Practices Related to Sociotechnical Thinking in the Teaching of Undergraduate Engineering StudentsAs a global society, we face significant challenges, including environmental degradation andclimate change, increasing economic inequity, rapid urbanization and population growth, theexclusion of individuals and groups from different forms of social engagement, and concernswith privacy and security. Given the omnipresent nature of technology and its influence on ourlives, engineers must consider the ethical, environmental and sociological impacts of their work,and some engineering programs are considering new pedagogical methods and broaderframeworks to engage students in macroethics, sociotechnical thinking and engineering for
Paper ID #37665’It Gives Me a Bit of Anxiety’: Civil and Architectural EngineeringStudents’ Emotions Related to Their Future Responsibility as EngineersDr. Madeline Polmear, Vrije Universiteit Brussel Madeline Polmear is a Marie Sklodowska-Curie, EUTOPIA Science & Innovation Cofund Fellow at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium. Her research interests relate to engineering ethics education and the development of societal responsibility and professional competence through formal and informal learning. Madeline received her Bachelors in environmental engineering, Masters in civil engineering, and PhD in civil
electrician described how he sought engineering as a means of making moremoney than he thought he could make as an electrician, despite always wanting to be anelectrician. It is a truism that students often enter into engineering programs to obtain high salaryemployment upon graduation, as this unionized electrician sought. Upon completing a year ofhigher education in an electrical engineering program, he found that he didn’t like it and that theprospect of higher pay with an electrical engineering degree was not significant enough tosustain his enrollment in the program. Instead, he transitioned to related associate degreeprograms at a community college before enrolling in the electricians’ union apprenticeshipprogram. His choice to obtain three
evidence for curricular practices present the following limitations: 1. The difficulty of representing the intellectual rationale and course content in that format; 2. The lack of consistency in website organization and design; 3. The tremendous amounts of path-dependent detail that are inherent to engineer programs of study; 4. The challenges of keeping website content up to date; and, 5. The reality that website design has become a public relations activity to a much greater extent than hard copy course catalogs were in the past (p. 5)While we acknowledge these limitations, we find that the outward-facing language of minorprograms provides a rich resource to gain a better understanding of how engineering programsare
ofthe program or its larger social implications. These social and humanistic concerns are oftenexplicitly devalued material because it falls outside of what engineering programs understand tobe their disciplinary scope (see, for example [12]).Critical pedagogies developed in the context of humanistic and social studies instruction aim toempower students by encouraging thoughtful consideration of the purpose of their education andthe skills they need to develop through it to enact a future they desire. Such approaches oftenencourage students to draw on their own experiences to deepen their understanding of the topicsthey are learning and their relevance to their own lives and goals. Feminist approaches seek to“create pedagogical situations which
,pedagogical and student experiences. Similarly, with a focus on an engineering thermodynamics course,Riley [5] motivates the use of liberative pedagogies in engineering education by relating pedagogy tostudents’ prior experiences, student responsibility and authority, including ethics and policy, decenteringwestern knowledge systems.Institutional and Data Collection ContextThe student co-authors of this paper, who are currently in their sophomore year, are enrolled in anundergraduate engineering program developed around the intellectual theme of “human-centered”engineering. The program integrates the university’s liberal arts curriculum with an experientialengineering curriculum emphasizing societal responsibility.For the liberal arts requirement of
. Simply put, empathy is a person's ability to relate toanother’s feelings, emotions, decisions, and understandings. The adage “put yourself in theirshoes” is a familiar concept for empathy [11]. It is one of the very human skills that help usunderstand each other, and empathy is essential in an ever-growing diverse society. This isparticularly true in the STEM fields, where scientific and engineering discoveries help advancehumanity. Empathy, however, is a concept that is not readily emphasized in STEM curriculumand is considered an afterthought by may STEM students, whereas scientific and technical skillsare at the forefront of learning [12]. Recent work in engineering, STEM pedagogy, and educationseeks to change this perception. Hess, et al
