Curricular and Co-curricular Influences on Undergraduate Engineering Student Leadership

Knight, David B.; Novoselich, Brian J.

doi:10.1002/jee.20153

Cited by 88 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(90 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results revealed a significant difference in all four leadership domains between alumni who participated in the three lower intensity co-curricular programs and those who completed semester long leadership courses (see Table 1). Courses alone were associated with perceptions of higher leadership growth across all 4 domains, when compared to co-curricular programs, a finding that confirms Knight and Novoselich's 2017 study [24]. suggests that co-curricular programing supplements and enhances the positive impact students experience when engaging curricular leadership development offerings.…”

Section: Quantitative Findingssupporting

confidence: 62%

Engineering Leadership Education: Catalyzing Long-Term Personal and Professional Growth

Simpson

Reeve

Rottmann

et al. 2019

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (Troost ILead) has been actively engaged in developing the leadership capacity of engineers since its inception of 2002. Through a suite of leadership programming—both curricular and co-curricular, a robust research team, and our active industry-university Community of Practice we work towards our vision of engineers leading change to build a better world.’ After 16 years of dedicated work, we conducted a mixed method study to discover and understand the lasting impact of our work. 806 alumni responded to our survey and 25 interviews were conducted. This study provides evidence that engineering leadership programming can and does catalyze long-lasting personal and professional growth for undergraduate and graduate students. This paper presents our findings and the implications for engineering leadership education.

show abstract

Section: Quantitative Findingssupporting

confidence: 62%

Engineering Leadership Education: Catalyzing Long-Term Personal and Professional Growth

Simpson

Reeve

Rottmann

et al. 2019

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several subsequent studies have provided empirical support for the utility of the college impact model since its proposal [19,20]. Focusing on the engineering context, several recent surveys performed in the United States have contributed to understand the relationship between college impact model components and engineering undergraduates' core learning outcomes recognized by the Engineer of 2020 report [21], such as contextual competence, fundamental skills, design skills [22], engineering leadership [23,24], interdisciplinary competence [25], teamwork skills, communication skills [24], and ethical development [26]. Following these pioneering studies, it is appropriate to employ the college impact model in the current study to effectively understand sustainability consciousness, which is also deemed an increasingly vital consideration for engineering education around the world [27].…”

Section: Modified College Impact Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of the Modified College Impact Model to Understand Chinese Engineering Undergraduates’ Sustainability Consciousness

Zhao

Liu

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The college impact model provides a valuable framework for explaining various college student learning outcomes. However, few quantitative studies have examined the effectiveness of college impact model in explaining engineering undergraduates’ sustainability consciousness, a critical learning outcome in engineering education. This study proposes a modified college impact model to test the structural links among curriculum experiences, sustainable agency beliefs, and engineering undergraduates’ sustainability consciousness, and to explore the moderating effect of gender on the structural model. Data are collected from 1804 senior engineering students enrolled in five traditional engineering disciplines at 14 first-class engineering universities in China. Structural equation modeling was used for testing the research model. The results demonstrate that (1) curricular emphasis has a significant direct impact on all three dimensions of students’ sustainability consciousness, while instructional practice has a significant direct influence on the sustainability knowingness dimension; (2) both curricular emphasis and instructional practice have a significant indirect influence on sustainability consciousness through the full or partial mediation of sustainable agency beliefs; and (3) gender moderates several paths in the structural model. Theoretical and practical implications are provided, and suggestions for future research are offered.

show abstract

“…To date, the main approach taken by universities in Canada and the United States has been to develop cocurricular and elective leadership development opportunities that fall "outside" the core curriculum which is bound by accreditation [1], [2], [3]. At the same time, others have sought to integrate leadership learning into core courses, particularly engineering design courses which tend to have a stronger teamwork element in their curriculum [4]- [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Carrots Make You Strong? Motivational and Teamwork Effects of Gamification of Professional Development for First Year Engineering Students

Klassen¹,

Bazylak²,

Sheridan³

et al. 2018

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

– There is an increasing interest in developing leadership capacity among engineering students, but these efforts are often split between curricular and cocurricular initiatives. This paper reports on an attempt to bridge these two worlds by using in-class incentives for first-year students to participate in leadership workshops. Findings are that team leaders participate at higher than average rates, that students surveyed had attended a large number of workshops and gave on average more detailed feedback than previous cohorts. However, there was no major evidence of greater team-member effectiveness among those who participated in workshops.

show abstract

Curricular and Co-curricular Influences on Undergraduate Engineering Student Leadership

Abstract: Background Multiple reports call for undergraduate programs to develop engineers who

Cited by 88 publications

References 62 publications

Engineering Leadership Education: Catalyzing Long-Term Personal and Professional Growth

Engineering Leadership Education: Catalyzing Long-Term Personal and Professional Growth

Application of the Modified College Impact Model to Understand Chinese Engineering Undergraduates’ Sustainability Consciousness

Do Carrots Make You Strong? Motivational and Teamwork Effects of Gamification of Professional Development for First Year Engineering Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About