computational power is greatly expanding its impactand influence in leadership, i.e., data, and computation on it, is used to enhance the practice ofleadership. These developments have wide-ranging impacts for organization and will force us toaddress thorny ethical challenges.This work will address a small slice of the overall picture, i.e., an initial exploration in the Fall 2023semester of student and industry perceptions about specific ethical questions on Gen AI’s impact oncareers and the workplace. The intent is to help students in our undergraduate Engineering Leadershipclass at Texas A&M University to be resilient in their own careers and to navigate the ethical watersof Gen AI in decision making in their workplaces.We use a flipped
privilege in terms of her race (i.e., operating as a Whitewoman in predominantly White spaces) in civil engineering. She understands that due tointersectionality one's identity and experiences are a result of interconnected socialcategorizations such as race, class, and gender [37]. The first author made an effort to continuallyconsult with the existing literature and the participants (via member checking), and peer debriefwith the second author and other graduate students in her lab (a Black man and Black woman) toensure trustworthiness of the findings.Research QuestionWhat do inclusive engineering spaces look and feel like to early-career women in civilengineering?MethodsThis exploratory research is a part of a large qualitative study following
, graduate students, and undergraduate students. Beyond professional roles, eachperson within a network will also identify as a mentor, mentee, and peer mentor depending on therelationship with another person. From a teaching perspective, the mentorship relationshipsbetween faculty members and graduate students are crucial in developing future educators andleaders [6]. This aspect of faculty mentorship is often undervalued and essential to enhancing thegraduate educational experience. The role of social networks in these relationships and howvarious factors influence the leadership trajectory of engineering educators is worth furtherexploration.Understanding how mentees and mentors are motivated to engage within this network may giveperspective to
-fold: 1) to help further bridge the gap between teamworkeducation and the actual skills needed to perform on professional engineering teams; 2) developengineering leadership competencies among students; and 3) to test a unique approach tosimulate more professional settings in a classroom, with the intended outcome of increasingstudents’ confidence in project management and comfort levels with professional-style feedback.BackgroundThe three authors formed a single instructional team for an origami engineering course. Two ofthe three authors on this paper are faculty members in a civil engineering department at the samehome institution, a large, public R1 university located in the southeastern United States. One ofthem has expertise in
their own decisions or courses of action(i.e., where the stakes and tradeoffs are real to the learner). As one author describes it, theseapproaches “[allow] students to draw on their own experiences…to create a focal point andmeaning around abstract ethical concepts” [19, p. 1390].While the literature on experiential learning in engineering ethics has grown substantially inrecent years, extensions of this strategy into the realm of engineering leadership education iscomparatively rarer in published research. Our development of The Mystery Lab, therefore,leverages an opportunity to explore how the strengths of an experiential approach to ethicsinstruction can be applied not just to personal decision making, but to the collective behaviors
leadership elective at theUniversity of Toronto: Systems Mapping for Complex Problems. The paper offers observationsfrom the first two offerings of the course based on student assignments and semi-structuredinterviews conducted with students, augmented by instructor reflections. Our goal is to motivatefurther exploration in connecting leadership and systems thinking in the context of engineeringprograms.Systems ThinkingDonella Meadows, an early leader in the systems thinking movement, defined a system as “a setof things interconnected in such a way that they produce their own pattern of behavior over time”[12]. Her work focused on sustainability; as the lead author on “Limits to Growth,” Meadowshad a deep appreciation for the complexity of
looking for technically skilled professionals andindividuals with strong leadership abilities. Leadership in engineering is the ability to guide,motivate, and influence a team of professionals toward achieving goals and objectives. TheEngineering School of a University in Chile needs to understand the self-perceived skills of itsstudents, especially those in the final years of their engineering programs. This will help thefaculty prepare future professionals for team management, decision-making, and otheressential skills required in their careers. The School can align their graduation standards withthe career profiles of the students to ensure they are well-equipped to succeed in theirprofession.Numerous studies have suggested that there is a
section first describes the omnidirectional mentorship program as an interventiondesigned to support faculty at career transitions in which they complete a year-long programaimed to provide mentorship opportunities for participants. Second, we describe the focus groupmethodology used to explore the participant’s experiences in the program to illustrate themeaning-making, impacts, and strengths and weaknesses of this program.Our approach to mentorship was designed with three key elements in mind: 1) catalyst, 2)affirmation, and 3) negotiation. Chiefly, catalyst introduces and sparks engagement amongparticipants; affirmations support professional and personal development and growth; andnegotiations reconcile individuals’ sense of self and belonging
positionality statements; discussing project findings with their mentorsand research team; sharing project findings with their peers; collaborating with otherundergraduate and graduate researchers, faculty members, and preparing final deliverables suchas individual research posters and reports.Each student worked on a specific project of their choosing as a part of on of the REU site’sfaculty member’s labs (located across various institutions). Some of the research topics included,exploring the experiences of women in STEM, Black students in engineering, and communitycollege engineering students. Students were guided by initial literature and research questions ontheir selected topic but were given the freedom to explore and present their findings
