Catherine Betancourt-Lee, B. Lindsay, Mandeep Pandey, M. Boyce, Kim Johnston
First year engineering students begin their degree with pre-conceived notions of how the year will go, with respect to their academics, in addition to their social and spiritual lives. This thereby gives way to a loss of self-efficacy, associated with both engineering itself and their own self-concept led by that initial disconnection. Thus, it is important to understand what factors influence the connections between engineering self-efficacy and their academic, social, and spiritual life-habits. Life habits can be defined as any set of factors encouraging the growth of an individual, affecting an individual’s life, ranging from learning strategies to self-perception of oneself and everything in between. Previous research has explored the stressors specific to students in first year engineering and how this affects students’ wellbeing overall [1] - although not specific to the motivational belief that is self-efficacy and the effect it has on their entire life. Using an inductive thematic analysis [2] on responses written by students who completed a series of self-reflections after participating in Mental Wellness and Engineering Attributes seminars offered in their first year Engineering courses, this research explores the factors that influence the connection between self-efficacy and an individual’s personal growth as described through life habits. The five themes that were found were social/spiritual wellness in terms of a support system, a fixed academic mindset with an “all or nothing” behavior, the inability to cope with transitioning and adapting out of their previous institutions, harmful expectations, and the importance of finding a balance in their everyday lives. Given these findings, the connection between self-efficacy and life habits is prevalent both negatively and positively for first year engineering students. The results suggest that individuals in their first year of engineering are caught off guard by the difficulty of the program, leading to a loss of self-efficacy and the development of new negative learning strategies - until they discover how to succeed in engineering.
{"title":"Factors that influence the connection between engineering self-efficacy and growth within academic, social and spiritual life habits","authors":"Catherine Betancourt-Lee, B. Lindsay, Mandeep Pandey, M. Boyce, Kim Johnston","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15955","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15955","url":null,"abstract":"First year engineering students begin their degree with pre-conceived notions of how the year will go, with respect to their academics, in addition to their social and spiritual lives. This thereby gives way to a loss of self-efficacy, associated with both engineering itself and their own self-concept led by that initial disconnection. Thus, it is important to understand what factors influence the connections between engineering self-efficacy and their academic, social, and spiritual life-habits. Life habits can be defined as any set of factors encouraging the growth of an individual, affecting an individual’s life, ranging from learning strategies to self-perception of oneself and everything in between. Previous research has explored the stressors specific to students in first year engineering and how this affects students’ wellbeing overall [1] - although not specific to the motivational belief that is self-efficacy and the effect it has on their entire life. Using an inductive thematic analysis [2] on responses written by students who completed a series of self-reflections after participating in Mental Wellness and Engineering Attributes seminars offered in their first year Engineering courses, this research explores the factors that influence the connection between self-efficacy and an individual’s personal growth as described through life habits. The five themes that were found were social/spiritual wellness in terms of a support system, a fixed academic mindset with an “all or nothing” behavior, the inability to cope with transitioning and adapting out of their previous institutions, harmful expectations, and the importance of finding a balance in their everyday lives. Given these findings, the connection between self-efficacy and life habits is prevalent both negatively and positively for first year engineering students. The results suggest that individuals in their first year of engineering are caught off guard by the difficulty of the program, leading to a loss of self-efficacy and the development of new negative learning strategies - until they discover how to succeed in engineering.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125005217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This research aims to provide insight into engineering education and how to structure academic course work and projects to demonstrate how engineers benefit society. By establishing the connection between industry and society, female students may be more interested in pursuing both Engineering education and a career in the field following graduation. As it is not part of the typical curriculum to structure coursework this way, many students fail to make this connection. Through the introduction of a community-based learning course project, first-year students were required to teach mechanics concepts to Grade 7 and 8 students. They were then asked to reflect on their experiences with the project using reflection reports and focus group discussions. The results largely illustrate an increased interest from students in the field of Engineering, especially among female first-year students.
{"title":"Constructing Community Learning Opportunities to Reduce Attrition Against Women in Engineering","authors":"Rania Al-Hammoud, Zahra Khosa, Michael Roclawski","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15846","url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to provide insight into engineering education and how to structure academic course work and projects to demonstrate how engineers benefit society. By establishing the connection between industry and society, female students may be more interested in pursuing both Engineering education and a career in the field following graduation. As it is not part of the typical curriculum to structure coursework this way, many students fail to make this connection.\u0000Through the introduction of a community-based learning course project, first-year students were required to teach mechanics concepts to Grade 7 and 8 students. They were then asked to reflect on their experiences with the project using reflection reports and focus group discussions.\u0000The results largely illustrate an increased interest from students in the field of Engineering, especially among female first-year students.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123647149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elizabeth Hassan, Sloane Kowal, Katherine Jamieson
McMaster University has recently made major investments in competitive engineering teams. Student participants in the teams benefit from technical skill development, career relevant experiences, and leadership opportunities. However, the number of students involved in these activities is currently limited, and we would like to serve more students with these programs. The objective of this work is to better understand the factors associated with participation or non-participation in the competitive teams. The research team studied both competitive team participators and non-participators through quantitative and qualitative methods (mixed-methods). The first (qualitative) stage of the study was an online 15-question survey. Students who fully completed the survey had the option to participate in focus groups. Overall, the students’ responses were more similar than they were different. The differences between the groups were: Hours per week on extracurricular, Do not currently have enough time, Existing extracurriculars of interest, Do not have time due to religious or cultural activities, Prefer to work alone, and Feel welcome in engineering. The small number of significant differences between groups is an encouraging finding, because it means that the barriers to broader participation in the teams may be small. If the students who currently participate are similar to the non-participants, similar excellent learning outcomes may be possible. The quantitative findings were examined for insights to establish best practices for encouraging broad participation.
