fulfill their obligation to work sustainably and ethically within the diverse communities of Canada and the world.Ms. Stephanie Diane Shaw, University of Guelph - School of Engineering Stephanie is a Professional Engineer and Ph.D. Candidate in the School of Engineering at the University of Guelph. Her research is focusing on product development of air quality purification technologies for urban environments. Her current degree is in Environmental Engineering, and she previous education includes an M.A.Sc. in Environmental Engineering (renewable energy), from the University of Guelph, and her B.Eng. in Materials Science and Engineering, from McMaster University. Stephanie has been involved with engineering leadership
Professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry and ILead.Dr. Emily Moore P.Eng., University of Toronto Emily Moore is the Director of the Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (Troost ILead) at the University of Toronto. Emily spent 20 years as a professional engineer, first as an R&D engineer in a Fortune 500 company, and then leading innovation and technology development efforts in a major engineering firm.Mr. Milan Maljkovic, Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering Milan Maljkovic is the Assistant Director, Community of Practice at the Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering at the University of Toronto. He engages with engineering
Paper ID #24799Engineering Leadership Development using an Interdisciplinary Competition-based Approach with Cross Functional TeamsDr. David Bayless, Ohio University Dr. Bayless is the Gerald Loehr Professor of Mechanical Engineering and the Director of Ohio Uni- versity’s Coal Research Center, part of Ohio University’s Center of Excellence in Energy and the Envi- ronment. He is also the director of the Robe Leadership Institute and director of the Center for Algal Engineering Research and Commercialization (an Ohio Third Frontier Wright Project) He is engaged in the development of energy and environmental technology
, national organizations have called for broadening of graduate education beyondthe technical to include career development and professional skills training [4-6]. The impetus isthat traditional graduate degrees prepare students to become professors and researchers ateducational institutions while career outcome studies show that those with engineering graduatedegrees find employment in a wide range of industries such as healthcare, banking, aerospace,consulting and manufacturing [5, 7, 8]. In Canada only 14% of engineers with PhDs (includingarchitecture and related technologies) are employed as professors [4].There is a need to provide leadership-learning opportunities to engineering students as leadershipcompetencies can boost their success in
Paper ID #24049The UTEP Edge: A Student Success Initiative for Developing High-impactPracticesDr. Peter Golding, University of Texas, El Paso Professor and Undergraduate Program Director in the Department of Engineering and Leadership at UTEP; Director of the Center for Research in Engineering & Technology Education (CRE@TE); Provost Faculty Fellow in Residence in the Center for Faculty Leadership and Development at UTEP.Mr. Mike Thomas Pitcher, University of Texas, El Paso Mike Pitcher is the Director of Academic Technologies at the University of Texas at El Paso. He has had experience in learning in both a
Paper ID #25510Engineering Leadership Styles Used in Industry TodayMichele Fromel, Pennsylvania State UniversityMatthew BennettMr. Lei Wei, ELIM program, Pennsylvania State UniversityDr. Meg Handley, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Meg Handley is currently the Associate Director for Engineering Leadership Outreach at Penn State University. Previously, Meg served as the Director of the Career & Corporate Connection’s office at the Smeal College of Business at Penn State University. Meg completed her PhD in Workforce Education at Penn State, where she focused on interpersonal behaviors and their impact on
c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Using Competing Values Framework to map the Development of Leadership skills as Capstone Design students Transition to the WorkplaceIntroductionAccording to the Engineers of 2020 report, one of the important attributes that will support thesuccess of engineering graduates when entering the workforce will be leadership skills [1].Engineering students’ development of leadership skills is highly acknowledged by industry whenlooking to hire new talent into the workforce [2]–[5]. Similarly, the Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET) revised criteria for student outcomes have specificallymentioned effective team function when students are able to contribute in the team
the NationalAcademy of Engineering (NAE), the Director of NASA’s Johnson Space Center, and a formerDirector of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In the end, the conferenceattracted 215 educators, students, and engineers from across the U.S. and Canada. It alsosucceeded in raising the visibility of our growing community of engineering leadershipeducators.One of benefits we were able to leverage from the conference involved using its success to help“make the case” for the national importance of engineering leadership education to ASEE. All ofour keynotes, especially NAE President, C.D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., delivered persuasive presentationsabout why engineers and engineering would benefit from leadership development among