Paper ID #43452Extraordinary Engineering Impacts on Society: Over Seven Decades of Contributionsfrom the National Science Foundation: A U.S. National Academy of EngineeringStudyMs. Casey Gibson, National Academy of Engineering Casey Gibson, M.S., is an Associate Program Officer at the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) of the U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine where she contributes to the Cultural, Ethical, Social, and Environmental Responsibility in Engineering (CESER) program. Gibson holds an M.S. from the Colorado School of Mines in Humanitarian Engineering and Science with a specialization
awell-developed and thoroughly integrated communication program that highlights howinterpersonal and intercultural communication can lead to measurable outcomes that enhanceprofessional identity and practice.Experiences in EngineeringProgram 1: University of Utah (2003-2013)Engineering Criteria 2000 resulted in the incorporation of communication and writing instructionas part of engineering graduation requirements. Dedicated learning outcomes related tocommunication, writing, teamwork, and ethics necessitated that engineering departmentsdemonstrate continuous improvement/development of these competencies. As a result, a pilotprogram was launched in the Department of Mechanical Engineering that paired two graduateteaching assistants (one from
, capitalism, racism, and cisheteropatriarchy.Engineering in Western countries, within a formal capacity, was never established separatelyfrom the military. In fact, the first formal engineering educational program in the United Stateswas founded at West Point Military Academy [8]. Exorbitant amounts of research fundingcontinue to tie the direction of academic training to the interests of the military [9]. Nearly half(44% in 2017) of all federal research dollars in science in engineering are directed towarddefense related work. Career centers at universities in the United States are legally required toprovide enrolled student contact information to the military for purposes of employment [10].Furthermore, career centers offer generous support for the
feelings of belonging in modern science. Her research specialties include histories of women, gender, and sexuality in modern science and technology; the interplay between engineers and engineering practices and the infrastructure of everyday life; and the relationship between design, technology, and justice.Dr. Avneet Hira, Boston College Dr. Avneet Hira is an Assistant Professor in the Human-Centered Engineering Program and the Department of Teaching, Curriculum and Society (by courtesy) at Boston College. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Engineering as Conflict: A Framing for Liberal Engineering EducationIntroductionIn this paper we use the framing of “engineering as conflict” to
about harm. In this paper, we analyze students’ discourseto answer the research questions: In small group discussions where students unanimously opposethe use of a technology, what arguments do they use to argue against that technology? How dothese arguments relate to common narratives about technology?Framework: Common narratives about technologyPrior research has worked to identify and describe the ways technology is commonly viewed inmodern society. These uncomplicated, positive views are found in media [16], educationstandards [17, 18], and throughout the undergraduate engineering curriculum [19, 20]. We willuse ‘common narratives’ to describe these perspectives, while others have used engineeringmindsets, underlying worldviews [20], and
relation to variable contexts (user empathy, professional responsibility, pattern recognition)Unlike the example given below where the performance indicator was narrowly described as theapplication of a specific model, the performance indicators here leave room for innovativeapproaches in ethics instruction as well as engagement with complex, open-ended socio-technical issues. This contrasts with more straightforward but arguably less robust assessments,such as applying a professional code of ethics to a given ethical challenge. In this way, wedeploy ABET to ensure our program engages with the complexities of engineering for ethicaloutcomes rather than the application of a single, specific ethical approach.Performance indicators provide
responsible conduct research (RCR), policy decision-making,human safety, sustainability, pro bono work, social justice, and diversity, equity, and inclusionwork [11].Many previous efforts in engineering education focused on structured research programs aroundskills such as research [12], research communication [13], and teamwork and leadership [14].Zydney et al. surveyed engineering alumni to assess the impact of the undergraduate researchexperience [15]. In the study, participants reported perceived significant cognitive and personalskills benefits when exposed to undergraduate research experiences for a longer time. Because ofthe limitations of the survey used in the study, there was no report on how these researchexperiences created epistemic
to controversial forms of techno-sciencesuch as “synthetic biology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and climate engineering” [1].Likewise, researchers have found productive ways of using Frankenstein to prompt ethicalreflection among professional scientists and engineers. Publishing in the novel’s bicentennialyear, Peter Nagy et al. conducted a study that examines how the Frankenstein myth hasinfluenced professional identity and ethical formation among techno-scientists working in publicresearch universities in the United States [2]. Those surveyed in the study were all engaged inprojects related to emerging technologies, including “genetic engineering, synthetic biology,nanotechnology, robotics, and artificial intelligence” [2]. When
