Paper ID #19764Dr. Curtis Abel, Worcester Polytechnic InstituteKristin Boudreau, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Kristin Boudreau is Paris Fletcher Distinguished Professor of Humanities at Worcester Polytechnic In- stitute, where she also serves as Head of the Department of Humanities and Arts. Her training is in nineteenth-century literature, but for the past 8 years she has taught engineering ethics, first-year en- gineering courses, and humanities for engineers. She has also worked with students and colleagues to develop role-playing games teaching engineering within its complex humanistic context. NOTE: this paper has co-authors. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017
history of electrical and computer engineering, the electronicsdevelopment cycle, professional ethics, multidisciplinary team environments, and commondevelopment tools used in industry. Students are expected to apply this and knowledge fromprerequisite and concurrent courses to completing their project.In our paper, we describe the course in detail, including examples of student projects. Studentoutcomes related to both technical and soft skills are assessed using student surveys and projectevaluation rubrics. We discuss these assessment results and highlight some successes andlimitations of the experiential 1st-year course.IntroductionThe traditional model for engineering undergraduate programs in the US is to have mostlyfoundational courses in
Computer Engineering, 2) Department of Physics, 3) Departments of Biology and of Women, Gender, & Sexuality Studies, Portland State University, Oregon, USA j.e.morris@ieee.orgAbstractThe goals of the program described below are to: Address the need for greater technical awareness in the general student population Extend the breadth of nanotechnology education for science and engineering majors, and Expose both student groups to the social, economic, and ethical issues of nanotechnologies.This has been accomplished by three junior-level lecture courses and a
that enables them to consider relevant historical, social,economic, environmental, political, cultural, and ethical facets of professional practice.Conceptualization of Contextual Competence Solutions to engineering problems always must be technically sound, which is whyundergraduate engineering programs are heavily loaded with technical courses (e.g.,thermodynamics, physics). A technically correct solution, however, is not necessarily one thatwill be feasible or desirable in a specific context. For example, engineers who seek to increasethe processing speed of a chip must also understand how certain design solutions affect the life-cycle of the chip, as well as consider the potential environmental impact of its
macroethical and practical conceptualization of engineering work.As early as 1999, the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Board of Directorsrecognized this need and declared, in an official statement, “ASEE believes that engineeringgraduates must be prepared by their education to use sustainable engineering techniques in thepractice of their profession.”1 Engineering professional disciplinary societies have responded byincluding sustainability as part of Engineers’ Codes of Ethics: the first “fundamental canon” ofthe American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Code of Ethics includes that engineers “shallstrive to comply with the principles of sustainable development;”2 the American Institute ofChemical Engineers (AIChE) includes
in the use of computing instruments. 3. Work more effectively in small groups as a result of further developed group problem solving skills. 4. Complete the design problem solving process from experience with a semester-long, discipline-specific design project. 5. Begin building professional relationships with faculty members within the student's chosen department. 6. Resolve basic engineering and professional ethical problems. 7. Make an informed decision on an engineering major based on exposure to various fields of engineering from active representatives in those fields. 8. Utilize the common solid foundation to logically lead into the introductory major-specific courses.With this wish list in mind, a
which researchers are trained and socialized into their professions.To understand and anticipate the progress of sustainability it is necessary to examine theprocesses by which technologists are trained, particularly their education about the scope oftheir profession: whether, and how, the social, economic, cultural, and ethical aspects ofsustainability can be integrated into engineering.The Evolution of Engineering EducationHow amenable is engineering education to change? A series of self-examinations and calls forreform over the past century have been intended to distinguish engineering professionals fromtechnicians, to strengthen the scientific basis of engineering education, to make engineers morewell-rounded citizens, to improve their
