) [5], states engineering students’ minimum learning outcomes (a)through (k) as shown in Table 1: Table 1: ABET learning outcomes a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f) an
of Engineering Education” (IGIP, http://www.igip.org). Furthermore he is one of the founders and Secretary General of the ”Global Online Laboratory Consortium” (GOLC). GOLC is the result of an initiative started in 2009 at MIT to coordinate the work on educational online laboratories worldwide.Prof. Abul K. M. Azad, Northern Illinois University Abul K. M. Azad is a Professor in the Technology Department of Northern Illinois University. He has a Ph.D. in Control and Systems Engineering and M.Sc. and B.Sc. in Electronics Engineering. His research interests include remote laboratories, mechatronic systems, mobile robotics, and educational research. In these areas, Dr. Azad has over 100 refereed journal and conference
to medicines for Africa and developing nations, and to advance discovery in manufacturing technology, quality of medicines, and rare disease research. This mission is accomplished through innovative knowledge-based programs in STEM areas with an emphasis on interdisciplinary col- laboration. Dr. Clase teaches multiple courses covering topics in biotechnology, bioinformatics, biolog- ical design and drug discovery to engineers, scientists and technologists. Her currently funded projects include collaborators from multiple disciplines and an impact that spans K-12 to graduate education.Mrs. Lauren Ann Terruso, Purdue University Lauren Terruso is the Operations Manager of the Biotechnology Innovation and Regulatory
engineering leadershipprograms through co-operated courses, minors, integrated curriculum, scholarship programs,certificated courses and any other ways to help students acquire leadership knowledge andprinciple, team work skills, communication skills, creativity and innovation. MIT-Gordonengineering leadership program (ELP) is developed through cooperating with Sloan BusinessSchool, and it is an integrated curriculum to develop MIT engineering students’ leadershipability [11]. The Engineering Leadership Development Minor (ELDM) of Peen StateUniversity is a minor program that engineering students complete this minor course throughtaking related leadership classes and obtaining the corresponding credits [12]. The engineeringleadership program (ELP) in
and learning in Japan. Through this framework, best practices are developedthat can be applied for greater cross cultural understanding for engineering educationacross borders. The framework can be applied to not only Japan, but to other counties forgreater understanding for teaching and learning globally.IntroductionTrends in globalization and demographics are leading to the call for international engineeringeducators who are able to gain a cross-cultural knowledge of their students, institutions, andhost countries. This is important for not only developing countries, but also developedcountries such as Japan and the U.S. whose demographic trends are yielding increasinglyolder populations. Globalization and innovation play key roles for both
United States, and other countries, tocollective action toward fostering practices for the diversification of engineering. In twointerrelated sections, this paper 1) reviews the educational component and 2) shares the resultingoutcomes and recommendations of this session. The first section summarizes the framing of theissue through literature and data on diversity and inclusion, followed by a description of aninteractive training on explicit and implicit biases at the session. Section two is action-orientedand builds upon the educational awareness and training as outlined in section one. This secondsection describes our novel use of Structure-Behavior-Function (SBF), an approach from systemsengineering, as an empowering tool that leaders can
consistent evidence that all countries are concerned about work preparation andprovide “hands on experience” during training through internships, practicum, orapprenticeships.Using a blend of survey and interview data, we will investigate the role thatco-ops and internships play on enhancing URM students' learning inengineering in two primary areas (i.e., professional competencies, problemsolving) as well as their professional identity. Survey data were collectedusing an online, web-based survey administered to URM engineering majorsat predominantly White institutions in the southeast and Midwest regions ofthe country. Interview data were collected using a semi-structured protocolthat asked questions about the nature of the co-op or internship
anthropology of science and engineering mentioned earlier. But our goals go beyond description. Our larger aspiration is that the collection and publication of such materials can aid in a critical enterprise—one through which conventions and norms are deliberately and continually subject to challenge and refinement. In both cases—as description and as critical enterprise—the international supplement is intended to support pedagogic goals of breadth, balance, and the consideration of foreign perspectives in developing courses, syllabi, and instructional materials. In thinking about ethics, many non-‐specialists will select from a variety of collections
systems will be used, and thechallenges faced by the development, production, deployment, and support teams involved intheir creation and sustainment. To build a pathway to systems focused education, thefoundations of systems knowledge and skills should be instilled in engineering students early intheir education, starting with systems thinking in K-12 and building on more advanced systemconcepts through undergraduate education and beyond. This paper describes how societal needscombined with global trends produce systems challenges that must be addressed by engineerswho are systems thinkers. After analyzing three separate undergraduate engineering educationresearch efforts in process, the authors propose a pathway to support engineering education