Collection

2008 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Lawrence Whitman; Zulma Toro-Ramos; Dan Allison; Colin Davidson; Martha Shawver; Shelly Belles; Chris Wilkinson

global issues,cultural concerns, and even global constraints in design. In fact, Shuman, et al. [2]state that future engineering graduates need “to become highly innovative global‘problem solvers.’” Downey, et al. [3] present the required competencies for anengineer to be “globally competent.” Global learning may even impact thelifelong learning of graduates. As students become more aware of differences inclusters, even in engineering design, they realize their need to learn throughouttheir lives [4]. The definition of global learning is considered by some to be lessimportant than the implementation. According to Hedberg [5], there is a degree ofconsensus regarding the definition of global learning, but the problem is in regardto “how to attain

Collection

2008 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Chih-Hao Wu; Kim Troboy; Tracy Cole; Loretta Cochran; David Roach

making a decision that leads to ethical behavior.Teaching Ethics Engineering faculty of different universities have approached teaching ethics in a varietyof ways. For instance, Cummings17 used a Valued-Sensitive Design (VSD) approach to teach herstudents at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) the concept of ethical responsibility inengineering design through human-computer interaction research. In her work at MIT, sheProceedings of the 2008 Midwest Section Conference of the American Society of Engineering Education 4defined the major components of Value-Sensitive Design (VSD) as conceptual, technical andempirical and used a case

Collection

2008 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

Shaibal Mukherjee; Pallabi Mukherjee

: 2000,” pp. 84, Table 116. 7 A. Scott, G. Steyn, A. Geuna, S. Brusoni, W. E. Steinmeuller, “The Economics Returns of Basic Research and the Benefits of University-Industry Relationships,” Science and Technology Policy Research, Brighton: University of Sussex, 2001. 8 “Social Rate of Return” is defined in C. I. Jones and J. C. Williams, “Measuring the Social Return to R&D,” Working paper 97002, Stanford University Department of Economics, 1997. 9 W. M. Ayers, “MIT: the impact of innovation,” Boston, MA: Bank Boston, 2002. 10 US Commission on National Security, “Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change,” Washington, DC, US Commission on National Security, 2001. 11 National Science Board, “Science and Engineering

Collection

2008 ASEE Midwest Section Conference

Authors

James A. Ejiwale

not well managed, itsimplementation may constitute waste rather than fulfilling its anticipated outcome of increasingproductivity. Therefore, it is imperative to educate graduates of our programs with the skillsnecessary to manage and overcome many of the difficulties typically encountered in virtualsettings.Bibliography1. Avolio, J. B. , Kahai, S. & Dodge, G. E. (2000). E-leadership Implications for theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly . Vol. 11, 4 , p. 615-668.2. Cascio, W. F. & Shurygailo, S. (2003). E-Leadership and virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 31, 4, p. 362-376.3. Davenport, T. H. & Pearlson, K. (1998). Two Cheers for the Virtual Office