Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York. Dr. Barry holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rochester Institute of Technology, a Master of Science degree from University of Colorado at Boulder, and a PhD from Purdue University. Prior to pursuing a career in academics, Dr. Barry spent 10-years as a senior geotechnical engineer and project manager on projects throughout the United States. He is a licensed professional engineer in multiple states. Dr. Barry’s areas of research include assessment of professional ethics, teaching and learning in engineering education, nonverbal communication in the classroom, and learning through historical engineering
by an Academy programadvisor, and HCC students are required to enroll in a prescribed set of courses that are alignedwith transfer to the College of Engineering. As part of the Engineering Academy program, allengineering courses offered at the participating community colleges are taught by Texas A&MCollege of Engineering faculty. Based on student academic performance while at the communitycollege, they have an opportunity to transfer directly into the College of Engineering at the endof their first or second year of study. These are highly motivated students and display a strongwork ethic. Six students from the Academy were accepted into the 2015/2016 REEMS academic yearprogram, twelve accepted into the 2016/2017 REEMS program
(Downey et al., 2006 as cited in [11].Those with cultural humility recognize that there are multiple technical approaches and thatwhile they may have a preference for one way of defining a problem over another as well as oneway of justifying a solution over another, they have the flexibility of mind and command oftechnical knowledge to be able to adjust and adapt to multiple ways of defining as well asresolving problems [11]. Cultural humility also means recognizing when we do not have thetechnical knowledge to accomplish a task and having the wherewithal to acknowledge thisdeficit and seek out this knowledge either through bringing in outside expertise or additionaleducation, as called for in the Code of Ethics of a Professional Engineer [11
like jigsaws.34 I’ve used them for problem-solving exercises (e.g., each teamlearns and teaches a method to calculate the pure component vapor pressure) and for soft-skill exercises (e.g., each team considers an ethical case study and then presents it to other teams fordeeper discussion). I can cover a lot of ground without taking a lot of time in class.Anna – The best learning activity is one that aligns well to the learning objective. One flexible,low-prep activity is the minute paper. It engages every member of the class as individuals, andyou can use their responses as the basis for
ofstudent responses and the ethical debate of how we, as researchers, were to react to theirresponses, we grouped individual reactions to stressors items into their factor components ofphysiological, emotional, and behavioral, transforming them into an individual item each. Wealso added questions centered on personal, family, peer, and institutional (university) supportbecause we posit that these types of support may mitigate negative affects due to stress.Gratitude (6 Items). The gratitude construct is a six-item single factor subscale adopted from theCollege Student Subjective Wellbeing Questionnaire (CSSWQ) [39]. We chose to only includethe gratitude subscale due to its relatively short length, validity evidence, and lack of overlapwith other
dichotomy of relevant versus irrelevant, or fair versus unfair, frames the feelings of manyengineers when it comes to their treatment of ethics. Unlike many aspects of engineering ethicslooks mostly in hindsight, not at all with innovation. It is usually seen as a reaction to a crisis.This hindsight is framed by topics that were seen as unimportant, the first pillar of Cech’s theoryof disengagement [17]. The final pillar is prevalent in many undergraduate and graduateengineering departments to an extreme measure. Numerous studies have pointed to the need toweed out the weak students from undergraduate programs. This builds on the very foundations ofengineering education as a vocational degree for the brightest students. This overarching concernwith