-demanding nature of the curriculum” (p. 1). Their description of an innovativecurriculum for achieving global competence at the Georgia Institute of Technology reflects otherchallenges of study abroad for engineers, including obtaining institutional support, providingincentives for faculty involvement, and overcoming the inertia created by the lack of a traditionof study abroad for engineers.Lohmann, Rollins, and Hoey2 also describe deficiencies in the existing scholarship that assessesthe outcomes of study abroad generally: (1) a tendency to “dwell on logistical and actuarialaspects. . . or student satisfaction;” (2) lack of attention to “student learning effects or careerimpact;” (3) limiting assessment “to the development of psychosocial
are introduced to and invited to reflect on the 13 dimensions ofForeign Service Officers as described by the U.S. Department of State(https://careers.state.gov/work/foreign-service/officer/13-dimensions/). These dimensionsinclude: cultural adaptability (i.e., “to work and communicate effectively andharmoniously with persons of other cultures, value systems, political beliefs, andeconomic circumstances; to recognize and respect differences in new and differentcultural environments”); oral communication (i.e., “by speaking fluently in a concise,grammatically correct, organized, precise, and persuasive manner; to convey nuances ofmeaning accurately; to use appropriate styles of communication to fit the audience andpurpose”); working with others
& Engineering Literacy/Philosophy of Engineering These numbers provide evidence of a common interest in engineering communication, but theyalso reflect the fragmentation of the scholarly conversation. This paper reports on work inprogress toward the goal of establishing some coherence in the conversation while at the sametime highlighting the diversity of approaches and range of expertise that are relevant toresearching and teaching engineering communication. We have begun a qualitative analysisusing papers presented at the 2015 annual conference as our evidence base. Here we provide aquantitative overview of the papers, identify trends that we have observed in the papers
approach to teaching professional communication, andintroduce our larger research project, which aims to assess the effectiveness of our program.Finally, we shall briefly reflect on whether the small communication class is really as inefficientas some have suggested. The purpose of this study is to develop the theoretical groundwork fora larger study we are just beginning to conduct on the efficacy of our professionalcommunication program. Using the investigative tools of narrative research and discourseanalysis, we hope ultimately to determine the degree to which our program, which maintainssmall classes and focuses on cultivating students’ rhetorical judgment, effectively graftsprofessional communication onto our students’ burgeoning
-program aggregate response report to Carnegie Mellon University. The response rate forsummer 2015 respondents from Carnegie Mellon University was 70.7%. Responses reflect self-reported learning gains for each construct andwere measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from very large gain (5) to no gain or very small gain (1).2.2 Efforts to build a communications program for summer undergraduate researchers throughbroad stakeholder collaborationIn 2010, the American Society for Engineering Education issued two reports on the future ofscholarly and systematic innovation in the discipline. Among their recommendations for success,ASEE urged those engaged in new pedagogies to be sure to gain broad, collaborativeparticipation among stakeholders
and focused motivational strategies [10]. These validated instructionaltheories and their assessment techniques offer a means to frame this project in the broadercontext of the student experience in University of Virginia, while delving more deeply into theclassroom setting.2.1 Background: Course Context The course that is the object of study at University of Virginia is a non-technical, introductorycourse, required for graduation by all undergraduate engineers. The course’s learning objectivesinclude, “To be true professionals, engineers need to have a sense of how people design andinvent technology, how intentions reflect the needs and wishes of a society, and how inventionsdiffuse through a culture. Without a thoughtful sense of
Appropriate Technology, Biotechnology, History of Modern Science, Religion &Science in Modern America, Scientific Revolution, Plants & People, Eco-UrbanFootprints and Exploring Electrical Technology (EET). Such variety is afforded by thefreedom instructors have to plan courses reflecting their own interests and expertise,while satisfying a common set of STW objectives. Over the years this author hasdeveloped and taught EET, a typical distribution of student disciplines has emerged asshown in Table 1. The classroom presence of students with certain major disciplines has Page 25.1255.3naturally led to developing particular illustrations, emphases and
