chance to do it yourself. Okay so [our university] started a course, we piloted it...which attempted to give that experience, hands on experience, guided towards innovation, to undergrads. And it’s a delightful thing...it is exactly what we need to inspire these [students].” (00:47:56–00:49:15)This quote provides another example of Leo seeing a problem and trying to solve it, with obviouscurricular implications for engineering education at his university.Lisa (Education)Lisa’s interview transcript narrative followed the overall structure of the interview protocol,connecting repeatedly back to interrelated themes of social justice, equity and inclusion,macroethics, fixing structural factors, and authenticity. We observed both
ResearchersAbstractThis pilot study explores engineering students' views on social responsibility in undergraduateresearch experiences. Participants displayed high concern for human welfare and safety butneeded more education and training to understand the importance of being socially responsiblescientists and engineers. To address this, the authors recommend incorporating a formalcurriculum to facilitate students' understanding and articulation of their views on socialresponsibility in science and engineering research. The authors provide suggested case studiesfor engineering educators to incorporate social responsibility topics into their curriculum,enabling students to learn and debate the ethical and social implications of their research,promoting critical
the years that engineering graduates do notrefer to the ethics codes [9, 10]. Further, the faculty/administration and student perceptions ofengineering ethics education delivery are not aligned. In a study conducted over 18 campuses,110 faculty members and 123 students were interviewed in 90-minute focus groups; twoadministrators from each campus were also individually interviewed. While the faculty andadministrators believed that the engineering ethics curriculum provided a “nuanced treatment ofcomplex issues, their students reported “hearing simplistic, black-and-white messages aboutethics” [11]. Due to observations of faculty approving or participating in unethical behavior,students also did not perceive the faculty as ethical role models
be either quantitative (e.g., experimental, quasi-experimental), qualitative, or mixed methods in nature. • The article should target post-secondary students (i.e., undergraduate students and graduate students) in higher education contexts (e.g., college, university). • The article should be conducted in students’ primary or home language (L1). • The article can cover all disciplines (i.e., STEM, non-STEM, general education). • The article should be published in a peer-reviewed academic journal or conference proceedings. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals are believed to have high quality as well as demonstrate full study results, beyond pilot-test results or
to consider what dispositions I brought to this research as both a graduatestudent and an instructor. My experience as a graduate student increased my ability to noticewhen language was affected by the desire to express competence and reflect a certain identity,two important elements in our study of empathetic disposition. Through my teacher lens, I wasable to discern shifts in speech that indicated a change of attitude or perspective at both historicaland personal levels. As someone who values human-centered research and empathetic pedagogy,I worked to maintain impartiality in my analysis through reflexivity and collaboration with theother analysts on our team to help ensure my interpretations of the data remained close to thestudents
algorithms to the omission of important topics and key theoretical ideas.Langley’s findings provide a rationale for integrating discussions and ideas commonly in the realm of thehumanities and social sciences into AI course design for engineering education [31]. Their study found that“problem areas like qualitative reasoning, analogy, and creativity are ignored in favor of ones that are more easilyformalized” [31]. Promoting critical thinking and creativity through interdisciplinary approaches to problem-solvingcan set the basis for qualitative reasoning beyond quantitative analyses. It also allows for deeper reasoning on theinterplays between society and technology.These findings echo Mishra and Siy, who warned that “a Computer Science centric