Vision 2030; Creating the Future of Mechanical Engineering Education

Abstract

and has served in this capacity since 1999. He has been active in ASEE in the Mechanics Division and the Engineering Technology Division, currently serving on the Executive Board of the Engineering Technology Council. He has also been active in ASME; being awarded the 2009 Ben C. Sparks Medal for excellence in mechanical engineering technology education, serving as a member of the Vision 2030 Task Force, serving as chair elect of the Committee on Engineering Technology Accreditation, serving on the Board of Directors of the ASME Center for Education, and as a member of the Mechanical Engineering Technology Department Head Committee. He has been a program evaluator for both the Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME) and ASME and currently serves on the Technology Accreditation Council (TAC) of ABET, representing ASME. He also serves on the SME's Manufacturing Education and Research Community steering committee. Before joining ASU, he had been at North Dakota State University where he was a faculty member in the Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering department. His research interests include machining, effective teaching and engineering mechanics. Before coming to academia, he was a design engineer, maintenance supervisor, and plant engineer. He is a registered professional engineer.

The history of engineering leadership development in academia: Influences, influencers, and a general roadmap

“…Curricular approaches to EL include leadership electives, minors, certificates, and integration into core technical courses, while co‐curricular approaches include workshops, cohort programs, and support for club leaders. The growth of program descriptions across institutional contexts provided timely knowledge and value to the discipline; however, very few included assessment or evaluation measures related to impact (Kirkpatrick, 2011).…”

A multidisciplinary engineering capstone design course: A case study for design-based approach

“…There are still gaps between the skills of engineering graduates and the qualifications or skills needed in the industry. In a recent study, 1 Kirkpatrick et al. defined major differences when considering areas of improvements for engineering graduates.…”

The Distributed System of Governance in Engineering Education: A Report on Initial Findings

“…Other national conversations about engineering education reform have also served as an important context for more local initiatives. Our data suggests that studies such as the National Academy of Engineering's The Engineer of 2020 (2004) and ASME's Vision 2030 (Kirkpatrick, et al, 2011) have served as a catalyst and a focal point for local initiatives, but have rarely led to specific implementations. The NAE Grand Challenges, and especially the Grand Challenges Scholars Program has had a more direct impact on the shape of local reform initiatives, but even there, the Grand Challenges operate primarily as a touchpoint for open discussions about general project ideas.…”