-intercept & their standard deviations), which will also be covered during the prepcourse. Collectively, these activities will not only enhance students‟ understanding of theconcepts and improve their problem solving skills in chemistry, but it will also teach studentshow best to study the sciences, integrate concepts, and learn scientific thinking.Genetics and ethics are both logic-based disciplines uniquely integrated in the day-to-day workof genetic researchers. Given the history of the eugenics movement, it is imperative that ethics isintegrated into introductory genetics courses as a core part of a whole rather than an afterthoughtor add on. It is critical that high school students‟ initial genetic research experience involve thedevelopment
solvingstrategies, and ethical or social considerations are unique to engineering and set it apart fromthose other subjects. Identifying those characteristics necessary for success in engineeringeducation will help states, districts, schools, and teachers to evaluate the engineering skills andknowledge that they will be implementing in the classroom.The purpose of this paper is to present the development of a framework to be used to assessacademic standards related to engineering. Using the ABET Program Outcomes (Criteria 3 a-k)as our starting point, we examined the literature and national documents in the field related toeach outcome, with particular focus on related K-12 literature. From this, we developed aframework for describing engineering content
between qualitative and quantitative reasoning, (4) developmental instruction in systemsthinking and sustainability, (5) integrating cross-disciplinarity perspectives, (6) process and notjust content (e.g. cognitive processes), and (7) bridging engineering skills with professional skillssuch as communication, project management, team and collaborative work, ethics, etcetera. Inthis paper, we present how each course in the six-course sequence builds off the prior providingmoderate instruction over a long period of time and building developmentally on prior learningoutcomes, all while in the context of authentic and meaningful PBL experiences. It is such skillsand attitudes that students learn and practice over a long period of time (with regular
: Page 22.253.3 explain the operation of the industrial facility in which they worked describe the professional skills they developed during their internship demonstrate communication skills (written and oral)Initially, we also thought that the students’ experience would help them develop skills associatedwith the following ABET Student Outcomes: Students will demonstrate: ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
interested in the social dimension of theirpractice throughout their degree program [5]. Stand-alone ethics courses or modules helppermeate tech culture by creating space to foreground a human-centered focus, but oftenreinforce the idea that such practices are separate from the central technical content.It is thus imperative to develop ways of integrating and emphasizing human-centered learninggoals alongside and within technical learning experiences. In our work, we explore thepossibilities of integrating a human-centered perspective in STEM courses through informalmaker activities. We developed and ran a capstone course for a group of 5 upper levelundergraduate computing students to participate in the common maker practice of creating 3Dprinted
problem definition, multiple interconnectedproblems, consequences difficult to imagine, let alone characterize, and riddled with ideological,political, and cultural conflict. Climate change looms large as an example of a social mess thatengineers will need new capacities to effectively confront.The capacities engineers need include many attributes long discussed within the LiberalEducation/Engineering and Society Division of ASEE and echoed in the NAE Engineer of 2020report at the turn of this century: creativity, leadership, communication, lifelong learning, ethics,resiliency, and flexibility. There is increasing recognition that we additionally need to grow ourcapacity for holistic systems (or systems-of-systems) thinking, data-informed
other courses 12, undergraduate engineering programs havefocused on providing students with real-world open-ended engineering problems. Typically,senior design courses focus on the following ABET guidelines: 1) promote the developmentof student creativity, 2) use open-ended problems, 3) use design methodology, 4) incorporatethe formulation of design statements and specifications, 4) provide opportunities to evaluatealternative solutions, 6) allow students to evaluate design feasibility, and 7) provideopportunities to consider economic factors, safety, reliability, aesthetics, ethics, and socialimpact. In addition, General Criterion 4 requires that a student participate in a major designexperience12. In addition, in ABET’s General Criterion 3
. Recognize professional responsibilities and make informed judgments in computing practice based on legal and ethical principles. 5. Function effectively as a member or leader of a team engaged in activities appropriate to the program's discipline. 6. Identify and analyze user needs and to take them into account in the selection, creation, integration, evaluation, and administration of computing-based systems.The following Student Outcomes have been adopted for the mechanical engineering program andare exactly the Student Outcomes recommended by ABET EAC. 1. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics. 2. An ability to apply the
