Paper ID #9384Exploring Engineering Education in Broader Context: A Framework of En-gineering Global PreparednessScott C Streiner, University of Pittsburgh Scott C. Streiner is a full-time doctoral student in the Industrial Engineering Department at the University of Pittsburgh. He conducts research in the field of globalized engineering, including studying offerings in international engineering education, and the extent to which these experiences improve global prepared- ness of engineering students. Currently, Streiner’s research focus is on how best to operationalize and evaluate global opportunities within the
appeared in the San Jose Mercury News, CBS Market Watch, CNN.com, Information Week, PC Magazine, Fast 2008 Company, and Enterprise Linux. He is an active participant in government-industry-university partnerships through such groups as the US National Academies Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable. He Page 15.389.1 has participated on many scientific program committees, is on the board of advisors for four major universities including the University of Illinois and the University of California San Diego, published extensively (his top five publications have been cited 580+ times
“Energy and Environmental Issues for China.”Each student was assigned to study selected sites in depth and present his or her findings to thegroup on the day of the visit. In addition, students were expected to keep a journal documentingtheir reflections on what they had witnessed and learned throughout the trip. After the study-tour, the GTI Study Program participants made presentations to 200+ students in the College ofEngineering about the information they had learned and the impact of globalization oneveryone’s lives.2.4. Study Program Site SelectionAs mentioned earlier, all participants were undergraduate students; most of them were juniorsand seniors. It was discovered that stimulating student interest was best achieved by selectingstudy
Page 12.795.8 important initiative that can be implemented. Postdocs can immediately influence the quality and quantity of research outputs through more publications, and more PhD students. 11. Focus on research capable staff when academic recruitment opportunities present. This can be easier to say than to implement in colleges that have strongly vocational undergraduate teaching programs to deliver. 12. Be careful of timetable and academic load for young faculty. Ensure that schemes are available for faculty to buy-out their time or to balance PhD supervision against traditional teaching activities. 13. Develop an effective research supervisor/advisor training
participate in seminars, workshops, open forums, etc., to exchange ideas,express their views, discuss the pros and cons of the status quos, and why they think a “change”should take place! By the end of this stage, an initial draft of the proposed changes or a pilotprogram would be arrived at. The senior faculty should assume a leading role in providingguidance and insuring that all faculty members, wishing to contribute or be heard, have beengiven ample opportunity to air their views.Industries’ feedback: The preliminary views arrived at during the consensus stage need to bepassed on to the industrial sector. Those industries that have an interest and have made theirviews known regarding educational programs in general and engineering in particular
faculty, and its objectives. After overcoming traditionalbarriers, a conceptual framework for “retooling” and/or “revitalizing” the academic programsshould be outlined. What lies at the crux of the matter is: what engineering students need to learnand how can they best learn it, as well as what engineering institutions should teach and how canthey best teach it? The paper argues that various “stakeholders” in the future of engineering education(administrators, faculty, students, industry, and government leaders) as well as others - wouldeventually come to grip with the dilemma in which they are immersed, be stimulated to debate,and motivated to act along workable paths to implement widespread reform to insure theviability and currency of
lack of skilled professionals in areas deemed necessary for growthand development of oil-related industries of the Region, has been pivotal in the start-up of highereducation in general and engineering education in particular.There are today eight public colleges of engineering in the Region (Table 1) in addition toseveral, recently established, private and semi private colleges and/or universities that offerengineering programs. These eight public colleges have, since their inception, been guided byadvisory boards made up largely from faculty members and administrators drawn from UScolleges. Previously, the Grinter’s Report (15) and the Goals Report (16) have been used to guidethe educational process. Recently, ABET Engineering Criteria 2000
” learning-related activities, believed to spark and stimulate their learning, whilein the classroom.(17) These activities would include: reading, writing, solving problems,answering questions, participating in a discussion, etc.; and most important, students must beengaged in thinking tasks while actively involved. It is generally understood that duringactive learning, less emphasis is placed on transmission of information and more ondeveloping students’ skills. Additionally, during an active learning cycle, emphasis is placedon students’ exploration of their own abilities, including: their thinking process, their valuesystem, their intellect, and their courage to express themselves orally and in writing. Activelearning is contrasted to the
question whether students are ready and willing tobecome active participants in the process? Sixth, most faculty members were mindful of thetime and effort required to become a more effective instructor; and, at the same time,apprehensive and concerned that teaching is often undervalued in comparison to research.The interviewed faculty members have been teaching undergraduate classes at their presentinstitutions for a minimum of five years. Most of the classes taught by the aforementionedfaculty are small size, seldom exceeding 35 students per class. The lecture format dominatesthe seen. Students listen, take notes, and are allowed to ask questions at the end of the lectureor during office hours. There seem to be less interest (by most of the
