beoperationalized in an EL program using a team-based experiential learning approach.Motivation for curricular innovation – The promise of experiential learning in ethicsA growing set of examples in engineering education literature describe new experiential learningapproaches for ethics instruction in engineering [12, 17 - 20]. Motivating this trend, scholars discusshow traditional approaches to ethics instruction have largely focused on retrospection and historicreview, often at the expense of other learning modes, such as experimentation and personalexperience [18, 19]. Those latter modes can be important toward building an ability in students tohandle “unfamiliar tensions” [18], a capacity essential for joining new work environments and indealing with
integrate growth in these competencies into future experiences. Due to the lack ofshared curricular requirements across the eighteen engineering majors offered at U-M,incorporating a bookend approach seemed to be a potentially effective strategy. Updating anexisting course in the first year, where some shared curriculum does exist, and implementing anew course in the senior year when most students are completing their senior design experienceand preparing to enter the workforce, proved to be the most feasible.This practice paper primarily provides information regarding the design of these two courses,including explanation of the motivations for implementing these courses and the research basisthat informs the course design. Additionally, we analyze
Paper ID #43350Applying Aspects of Professional Settings to Student Teaming in an Engineeringand Design CourseRobert Benjamin Simon, Georgia Institute of Technology Robert Simon serves as an Academic Professional for the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) at Georgia Tech. He contributes to our undergraduate Global Engineering Leadership Minor, as well as our new Innovation & Entrepreneurship track, by infusing leadership, innovation, and team effectiveness into our engineering curriculum. He co-instructs our Innovation & Entrepreneurship in CEE Systems course, and is a member of the instructional team
leadershipin the process of developing technological innovations. However, during a typicalundergraduate engineering program the students are not taught about effective decision-making or leadership, as these are considered to be management modules and outside thecore engineering curriculum. This research paper, based on a case study from PlakshaUniversity, a new engineering university in India presents a pedagogical innovation thatcenters research design as an effective pedagogical tool to teach decision-making andleadership skills to engineering students. To test this, we collected data on three majorquestions: student perception of the importance of decision-making and leadership, actualstudent performance in the course, and student perception of
Paper ID #43844Assessing Student Engagement, Success, Leadership and Teamwork Skillswith Respect to Team Role Selection and ExecutionDr. Edward Latorre, University of Florida https://www.eng.ufl.edu/eed/faculty-staff/edward-latorre-navarro/ ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Assessing Student Engagement, Success, Leadership and Teamwork Skills with respect to Team Role Selection and ExecutionAbstractThe importance of working in teams throughout the engineering education curriculum has beenwell documented in research. Therefore, most engineering curricula conclude with a team-basedcapstone design
. INTRODUCTION1.1 MotivationThis work is motivated by our own efforts in trying to effect change as it relates toincorporating interdisciplinary approaches and concepts within the curriculum, bothinternally at our own institutions, and broadly as members of national engineeringeducation communities of practice such as the Canadian Engineering EducationAssociation (CEEA), the CEEA Sustainable Engineering Leadership and Management(SELM) special interest group, the National Initiative on Capacity Building andKnowledge Creation for Engineering Leadership (NICKEL), the American Society forEngineering Education (ASEE) and the ASEE Engineering Leadership DevelopmentDivision (LEAD). We are instructors with both industry and academic experience whohave spent many
management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling Twelfth edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2017.[21] M. S. Rao, "Enhancing employability in engineering and management students through soft skills," Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 42-48, 2014, doi: 10.1108/ICT-04-2013-0023.[22] L. Infante-Alcántara, M. D. J. Araiza-Vázquez, and J. F. López-Pérez, "Competencias blandas que influyen en la empleabilidad laboral de profesionistas egresados de ingeniería de una universidad del Norte de México", Form. Univ., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 112, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.4067/S0718-50062023000200001.[23] J. I. Pagán Conesa, "Habilidades emprendedoras para fomentar la inserción laboral del