Property, Technical Communications, WritingSpecifications, Engineering Ethics, Engineering Economics, Codes and Standards, theDesign Process, and Sustainability) which results in nine individual homeworkassignments (about one sixth of the grade) and two exams (about one third of the grade).Detailed descriptions of the projects and assignments for the sophomore design courseand their assessment in Fall 2007 will now be presented along with results from studentsurveys in the course.Assignments for the Sophomore Design CourseIn the fall 2007, 70 students enrolled in the sophomore design course, MECE 2361. Bythe time teams were self-selected for the team project during the fourth week, twostudents had dropped. The remaining 68 students completed the
is integrated with a course on Ethics in theProfession; (iii) Creation of a new junior year design course integrated with courses inbiomedical, civil, computer, electrical, and mechanical engineering; and (iv) Partnership withindustry in the creation of real-life engineering projects for senior capstone design course.This paper presents how the sophomore design course has evolved and the changes that werebrought about based on faculty and informal student feedback.Design Throughout the Engineering CurriculumConsistent with most engineering programs, the curriculum at the University of Hartfordincludes a freshman engineering and senior capstone design course. Because of the relativelysmall size of the engineering program with about 100
Do their fair share of the work when working on multidisciplinary teams .712* Student Outcomes 5 – An Identify problems for which there are engineering solutions .568* ability to identify, formulate, Formulate a range of solutions to an engineering problem .770* and solve engineering Test potential solutions to an engineering problem .814* problems Use feedback from an experiment to improve solutions to an engineering .801*Page 14.1344.7 problem Identify potential ethical dilemmas
starting the process by orienting the first planning meeting to relevantdepartment, college, university, and accrediting agency outcomes: Department: Engineering Technology Outcomes: The department of Engineering Technology has written its student learning outcomes in five categories, A-E. The faculty/librarian team selected four outcomes that the instructor’s assignment could encompass: Ability to be life-long learners Ability to write clear and effective technical reports, proposals, and business correspondence Awareness and understanding of the impact of technology on society Ability to practice professional ethics and social responsibilityFaculty
employees’ well- being, professional development and performance. Her work has been published in peer reviewed journals and presented in several international conferences.Dr. Gunter Bombaerts, Eindhoven University of Technology Gunter Bombaerts is Assistant Professor for Philosophy and Ethics of Technology at Eindhoven Univer- sity of Technology, the Netherlands. His research fields include ethics in engineering education (moti- vation, deep learning, competence measurement), comparative ethics and questions concerning applied ethics in the field of energy ethics, in particular on participation and innovation. He is coordinating the TU/e USE program and is teacher of USE courses (amongst which the USE basic course on History
argue that culturalresponsiveness, as well as a commitment to research that actively benefits marginalizedcommunities, are two core components of quality in qualitative research that were not originallyidentified by Walther et al.In the remainder of this paper, we use their six validation types—theoretical validation,procedural validation, communicative validation, pragmatic validation, ethical validation, andprocess reliability—as an organizational framework. Under each validation type, we describehow researchers can maintain cultural responsiveness during three phases: the conceptualizationphase, the data generation phase, and the data handling phase. To identify additional validationstrategies beyond Walther et al.’s framework, we conducted
energy industries, with a focus on cor- porate social responsibility, social justice, labor, and gender and 2) engineering education, with a focus on socioeconomic class and social responsibility. She is currently completing a book manuscript on the intersection of engineering and corporate social responsibility. She is the author of Mining Coal and Un- dermining Gender: Rhythms of Work and Family in the American West (Rutgers University Press, 2014), which was funded by the National Science Foundation and National Endowment for the Humanities. In 2016 the National Academy of Engineering recognized her Corporate Social Responsibility course as a national exemplar in teaching engineering ethics. Professor Smith holds a
by applying (b) an ability to design and conduct principles of engineering, science, and experiments, as well as to analyze and mathematics. interpret data (2) An ability to apply both analysis and (c) an ability to design a system, component, synthesis in the engineering design process, or process to meet desired needs within resulting in designs that meet desired needs. realistic constraints such as economic, (3) An ability to develop and conduct environmental, social, political, ethical, health appropriate experimentation, analyze and and safety, manufacturability, and interpret data, and use engineering judgment sustainability