Research Council), Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC, US: The National Academies Press, 2005. doi: 10.17226/11463.[18] ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology), “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2020 – 2021 | ABET,” 2020. https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering- programs-2020-2021/ (accessed Nov. 29, 2020).[19] J. Russell, J. T. P. Yao, J. P. Farr, S. G. P. Walesh, and J. P. Bishop, “Consensus! Students need more management education,” Journal of Managemet in Engineering, vol. 12
engineering degree programs offered at the University of St. Thomas -Minnesota. The survey of alumni from 13 years of the courses’ history assessed keyinstructional processes and intended leadership learning outcomes for experienced engineers: thedevelopment, deployment and professional and personal outcomes of core leadership processes;how the alumni have used this learning; the perceived long-term career and personal value ofthat leadership education experience; and aspects of the curriculum they perceived as mostvaluable. The key question: has the study of leadership development been of value to thegraduates in the years after completing a course, and if so, how? The paper also describeshow the leadership course has evolved in response to changing
video at the end of the course. At the end of the semester,faculty members vote on the top teams in the class, who are then given awards for theirachievements. Awards were departmental merchandise valued at about $45/student.All research was conducted following approved IRB procedures, including anonymization of theresearch participants through the use of pseudonyms and IRB-approved interview protocol (seeAppendix). In order to investigate student leadership characteristics, we first conducted interviewswith 18 faculty advisors in order to identify a potential pool of alumni/students for interviewsthrough purposeful sampling. The approach of seeking engineering educators as experts inunderstanding students’ strengths finds precedence from the
detection and manipulation of various cell types. One application in particular was to design an electrically-driven cell focusing microfluidic device to be used in conjunction with an optical waveguide for environmental-based applications. Although, she has held a number of positions in industry with companies such as: Dow Corning, Johns Manville and Hospira, her passion lies in teaching, mentoring undergraduate students and promoting excellence in education for engineers.Mr. David Bowles, Louisiana State University David ”Boz” Bowles is an Assistant Director of Academic Affairs for the College of Engineering, where he coordinates the Communications Across the Curriculum program for the College. He also manages the
forengineers to accommodate complex relationships between technological systems and the socialsystems in which they are used. Crawley, Malmqvist, Östlund, and Brodeur [34] emphasized theuse of systems thinking skills in engineering, including societal and other concerns, withimplications for leadership development. In a similar manner, systems thinking has been used tohelp improve the success of projects executed for Engineers Without Borders (EWB). Thisorganization provides infrastructure systems in developing areas using teams composed ofengineering students [35]. A critical factor in the success of these projects concerns the complexrelationships among the engineered systems, the culture of the local community, availableresources, complementary
population he primarily focuses on is STEM undergraduate and graduate students. He has received extensive qualitative and quantitative methodological training in the area of educational c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Paper ID #25320psychology. He acquired a Bachelor’s of Science in Human Resources Management and a Masters ofEducational Technology from California State University, Long Beach, and a Master’s of Program Eval-uation and a Doctorate of Philosophy from the University of Texas at Austin. Prior to joining the PennState University, he worked as a research fellow and program evaluator at
paper presented at the 2010 Annual Conference of The Association for the Study of Higher Education, Indianapolis, IN. 2010.10. Lattuca, L.R., I. Bergom, and D.B. Knight, Professional development, departmental contexts, and use of instructional strategies. Journal of Engineering Education, 2014. 103(4): p. 549-572.11. Spohrer, J. and S.K. Kwan, Service science, management, engineering, and design (SSMED): An emerging discipline. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 2009. 1(3): p. 1-31.12. Toor, S.-u.-R. and G. Ofori, Developing construction professionals of the 21st century: renewed vision for leadership. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