in men’sresponses, expectancy was a more prominent theme for women. Thematic differences were alsoapparent in the instrumentality of the activity, with women more likely to record goals ofexciting students about engineering and men more likely to articulate goals of teaching content.Work In Progress (WIP): A Systematic Review of Outreach Impact 4 Bigelow [14] also used a VIE-informed reflection paper to investigate undergraduateengineering students’ motivation towards outreach after participating in a biomedicalengineering course in which an outreach activity was included. Using an inductive codingprocess, Bigelow identified 12 themes within the reflections, but these focused on lessonslearned
MSAs and their impact on quality of life metrics, to find multiplealternative hypotheses to pursue, and find ways, both engineering and non-engineering, toimprove such metrics. This should help place engineering solutions in the broader scope ofthings and their impact.We hypothesize that, by providing scaffolding with ’executable’ narrative case studies andinteraction with students in other disciplines, we can help mainstream engineering students tostep out of their comfort zones and reflect on broader societal issues. We also hypothesize thatthis would help non-mainstream engineering students to find a new awareness and strength inbecoming engineers.Our approach is derived from two theoretical models with strong emphasis on studentinvolvement
literature in Engineering and other disciplines on team teaching to betterunderstand this andragogical approach. We determined that Davis’ [1] interdisciplinary teamteaching frame and criteria for teaching evaluation provided a collective lens for examining howwe were working together and how that affects our students’ learning outcomes for all of thematerial we include as part of the course. With this lens in mind, we share the story of ourcourse’s evolution as we reflect on our personal experiences.Stories of teaching experiences provide an important resource for other faculty; simultaneously,stories provide a format for examining ongoing teaching practices for the authors. This paperoverlays stories of our current practices onto Davis’ degrees of
prompt at the beginning and end of the module.The prompt asked students to respond to questions about whether and how corporations hadresponsibilities to society and what roles engineers fill in fulfilling those responsibilities. Thepreliminary essay was an in-class writing assignment that students completed for an attendancequiz. After over two weeks of activities, the post-essay was assigned as one of a number ofprompts in a reflective exercise. To prevent students from using the pre-write to complete thepost-essay assignment, the pre-writes were not handed back until after the post-write was turnedin. A comparison of the writings showed that the pre-and post-writes were unique for allparticipants.For this study, the initial and final essays
Narratives aims to provide students with a toolkit for successfulcommunication in contemporary society and the workplace. This integrated course experience invitesstudents to reflect and use diverse ways of communication in the digital era. During one semester,participants were introduced to oral, written, visual and auditory techniques of communication, anddocumented through various digital media artifacts. Page 26.127.3Our value proposition that artistic storytelling can help students think, communicate and aid in theiremotional wellbeing is backed by a long history of scholarship. Such seminal articles as K. Egan’s“Memory, Imagination
China’s engineering schools. During the 20th century,engineering would in turn become one of the most important fields of higher education in China.The renewal of the educational system in early modern China involved three formative policyphases – namely the “renyin kuimao school system” (1902-1911), “renzi kuichou school system”(1912-1916), and “renxu school system” (1917-1922) – that reflected two different approaches tosituating an emerging discipline of engineering within the broader landscape of Chinese highereducation. This paper examines the three educational systems, including the implications of eachin relation to the establishment of engineering as an academic discipline in early modern China.As we discuss, this historical period has
years immediately after ASEE,6 and engineering faculty from religious colleges anduniversities often reference their faith when describing the context of their teaching work.However, when we searched, we found that the experiences of engineering teachers andengineering education researchers have not been as well explored. As graduate students, ournarratives emphasize our enculturation into the engineering education community as bothteachers and researchers; as people of faith, our spiritualities are an important part of ourjourneys. Prior work7 has highlighted the importance of personal narratives as ways to expresscommunity values by “[providing] a vehicle for scholarly discourse that makes explicit ourimplicit knowledge, promotes reflective
ASEE Paper_2019_Final - Google Docs concerns. As such, the co-instructors framed the seminar as helping the LAs (a) learn how to support their students, (b) learn how to partner with course instructors to improve students’ experiences, and (c) develop their engineering skills (e.g reflect on design process, facilitate teamwork, and consider social justice implications). This second iteration of the seminar maintained some of the same learning objectives as the pilot version of the seminar such as (1) identify and critically evaluate claims from readings, (2) carefully observe and document classroom events, (3) analyze classroom events and consider multiple plausible
