accreditation cycle. The revised ABET-EAC general criteria included changes to previousCriterion 3 and Criterion 5. The definitions of the terminologies used in the general criteria wereimproved and expanded. In the new general criteria, criterion 3 consists of seven studentoutcomes. Student outcome 2 replaces SO (c) of the previous general criteria. It states