encounters is hard to track and howthey relate to these cultural practices evolves (non-linearly!) over time in interaction with otherinstitutional influences usually embodying dominant engineering culture. Furthermore, becausethese mindsets and practices are interwoven and students interpret them in a variety of waysdependent on their personal experiences and identities, it is difficult to systematicallycharacterize the influence of new cultural practices on students. So, any one study of animmersive engineering program centering macroethics is going to be a snapshot into a messyprocess that is difficult to capture [23]. Nonetheless, the growth of immersive counterculturalengineering programs in U.S. engineering schools makes it important to pursue
key words in both topics relate to the structure andrelationships built into “Engineering and. . .” programs. Topics 2 and 4 fall under the theme ofidentity and culture, as the key words focus on an engineer’s sense of self and career. Topic 3falls best under the teams and groups theme, as the key words relate to the features of individualsand groups that contribute to teamwork. 14 Topic 1: Program Topic 2: Topic 3: Team Topic 4: Topic 5: Design Learning Skills Identity MentorshipKeyword 1 student engineers kgi identity mentorsKeyword 2
the rebuttal from MIT’s headof Nuclear Engineering at the time, Kent Hansen, quoted in the New York Times’ coverage ofthe program: “Foreign students who come to MIT rise to become very important people in their society,” [Hansen] said. “Since they do become influential, we feel that exposure to MIT is beneficial [15]. “Referencing analogous US partnerships overseas, then MIT president Jerome Wiesner weighedin with his approval of continuing relations with Iran: “In spite of the present very discouragingsituation in the Soviet Union, I think that the effort was worthwhile and I wonder if we don’thave an equivalent opportunity to play a constructive or supportive role in Iran'' [16].In Hansenand Wiesner’s response to the
Paper ID #41641Engineering Identity Development Among International Students in UK FoundationYearDr. Madeline Polmear, King’s College London Madeline Polmear is a lecturer (assistant professor) in engineering education at King’s College London. Her research interests relate to engineering ethics education and the development of societal responsibility and professional competence through formal and informal learning. Madeline received her Bachelor’s in environmental engineering, Master’s in civil engineering, and PhD in civil engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder, USA. Prior to joining KCL, she was a Marie
student success; and (c) cultivate more ethical future scientists and engineers by blending social, political and technological spheres. She prioritizes working on projects that seek to share power with students and orient to stu- dents as partners in educational transformation. She pursues projects that aim to advance social justice in undergraduate STEM programs and she makes these struggles for change a direct focus of her research.Devyn Elizabeth ShaferDr. Brianne Gutmann, San Jos´e State University Brianne Gutmann (she/her) is an Assistant Professor at San Jos´e State University. She does physics education research with expertise in adaptive online learning tools, identity-responsive mentoring and community
cognitive machinery and help to drive behavior in learning environments. His academic training was in Physics and Philosophy before he turned to science (particDr. David Tomblin, University of Maryland, College Park David is the director of the Science, Technology and Society program at the University of Maryland, Col- lege Park. He works with STEM majors on the ethical and social dimensions of science and technology. David also does public engagement with science and ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023The Amazon Effect: A Case Study of Corporate Influence on Student Macro-Ethical Reasoning1 - IntroductionAs the field of engineering faces looming societal issues, it becomes
health support, engineering studentsmay struggle to succeed in their coursework and may even drop out of their programs. This canbe particularly true for underrepresented students, who may face additional challenges related tolearning such as imposter syndrome and stereotype threat, both typically reinforced byengineering’s hidden curriculum. Engineering educators should be particularly concerned aboutthese issues, as they have a responsibility to ensure that all students have access to the resourcesthey need to succeed. By taking institutional mental health resources and approaches tointervention seriously, engineering educators could help to create a more inclusive andsupportive learning environment that benefits everyone involved.B. Caring