{"title":"Ordinary students, extraordinary results: What factors affect student participation in experiential opportunities in Competitive Teams?","authors":"Elizabeth Hassan, Sloane Kowal, Katherine Jamieson","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15883","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15883","url":null,"abstract":"McMaster University has recently made major investments in competitive engineering teams. Student participants in the teams benefit from technical skill development, career relevant experiences, and leadership opportunities. However, the number of students involved in these activities is currently limited, and we would like to serve more students with these programs. The objective of this work is to better understand the factors associated with participation or non-participation in the competitive teams.\u0000The research team studied both competitive team participators and non-participators through quantitative and qualitative methods (mixed-methods). The first (qualitative) stage of the study was an online 15-question survey. Students who fully completed the survey had the option to participate in focus groups.\u0000Overall, the students’ responses were more similar than they were different. The differences between the groups were: Hours per week on extracurricular, Do not currently have enough time, Existing extracurriculars of interest, Do not have time due to religious or cultural activities, Prefer to work alone, and Feel welcome in engineering.\u0000The small number of significant differences between groups is an encouraging finding, because it means that the barriers to broader participation in the teams may be small. If the students who currently participate are similar to the non-participants, similar excellent learning outcomes may be possible. The quantitative findings were examined for insights to establish best practices for encouraging broad participation.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121058906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Empathy is a necessary soft skill for 21st century engineers that can support engineering design, creativity, ethical skills, and collaboration. Empathy-based pedagogical research has predominantly focused on course or project-specific approaches. This paper presents instructor (n = 40) perceptions on empathy as a professional skill and as a pedagogical area captured in a survey distributed to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Waterloo. Instructors identified empathy as a moderately to extremely important professional skill but expressed a wider range of opinions on the importance of empathy-based pedagogy ranging from not at all important to extremely important. This difference in perceptions may be connected to self-identified gender, professional engineering status, and perceived connections between empathy and a wider range of graduate attributes. Future work will focus on a qualitative analysis of survey statements to better understand the broader context of instructor perceptions and developing a larger multi-institution study.
{"title":"Where We Are: Understanding Instructor Perceptions of Empathy in Engineering Education","authors":"Jennifer Howcraft, Kate Mercer","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15913","url":null,"abstract":"Empathy is a necessary soft skill for 21st century engineers that can support engineering design, creativity, ethical skills, and collaboration. Empathy-based pedagogical research has predominantly focused on course or project-specific approaches. This paper presents instructor (n = 40) perceptions on empathy as a professional skill and as a pedagogical area captured in a survey distributed to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Waterloo. Instructors identified empathy as a moderately to extremely important professional skill but expressed a wider range of opinions on the importance of empathy-based pedagogy ranging from not at all important to extremely important. This difference in perceptions may be connected to self-identified gender, professional engineering status, and perceived connections between empathy and a wider range of graduate attributes. Future work will focus on a qualitative analysis of survey statements to better understand the broader context of instructor perceptions and developing a larger multi-institution study. ","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127350174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Zhang, E. Croiset, F. Pantazi, Marios Ioannidis
We present an integrated project-based learning (PBL) asset integrating 360° virtual reality tour, high-fidelity simulation, and simulation-based design for chemical engineering laboratory courses. The 360° virtual reality tour integrated with videos and learning lessons of distillation equipment components is based on a pilot-scale distillation column of the standard industrial design and an authentic separation system of renewable bioethanol. The dedicated simulation modules, tailored for process simulation and simulation-based design anchored on rigorous theoretical methods, provide students with accurate process performance scenarios and genuine process design practice. The unique combination of virtual reality and high-fidelity simulation enables students of all academic years to explore the connections among the process equipment and operation, underlying concepts, simplifying assumptions and sustainable design with high-level efficiency, depth, and flexibility. The integrated learning modules also contain content-appropriate learning activities and expected learning outcomes for all academic levels, and culminates in senior year as a project-based design laboratory focusing on sustainable design of equipment, systems, and processes, along with hands-on laboratory. Altogether, the integrated learning based on the exploration of the real-world process is structured to support efficient, student-oriented, and design-centric learning for students to acquire knowledge and engineering skills of integrated real-world systems and develop cognitive ability for problem solving. In particular, the integrated learning in the open-ended PBL with design component is expected to help students achieve higher-level learning outcomes and critical engineering skills.