the leadership,communication, and cultural competencies increasingly required of today's high-tech workforce.The John Lof Leadership Academy (JLLA) is an innovative leadership program for engineeringgraduate students that was founded at the University of Connecticut in 2018 to create culturallycompetent visionaries in the field of engineering. John Lof Scholars develop their leadershipabilities through focused training, specialized workshops and seminars, and active learning. Runby graduate students from various departments based on a “for us, by us” program philosophy, theJLLA empowers its members to develop as leaders in their fields by aiming leadership trainingthrough the lens of each individual’s career and personal goals. Academy
the biotech and pharmaceutical industries for eight years. Jessica’s experience leading multidisciplinary teams strengthened her perspective that the ability to empathize, communicate and collaborate is integral to success in engineering.Dr. Andrea Chan, University of Toronto, Canada Andrea Chan is a Research Associate at the Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering | University of TorontoCatherine MacKenzie Campbell MacKenzie Campbell is a MASc student in Chemical Engineering specializing in Engineering Education. Her thesis is exploring how the quality of work-integrated learning experiences shape women engineers’ career intentions, with a focus on intersectionality and diverse engineering fields
of Virginia.Dr. Meg Handley, Pennsylvania State University Meg Handley is an Associate Teaching professor and Director Undergraduate Programs for Engineering Leadership. Meg completed her PhD in Workforce Education at Penn State, where she focused on inter- personal behaviors and leadership for early-career engineers. She teaches engineering leadership and an engineering leader coaching course. Her research focuses on coaching skills, inclusive leadership, and career development.Dr. Meagan R. Kendall, University of Texas, El Paso An Associate Professor at The University of Texas at El Paso, Dr. Meagan R. Kendall is a founding member of the Department of Engineering Education and Leadership. With a background in
StructureUpon completion of this course, students will be able to: ● Explain the role of engineering in society, articulating the importance of a mindset that values diverse perspectives and experiences, and ensures equitable access and participation in all aspects of engineering education, design and practice. ● Apply design thinking principles and decision-making skills to evaluate personal, academic, and professional interests; make decisions; and create a planned academic path in the College of Engineering. ● Describe different career opportunities associated with a variety of the engineering disciplines offered within the College of Engineering. ● Begin to develop an engineering identity by identifying personal
, Godfrey [9] cites many studies andpapers that describe and examine how engineering education culture contributes to resistance tochange in engineering programs with respect to: ● the participation of women (Dryburgh, 1999; Hacker, 1983; Lewis et al., 1998; Tonso, 1996b) ● culture as gendered (Cronin and Roger, 1999; Lewis et al., 1998; Tonso, 1996b) ● culture as an agent in student attrition (Courter, Millar and Lyons, 1998) ● student engagement and enculturation (Ambrose, 1998; Lattuca, Terenzini &Volkwein, 2006) ● the development of engineering identity (Dryburgh, 1999; Stevens et al., 2008; Tonso, 2006) ● faculty cultures (McKenna, Hutchinson, and Trautvetter, 2008) ● campus cultures (Tonso, 2006
are noteworthy: the group whose members strove to drive globalimpact had the greatest positional authority and were all white men; the group whose proudmoments involved mobilizing and empowering others included an over-representation ofwomen; and the two groups whose proud moments involved limited structural interdependence,were more racially minoritized and internationally trained than the full sample. The first twotrends reflect gendered patterns of privilege while the first and third reflect the normative powerof white privilege and domestic graduate advantage in engineering organizations and Canadiansociety.DiscussionWhat did senior engineers learn from these proud moments in the context of their careers? First,they gained socio-technical
approaches include exploring the connection between personal values,personal story, and principles (or personal ethics) and students’ behaviors that can affectpsychological safety on teams.IntroductionWithin this work we examine ethics as the collection of principles that we use to motivate us andhelp us make decisions and guide our interactions with those around us and work that we do.Therefore, our ethic is made up of the principles that motivate, inform, and guide our daily lives.From this standpoint, the discussion on ethics development should extend beyond why theChallenger exploded or the causes behind the Hyatt Regency Bridge failure.If we apply the four domains of Leadership Model [1], the development of a leadership ethic notonly includes
engineering and product design.Dr. Bryce E. Hughes, Montana State University - Bozeman Bryce E. Hughes is an Associate Professor in Adult and Higher Education at Montana State University. His research interests encompass diversity and equity in engineering education, with a focus on LGBTQ students. He was recently awarded an NSF CAREER grant to study the experiences of LGBTQ under- graduates in STEM fields. He holds a Ph.D. in education from the University of California, Los Angeles, an M.A. in student development administration from Seattle University, and a B.S. in general engineering from Gonzaga University.William J. Schell William J. Schell holds a Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering aˆ C” Engineering
professionals avoid difficult yet necessary conversations, but this is a hugedisservice to their career growth. In this module we build on the effective and proven strategiesto having difficult, awkward, but crucial conversations within the ecosystem, whether that is toadvocate for an idea, to ask for resources or support, to clear up a misunderstanding, to buildtrust with peers or management or other similar scenarios. A sample scenario used in thistraining session is below. This scenario enables students to personalize their conversations, tobuild rapport and connect deeper with others rather than just mechanically go through themotions of conversation.Sample Scenario: We explored a sticky/awkward scenario where the engineer is the technicallead and