theexperience. Collectively, student responses highlight the ways in which the project facilitatedreflection related to ethical reasoning, civic responsibility, and engineering professionalresponsibility and that these experiences deepened the learning and commitment to sociallyresponsible engineering practice. Numerous student responses suggest that the social justice corecurriculum also likely influences and magnifies the impact of the assigned social justice casestudy, which is ultimately critical-consciousness raising. The majority of U.S. engineeringprograms do not mandate that their students take 9 to 13 social justice-based core courses, as doJesuit engineering programs. Responses suggest that this attention to social justice and equitywas a
University of Manitoba, in Winnipeg, Canada.Ms. Lydia Wilkinson, University of Toronto Lydia Wilkinson is an Assistant Professor, Teaching in the Engineering Communication Program/Institute for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education at the University of Toronto, where she teaches courses on written, oral and visual communicationChantal RodierDr. Laura M. Patterson, University of British Columbia, Okanagan campus Laura Patterson is an Associate Professor of Teaching in the School of Engineering at the University of British Columbia’s Okanagan campus in Kelowna, BC, Canada teaching technical communication courses to engineering students since 2007. She holds a Ph.D. in Technical Communication and Rhetoric from
which produces the harmswhich it apparently seeks to ameliorate.” [9] However, this implication of ideological dishonestyis not a necessary part of this viewpoint. Rather than a broadly underhanded scam, EA maymerely present a system with guidance for individual acts but not for collective action orsystemic transformation.STEM, Altruism, Rigor, and EmpathyEffective altruism might be less important for engineering educators if our programs weren’texpressly targeted by the movement’s recruiting pitches, like the one that Lewis describes asprompting Bankman-Fried’s conversion: Even before [MacAskill] was done, he knew the sort of person who’d be coming up to speak with him: the sort of person who scored an 800 on their math SAT, and
Paper ID #39243Transgender and Nonbinary Computing and Engineering Education: AWorkshop Experience ReportStacey SextonAmanda Menier, SageFox Consulting GroupRebecca Zarch, SageFox Consulting Group Rebecca Zarch is an evaluator and a director of SageFox Consulting Group. She has spent almost 20 years evaluating and researching STEM education projects from K-12 through graduate programs. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Transgender and Nonbinary Computing and Engineering Education: A Workshop Experience ReportExisting gender diversity Broadening
Paper ID #43056Developing Engineers’ Critical Consciousness through Gender and EthnicStudies: Reframing STEM IdentityDr. Jenn Stroud Rossmann, Lafayette College Jenn Stroud Rossmann is Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Lafayette College. She earned her BS in mechanical engineering and the PhD in applied physics from the University of California, Berkeley.Prof. Mary A. Armstrong, Lafayette College Mary A. Armstrong is Charles A. Dana Professor of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies and English at Lafayette College, where she also chairs the Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies Program. She earned her PhD in English and
achievement. They found that classes taught by an instructor with a fixed mindsetresulted in achievement gaps that were twice as large as those taught by teachers with a growthmindset [6]. This impact is further confirmed by the findings in Oduwole’s paper where hementions that “teachers’ beliefs are frequently taken over by their students” (p. 115) [7]. Thesestudies demonstrate the impact of a teacher’s mindset on a student’s learning, so gaining insightsinto professors’ mindsets is shown to be valuable. Our paper explores mindsets that are commonto engineering and education faculty and related literature to each will be discussed.Engineering is a profession centered on creating a design, typically one that will address or solvea problem. Being an
,they identify six dimensions of engineering culture: 1) an engineering way of thinking tied to tangible,measurable, quantifiable realities, 2) an engineering way of doing characterized as “hard,” 3) anengineering way of being involving a “can do” attitude prioritizing effective and efficient problemsolving, 4) a growing acceptance of difference linked to increasing demographic, disciplinary, andexperiential diversity in the school, 5) a relational commitment to study teams as a survival tactic, and 6)a mentality of “going it alone” as a faculty, separating their institutional identity from the rest of theuniversity.15 Among the many engineering education researchers who have cited Godfrey and Parker’sstudy, Deters and Paretti investigate the
Paper ID #42156The Power of Place: A Critical Examination of Engineering Enculturation &Identity FormationDr. Timothy Duane Reedy, University of Maryland, College ParkDr. David Tomblin, University of Maryland, College Park David is the director of the Science, Technology and Society program at the University of Maryland, College Park. He works with STEM majors on the ethical and social dimensions of science and technology. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 The Power of Place: A Critical Examination of Engineering Enculturation and Identity FormationAbstract