/extracurricularactivities but that data is out of the scope of this study.MethodsThe research team administered the series of three leadership surveys during the 2016-17academic year. These surveys were included with the typical assessment surveys used in the two-semester course. The pre, mid, and post-assessments were administered in mid-September, lateJanuary, and early May, respectively.The survey was derived from the Managerial Behavior Instrument (MBI), based on the theory ofthe Competing Values Framework (CVF) [13]. The original survey was validated using a sampleof employees from the business sector. The research team altered the survey slightly to beappropriate to an engineering education setting. For example, the phrase “insuring that companypolicies are
expectations for the future, and evidences of “giving back” through involvement in their communities or organizations. Each of these topics is explored with one or more questions with provided multiple choice or multiple response answers of typical expected responses (for example, typical types of advanced degrees for the question on further education). For most questions, an open response option is given for the respondents to use if their answer to the question did not fit any of the expected answers provided. These questions sought primarily factual data, as compared to the second and third part of the survey which were more about the respondents’ perceptions. These were sought in terms of factual
undergraduate level is to adaptexisting theories of leadership, drawn from organizational psychology or management studies.At their core, most such theories define leadership as influence (e.g., [7]) and focus ondeveloping a framework of behaviors or competencies of the kind that have been used across theindustry for decades (e.g., [8]). At the other extreme, engineering leadership is sometimes takenas shorthand for the purely technical, where an ‘engineering leader’ is a person or company thatis the most technically advanced in a given field, with no explicit acknowledgment of anythingbeyond engineering considerations [9].In the engineering education literature to date, there has been relatively little attention paid to theincreasing importance of
(e.g., some years may have less engineers who plan to become lawyers than doctors),utilize an independent study model where students attend a single class where the instructor utilizesa semester checklist of approved assignments related to the career track. Local professionals in theareas should be brought to these classes to help design the checklist.ConclusionThe well-prepared 21st century engineering leader can only emerge from an integrated academiccurriculum that is aimed at educating her to apply key leadership skills in whatever career path shechooses. This paper describes the challenges addressed and methods used to undertake the designof an engineering leadership and management curriculum for undergraduates that takes intoaccount both
design and implementation of a student-driven laboratory method which supports the development of authentic leadership skills. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 But how do you Feel?Authentic Leadership Development for undergraduate students through a student-driven,experiential, and emotion-laden course using a laboratory method addressing the whole person.AbstractBased on 324 reflections written by 27 undergraduate students from two independent cohorts,this study examines the effectiveness of a semester-long authentic leadership developmentcourse which is based on a student-driven, student-centered, and experiential laboratory method.This study shows firstly
Paper ID #27452A Continual Improvement Process for Teaching Leadership and InnovationWithin a Community of PracticeProf. Marnie V. Jamieson, University of Alberta Marnie V. Jamieson, M. Sc., P.Eng. is an Industrial Professor in Chemical Process Design In the Depart- ment of Chemical and Materials Engineering at the University of Alberta and holds an M.Sc. in Chemical Engineering Education. She is currently the William Magee Chair in Chemical Process Design, leads the process design teaching team, manages the courses and industry interface. Her current research focuses on the application of blended and active learning to
Assistant Professor, Teaching Stream, in the Department of Mechanical & Indus- trial Engineering and the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (ILead). She completed her PhD at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) studying product development decision-making during complex industry projects. Dr. Olechowski completed her BSc (Engineering) at Queen’s Univer- sity and her MS at MIT, both in Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Olechowski studies the processes and tools that teams of engineers use in industry as they design innovative new products. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Engineering Students and Group Membership: Patterns of Variation in
Rapid Transit district’s 1990’s expansions in the East Bay and SFO Airport at three billion to the New Starts program for the Federal Transit Administration with over a hundred projects and $85 billion in construction value. At the latter, he also acted as source selection board chairman and program COTR for $200 plus million in task order con- tracts for engineering services. Working for the third-largest transit agency in the United States, the Los Angeles County MTA, Michael managed bus vehicle engineering for $1 billion in new acquisitions and post-delivery maintenance support for 2300 vehicles with some of the most complex technology (natural gas engines and embedded systems) in the US transit industry in the