between engineering faculty expertise and the requirements of preparing students to function well in diverse settings and promote inclusive practices. Possible Topics for Future Papers/Collaborations • Given that engaged reflection is essential for students to optimize their learning from intercultural interactions and other diversity interventions, what are the most effective pedagogical strategies for getting students to engage in meaningful reflection? How can we structure reflection assignments so that they are optimally timed, efficient, and focused while still allowing space for
. While mostcreativity frameworks involve divergent thinking (concept generation), convergent thinking(iterating a prototype), as well as openness to idea exploration, and reflection, in practice andunder constraints most engineering projects focus disproportionately on the first two of these four.Useful interventions might find ways to increase students’ “openness to idea exploration” and“reflection” about design.Studies have shown that students’ creativity increases when risk taking is supported in theclassroom (Daly [65] again, citing others). Increasing incentives for students to take risks andexplore ideas, and providing an environment in which they feel safe doing so, could disrupt the“lockstep” “death march” and enhance creativity and free
Education from 2005 to 2016. Their “working definition considers interdisciplinaryinteractions as attempts to address real-world cases and problems by integrating heterogeneousknowledge bases and knowledge-making practices, whether these are gathered under theinstitutional cover of a discipline or not” and was adapted from (Krohn 2010). In the literaturethey reviewed, “the reported success factors include taking a system approach, employingreal-world problems as exemplars and tasks, involving reflective dialogue, and aspects ofinfrastructure and collaboration. Reported challenges address institutional barriers, complexity,and acquiring adequate levels of support.” The authors go on to report that “motivation behindinterdisciplinary education … is
research interests include: engineering for social justice, engineering with community, innovation, ethics, transformative learning, reflection, professional identity.Mr. Ramon Benitez, Virginia Tech Ramon Benitez is interested in how engineering identity and animal participatory design can be used to recruit Chicano K-12 students to engineering professions. Benitez completed his BS in Metallurgical and Materials Engineering at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), and is now a Ph.D. student in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech (VT). Benitez seeks to understand how to best instruct and assess ethical reasoning of engineering practices and engineering responsibilities, including wildlife and humanity, in
(e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learningin Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creat-ing curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests,motivation, and desire to persist in engineering. Through this work, outreach, and involvement in the com-munity, Dr. Zastavker continues to focus on the issues of women and minorities in science/engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Work in Progress: Transformation through Liberal Arts-Focused Grand Challenges Scholars ProgramsAbstractThe National Academy of Engineering’s Grand Challenges Scholars Program
numerous transitional points. In developmentalmodels from the field of psychology, empathy tends to be a peripheral but important component.For example, many of these models emphasize the individual’s cognitive growth as a parallelcomponent to their social development (e.g., Hoffman19, Kohlberg34). Other models integrate allaspects of development into a single unifying staged theory, be it their cognitive/ethicaldevelopment (e.g., Perry35) or their reflective judgement (e.g., King and Kitchener36).Stage models tend to include lower stages or tiers of development that the individual attains inearly adolescence. For example, Hoffman developed a stage model of empathic development, butthis model focused solely on the concept of empathic distress
theanalysis we focus on how these engineers reflect on their fit in each job and how they account fortheir decision to pursue a second term of internship or co-op at an organization or, alternately,how they decided not to return. We highlight the cases of three engineers who represent twodifferent experiences of young engineers: trying lots of internships as a student and finding agood fit before graduation versus trying one internship as a student and perceiving oneself as apoor fit for one’s job after graduation. We therefore use this analysis to examine the relationshipbetween undergraduate work experience, perceived fit in a work environment, andattrition/persistence in engineering.Analyses in this area are important to conduct because there is a