such as ethics, and smoothing outlogistical challenges with the course should result in improved student learning.IntroductionA new engineering course at a large land-grant university seeks to introduce non-engineers to theprofession via a combination of artistic endeavors, social science analyses, engineering designthinking, and community practice. The course introduces a new concept, “citizen engineering,”borrowed from a tradition of citizen science in which community members (“non-experts”)identify scientific questions and proceed through formal processes, such as participatory actionresearch, to systematically seek answers to their questions by defining and driving their ownprocesses of inquiry and analysis, sometimes but not always with
, religious, history, literature, fine arts, sociology, psychology, politicalscience, anthropology, economics, and foreign languages other than English or a student’snative language. Nontraditional subjects are exemplified by courses such as technology andhuman affairs, history of technology, and professional ethics and social responsibility. Coursesthat instill cultural values are acceptable, while routine exercises of personal craft are not.Consequently, courses that involve performance must be accompanied by theory or history of thesubject.I.C.3.d (2) (c) Subjects such as accounting, industrial management, finance, personneladministration, engineering economy and military training may be appropriately included eitheras required or elective courses
engineering departments to ensure that the course broadly meets the needs andexpectations across engineering disciplines. An ABET-style syllabus was also developed toidentify the student outcomes for the course and to help each engineering department understandhow they could use the course to support student outcomes a-k (Appendix). This course provided Page 26.651.4broad coverage of many ABET student outcomes since we included topics such as engineeringand research ethics and communicating research findings, in addition to the research processitself. The course is open to all engineering students and does not have prerequisites; however, itis a 400
. structures to achieve a civic aim. civic aim.There are actually several rubrics that could be added to assess an ISLPs in addition to civicengagement. AACU encourages users to also consult three other rubrics: Global Learning;Intercultural Knowledge and Competence; and Ethical Reasoning. These rubrics are provided inthe appendix12.Due to the months of planning to address all the constraints of an ISLP and the student outcomesof developing student leadership and collaborating with other project stakeholders a rubricassessing the rigor of teamwork would also be very desirable. With four rubrics to draw fromthe AACU assessment rubrics appear to be very useful. However, for the sanity of the facultyadvisors who develop these programs and
advocating ashift from a sole focus on student outcomes, we call attention to outcomes 4 and 5, which reflectsystem-level abilities, “An ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities inengineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact ofengineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts; An ability tofunction effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborativeand inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives.” Transdisciplinarylearning mirrors an authentic setting of “real world” engineering practice.Table 1. New Accreditation Board on Engineering and Technology (ABET) student outcomes. An ability
teamworkskills, improving communication and project management skills, and practicing ethical behavior.All undergraduate students must participate in at least two semester-long three credit hourprojects. Projects vary widely in focus, including Service Learning, Entrepreneurial, ProductDevelopment and others; some projects have participating external sponsors. We are collectingdata on ca. 36 - 40 teams each semester, enrolling approximately 400 students.We have developed several strategies for assessing teamwork effectiveness: (1) a self-assessmentof the extent to which each student feels that they have developed teamwork competencies, (2) aKnowledge Test of teamwork concepts drawn from the vast literature on teamwork, (3) a TeamExcellence and Trust
regular meetings to discuss the progress in theirexperiments, being included in the day-to-day workings of the laboratory and are notencountering personal conflicts. These meetings are scheduled by the CDE on an individual andgroup basis.Four-Part StructureThe program was restructured to include an ethics course in 2001 when NSF fundingsupplemented the contributions from industry. The four main components of the REU are allcritical to providing participants with a balanced experience. The four components are:independent laboratory research; an ethics course; a Weekly Meeting Series; and a WeekendExcursion Series. The benefits of each activity be discussed separately as well as the synergisticeffects of these components working together. Figure 1