study, allowed the authors to interrogatestudents’ boundary crossing experiences and curate approaches for supporting global learning.The findings can guide educators to intentionally incorporate boundary crossing situations intotheir curriculum to stimulate productive conflict and global learning exchanges that can supportthe development of global leadership competencies.This study is significant as it demonstrates boundary learning focus areas and strategies forscaffolding students’ leadership experiences in global learning contexts. This researchcontributes to the theory and practice of engineering leadership and learning across boundaries inengineering education. However, the research was limited to data from two team projects andstudents
coordinates the Communications Across the Curriculum program for the College. He also manages the Communication Studio in the Chevron Center for Engineering.Adrienne Steele, Louisiana State University and A&M College Adrienne Steele has over 20 years of experience in STEM education. Currently, Adrienne works at Louisiana State University as the Assistant Director of Student Programs and Outreach in the Chevron Center for Engineering Education. Her current responsibili ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023Using Escape Rooms to Apply Team Building and Leadership Skills in anEngineering Leadership Development Program: A Work in ProgressPerforming under pressure is common in engineering. Many
leadership [3].Mentorship can occur through prescribed means (e.g. a work program which pairs a mentor and amentee), or can be more organic (e.g. approaching an experienced colleague for guidance).Mentorship is particularly relevant within professional practices, such as engineering. Prior tolarger-scale delivery models commonly seen in higher-education today, education in professionalpractices historically relied upon apprenticeship models to foster learning and competencydevelopment [4]. These models emphasize experiential learning and reflective practice, whereapprentices apply their learnings to their own contexts with the support of someone with moreexpertise – mirroring the essence of mentorship. To develop better engineers, this approach
. Secondly, even if we had the "right" learning experiences in our courses, how would wemeasure team performance or growth in team effectiveness over time? Finding an adequateassessment that is simple enough for the average engineering instructor is critical todisseminating teamwork learning experiences throughout the curriculum. We decided to start by finding a way to measure teamwork that is simple to use, simple tograde, and simple to interpret at the course level as well as the program level. Once selected, wecan look at curating (or creating) learning experiences to use as interventions to help improve thescores related to teamwork effectiveness. There are a variety of studies that look at assessing teamwork in engineering teams
other half of the solution is the social aspect that is often very difficult to convert into numbers to be optimized. Realizing this gave me a realistic expectation of what engineering can and cannot solve.Instructor Reflections: Theme 2Students expressed surprise at the different disciplinary perspectives and approaches to problemsolving even within engineering, noting that the course gave them a new appreciation for thetools of other disciplines. Introduction of the different epistemologies of other academicdisciplines was an area of great interest and novel to the students. There were rich classdiscussions on the distinctions between paradigms in science/engineering and social sciences,and several students wrote about these
engineers in the software industry [12], [14], [15].These engineers are sometimes referred to in academia and industry as software developers.Two of the papers researched engineers in the construction industry [9], [10] and one of thosetwo specifically examined how women engineers in the construction industry experiencehappiness at work [10]. Five of the papers did not specify the industry that was examined [8],[11], [13], [16], [17]. 3) Methods and Approaches: Examination of the methods and approaches used in eachpaper revealed a dearth of theories applied to the topic. None of the papers on happiness forengineers strongly leveraged existing theories in human resource development, leadership,management, or psychology. Authors did employ a
is also interested in student and faculty development. Elizabeth received a B.S. in civil engineering from Clemson University (Clemson, SC).Dr. Denise Rutledge Simmons P.E., University of Florida Denise R. Simmons, Ph.D., PE, PMP, LEED-AP is the Associate Dean for Workforce Development in the Wertheim College of Engineering and a tenured Associate Professor in the Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering at the University of Florida. Her research answers national calls for construction and civil engineering professionals to develop new competencies to navigate the changes of evolving work- force demographics, technology, and organizational structures. As director of the Simmons Research Lab, she researches