, emotional, and self-reflective livesof engineers themselves that fail to “fit into” prevailing professional paradigms of thought andpractice.Cannons refers then not only to military annihilation but also to the systematic drowning out ofvoices/perspectives that diverge from, challenge, or oppose the engineering status quo. Wepropose that these voices and perspectives are essential for the development of technically andmorally robust engineering research and practice. In fact, they are the very thing that wouldenable engineering to truly hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, andrealize philosopher Charles Harris’ proposed ideal of bettering “the material basis of humanwell-being or quality of life.”3This paper engages in a
, china, comparative education research, culture, engineering education,ideology, internationalization, policy, policymakingIntroduction: The History and Politics of Policy Borrowing in ChinaPolicy borrowing has been a prevailing strategy for reforming education policies in mostdeveloping countries, reflecting a more general tendency toward dependence on foreignexpertise, information, and financing.1 As a developing country, China has been borrowingeducation policies from developed countries since the mid nineteenth century, including in the Page 24.497.2field of engineering education. In fact, one critical question throughout the modern history
Page 22.1169.2issues of rhetoric (audience, purpose) and analysis (claims, reasoning, evidence)” 9. Although itcan be helpful to think about different categories such as these when responding to writing, wewere concerned by a general sense in engineering education literature that grammar is somehowseparate from the concerns of content, analysis, purpose, and audience.Rather than assuming grammar can be separated from meaning, we decided instead to investigatewhether even sentence-level grammatical choices reflect the content and values of engineeringpractice, and whether different grammatical choices by students are likely to be one factor thatmakes them appear unprepared for writing in the workplace. For the analyses reported here, wefocused
students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teaching decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineering education. Page 22.1257.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Revisiting Communication Experiences to Prepare for Professional PracticeAbstractThe ability to communicate effectively is a critical competency for engineers. According to thefuture envisioned in the Engineer of 2020,1 in ABET criteria for accreditation,2,3 and scholarshipin the fields of
- cation with specific emphasis on innovative pedagogical and curricular practices at the intersection with the issues of gender and diversity. With the goal of improving learning opportunities for all students and equipping faculty with the knowledge and skills necessary to create such opportunities, Dr. Zastavker’s re- cent work involves questions pertaining to students’ motivational attitudes and their learning journeys in a variety of educational environments. One of the founding faculty at Olin College, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from science to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and
implement the SSDS and illustrate the findings when usingthis survey pre- and post- course with students who participated in WPSI across threeuniversities during the Fall of 2014. Results from these components are triangulated withstudents’ end-of-semester written reflections and participating instructors’ course experiences.This qualitative component allowed us to consider how WPSI might be improved in future Page 26.508.3iterations, as well as broader implications of the SSDS and WPSI for engineering educationcourses and curriculum.For anonymity, throughout this paper we will refer to course offerings as Course 1, 2, and 3. Thisframing puts the
student experiences.Structured reflections, interdisciplinary assignments, and reworked assessment criteria inviteparticipants to make elements of HC explicit, thereby providing spaces and times for criticalengagement, while extracurricular activities fulfill a complementary role by leveraging HC tocultivate more broad-based engineering skills that are not part of formal curricula. Notably, 3 5publications specifically articulated how the surfacing of HC could enable broader curricularreform, including one that discussed the possibility of emphasizing ethics as a core engineeringcompetency. We address the significance of this approach to HC in more
espouse differentvalues reflected in their respective cultures [38] [39]. For example, where academic goalsemphasize student learning and development, industry goals are often driven by profitability,productivity, and benefits to the broader organization. Many students thus graduate withuncertainty about what working in an engineering organization is like [40]. Some mightextrapolate from real-world jobs, internships, or co-ops [41] [42], but not all students have accessto these opportunities, especially if they come from minoritized groups or have less social andcultural capital [43] [44]. Further, engineering education has been criticized for perpetuating a“culture of disengagement” [24] that privileges objectivity and, in the process