Engineering. He has over 13 years of experience working in industry where he learned how important hands-on education and professional development are for preparing students to succeed in the workplace.Dr. Heidi Reeder, Boise State University Heidi Reeder is the Director of the Leadership Certificate programs in the College of Innovation and Design at Boise State University, and a Professor of Communication. As a social scientist her research interests include leadership, commitment, gender, and pedagogy. Her articles have been published in top communication and social psychology journals including Sex Roles, Communication Monographs, and the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. She earned a B.S. in communication
years indicates that engineeringleadership development programs and courses may look toward the U.S. Army and the militarymore broadly in addition to industry for examples of leadership and leader development.Leadership models used in these programs may pull from U.S. Army leadership doctrine (e.g.,[9]). Veterans and currently serving military members are often consulted in the development ofengineering leadership programs (e.g., [10], [11]). Faculty in these programs may be veterans(e.g., [12]). The University of Texas at El Paso’s E-LEAD program bases its model directly onthe leadership development model of The United States Military Academy [13]. Paradoxically,educators exploring engineering leadership [1] may overlook military colleges
and program evaluator at University of Michigan. Also he taught an ”individual learning skills” as an assistant instructor in the University of Texas at Austin for five years. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Inclusive Leadership in an Engineering Leadership CourseBackground Engineering educators have seen significant changes in the Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET) criteria starting in the early 2000. Pre-empted byworkforce demands, these modifications seek to address changing workplace dynamics andglobalization. One change reflects the evolution of teamwork in ABET’s Criteria 3, studentoutcomes, which now states
learning. Additional service interests include teaching and leadership training for graduate students, enhancing communication education for undergraduate engineering students, developing evidence-based design project team formation strategies, and improving engineering design curricula.Dr. Mattox Alan Beckman, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Mattox Beckman is a teaching assistant professor in the Computer Science department. He earned his doctorate from UIUC in 2003 under Sam Kamin, specializing in programming languages. He was a senior lecturer at the Illinois Institute of Technology for 12 years, and then returned to UIUC in 2015, where he teaches the Programming Languages and Data Structures courses. He
, pp. 525-545, 2009.[8] J. Kiyama and S. Luca, “Structured opportunities: exploring the social and academic benefits for peer mentors in retention programs,” Journal of College Student Retention, vol. 15 no. 4, pp. 489-514, 2014.[9] J. Good, G. Halpin, and G. Halpin, “A promising prospect for minority retention: students becoming mentors,” Journal of Negro Education, vol. 69 no. 4, pp. 375-383, 2000.[10] M. Washburn and S. Miller, “Retaining undergraduate women in science, engineering, and technology: a survey of a student organization,” Journal of College Student Retention, vol 6 no. 2, pp. 155-168, 2004.[11] B. Brand and M. Kasarda, “The influence of social interactions on female students in two engineering
American Society for En- gineering Education (ASEE). Gregg received his PhD in Educational Leadership and Higher Education from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln with a Master of Technology Management degree and a BS in Manufacturing Engineering Technology, from Brigham Young University.Major Blandon Prowse, Micron Technology Inc. 15 years working with leaders in building their personal and team effectiveness in military and high tech industries. Currently leading executive and leadership development for Micron Technologies.Mr. Wai-Leong Mook, Micron Technology Inc. Wai-Leong, Mook received the B.Sc. degree in Microelectronics Engineering from the Louisiana State University (US) in 2001 and the Master of Business
learning new things aftergraduation. He explained how he, as a new engineer, did not appreciate that he needed tocontinue to learn and adapt to new challenges. To him, that required that he make himselfhumble enough to learn. He also advocated that any leadership program be based on experientiallearning or utilize the case method. Experiential learning is perhaps the most popularpedagogical approach for leadership education [19] among the newer engineering leadershipprograms surveyed in the US [4], Europe, and Australia [20].Another group of engineering leaders from two different agencies listed key skills for newengineers as knowing the personality of their teams, understanding how each person prefers tocommunicate (face-to-face, email, text