substantial effort directed at curricular definition [7] and near-termevaluation, such as pre-/post- program assessments designed to enable course or programrefinement [8, 9]. However, EL program-level goals and visions often include emphases on long-term career outcomes of participants (e.g., [10 - 13]), such as GEL's aim to develop "the future 11 12leaders of engineering practice and technological development" [10]. As EL programs' lifespansnow approach the points in time when alumni are reaching mid-career stages, new types of outcomesbecome measurable that are pertinent to programs' evaluation against these broader goals. Theseoutcomes include, for instance, extents of career advancement, types of
/12.4.895.[24] M. Klassen, D. Reeve, C. Rottmann, R. Sacks, A. Simpson, and A. Huynh, “Charting the Landscape of Engineering Leadership Education in North American Universities,” in 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, New Orleans, Louisiana: ASEE Conferences, Jun. 2016, p. 26486. doi: 10.18260/p.26486.[25] P. J. Breaux, “An effective leadership approach for today’s engineer 2006 IEEE/UT EMC,” in 2006 IEEE/UT Engineering Management Conference, Austin, TX, USA: IEEE, Aug. 2006, pp. 61–65. doi: 10.1109/UTEMC.2006.5236200.[26] E. A. Croft, P. Winkelman, A. Boisvert, and K. Patten, “Global Engineering Leadership – Design and Implementation of Local and International Service Learning Curriculum for Senior
Character skills.Dr. Olga Pierrakos, Wake Forest University and National Science Foundation Dr. Olga Pierrakos is a rotating STEM Education Program Director in the Division of Undergraduate Education at the National Science Foundation (a second stint). Olga is also the Founding Chair (2017-2022) and a Professor of Wake Forest Engineering. With a unique vision to Educate the Whole Engineer and a commitment to Human Flourishing, Olga led Wake Forest Engineering to be ranked as one of the top (14th) ”Best Undergraduate Engineering Programs” by US News Report (2023). With this unique vision, Olga has also served as the principal investigator since 2019 on a multi-year Kern Family Foundation KEEN (Kern Entrepreneurial
both engi- neering education and design thinking, her research focuses on how Latinx students develop an identity as an engineer, methods for enhancing student motivation, approaches for faculty leadership develop- ment, and methods for involving students in curriculum development and teaching through Peer Designed Instruction. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Shaping the Engineering Leadership Research Agenda: Results of a 2022 Special SessionAbstractEngineering leadership (EL) research publication has seen significant growth coinciding with the ever-increasing recognition thatleadership development is an essential component of undergraduate engineering student
practices: JLLA aims to develop leadership andprofessional skills in graduate engineering students through a collaborative “for us, by us”approach and curriculum. The student lead program enhances leadership skills through specializedworkshops and seminars, targeted training, and hands-on learning experiences that extend beyondthe confines of the UConn campus. The workshops address a diverse range of topics, includingleadership development, communication skills, ethical decision making, conflict resolution,feedback skills, and more. Typically, they are structured to provide a fundamental understandingof the topic through presentations, interactive activities, and informative sessions conducted bysubject matter experts. The speakers for the workshop
. Sacks, and D. Reeve, "Engineering leadership: Grounding leadership theory in engineers' professional identities," Leadership, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 351–373, 2015, doi: 10.1177/1742715014543581.[9] M. Abdulwahed and M. O. Hasna, "Leadership: Models, Competencies, and the Emergence of Engineering Leadership," in Engineering and Technology Talent for Innovation and Knowledge-Based Economies, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 35–45. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-46439-8_3.[10] M. Klassen, D. Reeve, G. J. Evans, C. Rottmann, P. K. Sheridan, and A. Simpson, "Engineering: Moving Leadership From the Periphery to the Core of an Intensely Technical Curriculum," New Dir Stud Leadersh, vol. 2020, no
attributes and their intersection with sustainability, learning culture, diversity, equity and inclusion, and continuous course and program improvement.Dr. John R. Donald P.Eng., University of Guelph John R. Donald is a professor at the University of Guelph with over 25 years of leadership experience in post-secondary education and engineering consulting. John is a past president (2017–18) and fellow (2020) of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA-ACEG), ´ and founder of the Guelph Engineering Leadership Program. His current research focuses on engineering leadership and development of professional skills in the engineering design curriculum. ©American Society for Engineering