, unfortunately, the education process in nearly allgovernment-run programs within these countries, continue to suffer from: antiquatedprograms, improper teaching methods, poor management, and lack of resources. Onthe other hand, engineering institutions in the Arab Gulf Region have, by and large,been spared. Region’s colleges (a map of the Region is shown in Figure1) have, fromthe start, “got on the right foot” and founded - what appeared to be at the time -modern engineering colleges with a decisive advantage over most of the engineeringinstitutions of the broader Arab Middle East.Engineering education in the Arab Gulf Region started, in earnest, during the early tomid sixties. Initially, colleges of engineering were founded in Riyadh, Jeddah, andlater
less an imparter of knowledge and more a designer and a facilitator oflearning experiences and opportunities. In other words, the real challenge in college teaching isnot trying to cover the material for the students, as many of us believe and practice today; but,rather uncovering the material with the students. This is a call for all faculty involved withteaching engineering courses and as members of faculty teams who develop, maintain andimplement engineering programs , to consider not only the content and topics that make up anengineering degree but also how students engage with these materials. It is primarily a call toconsider how students engage in their college experience, and to search for proper tools that canbe deployed to stimulate
within the traditional lectureapproach. Fifth, some members have stressed the point that the success of any active learningstrategy requires students’ active participation, raising the question whether students are readyand willing to become active participants in the process? Sixth, most faculty members weremindful of the time and energy required to become a more effective instructor; and, at the sametime, apprehensive and concerned that teaching is often undervalued in comparison to research.The interviewed faculty members have been teaching undergraduate classes at their present Page 13.941.6institutions for a minimum of five years. Most of
learning requires students to take part in“pre-planned” learning-related activities, believed to spark and stimulate their learning, whilein the classroom.(17) These activities would include: reading, writing, solving problems,answering questions, participating in a discussion, etc.; and most important, students must beengaged in thinking tasks while actively involved. It is generally understood that duringactive learning, less emphasis is placed on transmission of information and more ondeveloping students’ skills. Additionally, during an active learning cycle, emphasis is placedon students’ exploration of their own abilities, including: their thinking process, their valuesystem, their intellect, and their courage to express themselves orally and
to Lima, Peru from May through the middleof June, annually. Up to 15 students from UNI can also participate in this program as part of theGlobal Engineering Culture and Society course. Students from both institutions will grapple withopen-ended projects that stimulate intercultural competence, interaction, and collaboration. Inaddition to providing undergraduate students with a cross cultural engagement and STEM-related study abroad opportunity, the program also: 1) Expose them to the use of scientificmethods in developing a problem statement revolving around identified global challenges; 2)Give them an experience-based understanding of the value of multidisciplinary teams, and; 3)Require them to investigate contemporary issues in a broader
Engineering (emphasis in Biomedical Engineering), 2 inIndustrial and System Engineering, and 1in Mechanical Engineering. All participants, except onegraduate student majoring in English, were undergraduate students; most of them were juniorsand seniors.4. Pre-trip student preparationThe GTI program, for the first four years, included a one-unit pre-trip acculturation course forthe participants. Between 2004 and 2008, the GTI students participated in a one-unit course priorto the trip. Assessment of the students from the GTI 2008 trip indicated that the one-unit courseon India failed to prepare GTI fellows for their trip to India. Therefore, beginning with the GTI2009 program, we increased the scope of the preparatory course from one to three units
, New York Institute of Technology Nada Marie Anid, Ph.D., is the first female dean of NYIT’s School of Engineering and Computing Sci- ences (SoECS). In this role, she oversees 77 engineering and computing sciences faculty members and approximately 1,700 graduate and undergraduate students at campuses located in Manhattan and Old Westbury, N.Y., the Middle East, and China. Her expertise is in Industry-academic partnerships; En- trepreneurship and Innovation; Emerging Technologies; Sustainability; Global Engineering Education; STEM K-12 Outreach. Dr. Anid embraces NYIT’s forward-thinking and applications-oriented mission and is working on sev- eral strategic partnerships between the School of Engineering and the
AC 2010-1242: IMPACT OF CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY EXPERIENCES ONCULTURAL SENSITIVITY DEVELOPMENTLarry Bland, John Brown University Larry Bland is currently Chair, Division of Engineering and Construction Management and Associate Professor of Engineering at John Brown University. Dr. Bland has been at John Brown since 2002. Prior to his academic career, he spent over 30 years in industry. His industrial career moved from engineering to executive management with significant international experience. Since joining John Brown, Dr. Bland has been active in expanding undergraduate research opportunities for students and assessing university study abroad programs