Changing Engineering Education: Views of U.S. Faculty, Chairs, and Deans

Besterfield‐Sacre, Mary; Cox, Monica Farmer; Borrego, Maura; Beddoes, Kacey; Zhu, Jiabin

doi:10.1002/jee.20043

Cited by 143 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kotter emphasises that there are two elements that are often overlooked in the change literature, namely the participants' sense of urgency and the creation of common vision and recent research presents results that shared vision is one of the lowest priorities among US faculties, although the shared vision supports the discussion of the what-in which directions engineering education should aim (Besterfield-Sacre et al 2014).…”

Section: Levels In Systemic Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering

Kolmos

Hadgraft

Holgaard

2015

Int J Technol Des Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last 25 years, there have been many calls for new engineering competencies and a corresponding gradual change in both curriculum and pedagogy in engineering education. This has been a global trend, in the US, Europe, Australia and now emerging in the rest of the world. Basically, there have been two main types of societal challenges that many engineering institutions have responded to: the employability skills of graduates and the need for a sustainability approach to engineering. These are two very different challenges and societal needs; however, the ways engineering institutions have responded form a consistent pattern across many of the content aspects. No matter the specific character of change, three very different curriculum strategies seem to have evolved: an add-on strategy, an integration strategy or a re-building strategy; the latter involves substantial curriculum re-design. The add-on strategy and integration strategy are the ones most commonly used, whereas the re-building strategy is at an emerging stage in most engineering education communities. Most engineering schools find it very challenging to re-build an entire curriculum, so smaller changes are generally preferred. The purpose of this article is to conceptualise these institutional response strategies in a wider literature and present examples of curriculum change within both employability and sustainability. We will maintain that all these strategies are based on management decisions as well as academic faculty decisions; however the implications for using the various strategies are very different in terms of system change, role of disciplines, leader interventions and faculty development strategies. Furthermore, institutions might use all types of response strategies in different programs and in different semesters. The conceptual framework presented here can provide analytical anchors, hopefully creating more awareness of the complexity of systemic change.

show abstract

Section: Levels In Systemic Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering

Kolmos

Hadgraft

Holgaard

2015

Int J Technol Des Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Long-standing obstacles have limited the development and long-term success of multidisciplinary capstone programs, even given the support by engineering faculty. 3,6,27 Challenges can be broadly categorized as curricular and knowledge differences across departments, a lack of standardization in working with industrial partners, and differences in faculty rewards and expectations. 3,10 Small-scale models of multidisciplinary capstone courses have been piloted, but have depended heavily upon on the network and contacts of individual instructors, and consequently have been difficult to sustain over time.…”

Section: Multidisciplinary Capstonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,6,27 Challenges can be broadly categorized as curricular and knowledge differences across departments, a lack of standardization in working with industrial partners, and differences in faculty rewards and expectations. 3,10 Small-scale models of multidisciplinary capstone courses have been piloted, but have depended heavily upon on the network and contacts of individual instructors, and consequently have been difficult to sustain over time. 16,28 Hotaling 14 found that students who completed their multidisciplinary capstone design course produced higher quality engineering solutions, as evaluated by external industry professionals.…”

Section: Multidisciplinary Capstonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most engineering educators support the idea of a multidisciplinary capstone course in concept, 3,4 but long-standing obstacles have limited the development and long-term success of such projects. 5, 6 Saunders 4 noted that work experience involving both engineers and non-engineers enhances the preparation as engineers and more broadly, as life-long learners 7 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 Curricular and knowledge differences across departments, a lack of standardization in working with industrial partners, and differences in faculty rewards and expectations limit the development of multidisciplinary capstone courses. 3,10 Although few question the importance of and need for multidisciplinary education, sustainable strategies for accomplishing these goals are limited. This paper will report the results of a feasibility study performed to examine the benefits and challenges of creating a multidisciplinary senior capstone course from the perspective of engineering faculty.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Feasibility of Developing a Sustainable Multidisciplinary Senior Capstone Experience

Baughman¹,

Mosher²,

Gansemer-Topf³

et al.

2016 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

University. His research critically examines the role of design research in design education and practice. He has taught classes in design research methods, design thinking, multidisciplinary innovation, and human-centered design. Trained as a design researcher, he is passionate about developing new methods for investigating cross-disciplinary collaboration among faculty, students and academic units.c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Feasibility of Developing a Sustainable Multidisciplinary SeniorCapstone Experience Abstract Today's undergraduate engineering students will enter a workforce that requires a multidisciplinary approach to problem-solving. According to data from the National Science Foundation 1 and the National Academy of Engineering 2 a multidisciplinary problem-solving approach is increasingly a critical component of the nations' innovation infrastructure. Although both academic and industry professionals agree on the importance of providing students the opportunity to work on multidisciplinary teams, many institutions struggle to create these opportunities within their curriculum. This paper will examine the benefits and challenges of creating a multidisciplinary senior capstone course from the perspective of engineering faculty. IntroductionMost engineering educators support the idea of a multidisciplinary capstone course in concept,

show abstract

Teaching optimization of manufacturing problems via code components of a Jupyter Notebook

Suarez¹,

Álvarez-Feijoo²,

Fernández‐González

et al. 2018

Comp Applic In Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Degree in Mechanical Engineering combines knowledge and skills of the academic STEM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). The teaching of the STEM subjects must give prominence to the association of the physical, chemical, and mathematical concepts with the real world. The Jupyter Notebook can be defined as a scientific interactive framework. They can contain text, mathematical equations, interactive graphs, and videos. It allows creating a workspace for watching and playing with the concepts to be learned. Because of their didactic usefulness and easy divulgation, they are highly recommended as a learning environment. In the present work, there are reflected the experiences of using interactive Jupyter Notebook in virtual laboratory sessions within a 4th year subject of Mechanical Engineering related with manufacturing processes. Students' judgments on the efficacy of this resource were evaluated. The results showed that students are in agreement on the effectiveness of using Jupyter notebooks as a teaching‐learning tool.

show abstract

Changing Engineering Education: Views of U.S. Faculty, Chairs, and Deans

Abstract: Background Many reports present a vision of what engineering education should look like,

Cited by 143 publications

References 29 publications

Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering

Response strategies for curriculum change in engineering

Feasibility of Developing a Sustainable Multidisciplinary Senior Capstone Experience

Teaching optimization of manufacturing problems via code components of a Jupyter Notebook

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About