{"title":"Achieving Deep Learning through Integration of 360° Virtual Reality Tour, Hands-on Experience, and Simulation-Based Design in a Project-Based Laboratory","authors":"M. Zhang, E. Croiset, F. Pantazi, Marios Ioannidis","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15857","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15857","url":null,"abstract":"We present an integrated project-based learning (PBL) asset integrating 360° virtual reality tour, high-fidelity simulation, and simulation-based design for chemical engineering laboratory courses. The 360° virtual reality tour integrated with videos and learning lessons of distillation equipment components is based on a pilot-scale distillation column of the standard industrial design and an authentic separation system of renewable bioethanol. The dedicated simulation modules, tailored for process simulation and simulation-based design anchored on rigorous theoretical methods, provide students with accurate process performance scenarios and genuine process design practice. The unique combination of virtual reality and high-fidelity simulation enables students of all academic years to explore the connections among the process equipment and operation, underlying concepts, simplifying assumptions and sustainable design with high-level efficiency, depth, and flexibility. The integrated learning modules also contain content-appropriate learning activities and expected learning outcomes for all academic levels, and culminates in senior year as a project-based design laboratory focusing on sustainable design of equipment, systems, and processes, along with hands-on laboratory. Altogether, the integrated learning based on the exploration of the real-world process is structured to support efficient, student-oriented, and design-centric learning for students to acquire knowledge and engineering skills of integrated real-world systems and develop cognitive ability for problem solving. In particular, the integrated learning in the open-ended PBL with design component is expected to help students achieve higher-level learning outcomes and critical engineering skills.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116130035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Renaissance Engineering 1 is a first-year engineering course that is the “flagship course” of Lassonde School of Engineering, where students are introduced to essential concepts and practices in ethics, communication, and creative problem solving. It is a large course that impacts over 600 students per year. Since Fall 2020, partly as a response to the pandemic, we fundamentally transformed the content and delivery of the course. This year, we have continued this transformative journey with an emphasis on reinventing the assessment approach. The limitations of normative grading are wellknown in the education field. Specifically, to our situation, the appropriateness of this practice in professional education where the goal is to ensure every student acquires the necessary competence, is suspect. Specification grading bridges normative and competencybased grading paradigms and has been shown to be effective in the engineering education setting. We applied specification grading to Renaissance Engineering 1. In all assignments, including the final case study, students are asked to satisfy a number of requirements distributed across four levels of competencies: Level 1: Foundational requirements for being a well-adjusted citizen, Level 2: Foundational requirements for being a contributing engineer, Level 3: Advanced requirements for being a well adjusted citizen, and Level 4: Advanced requirements for being a contributing engineer. Students are assigned grades from D to A based on their requirement satisfaction. Students have a limited number of chances to revise and resubmit their work if they have failed to satisfy all requirements in order to demonstrate competency. If they fail to meet multiple level 1 requirements after resubmission, they will fail the course. During the Fall-2021 term, we faced a number of unexpected challenges and surprises. Compared to previous years, this cohort - having experienced tremendous difficulties through the pandemic - were more tentative and insecure and took to a new grading scheme with notable trepidation initially. Surprisingly, many students had notable difficulty following clear written instructions, which is likely another pandemic-induced abnormality. Nevertheless, the majority of the students became comfortable with the scheme by the end of the term and achieved satisfactory learning outcomes. Significantly, while the majority of the students (~58%) achieved A or B grades, a significant minority (~18%) of students had failed the course. The course is offered to a new cohort of students in Winter 2022. Following a system thinking approach, we adjusted the grading scheme implementation based on our experience and learnings from the Fall-2021 term through winter term that led us to new and consistent findings. However, the benefits of specification grading in ensuring students meet critical competencies is particularly relevant for a professional education program such as engineering. Indeed, the bimodal grad
{"title":"Journey Continues: Piloting Competency-based Assessment in a First-year Engineering Course on Ethics, Communication, and Creative Problem Solving","authors":"Kai Zhuang, J. Harris, S. Mattucci, M. Jadidi","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15929","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15929","url":null,"abstract":"Renaissance Engineering 1 is a first-year engineering course that is the “flagship course” of Lassonde School of Engineering, where students are introduced to essential concepts and practices in ethics, communication, and creative problem solving. It is a large course that impacts over 600 students per year. Since Fall 2020, partly as a response to the pandemic, we fundamentally transformed the content and delivery of the course. This year, we have continued this transformative journey with an emphasis on reinventing the assessment approach. The limitations of normative grading are wellknown in the education field. Specifically, to our situation, the appropriateness of this practice in professional education where the goal is to ensure every student acquires the necessary competence, is suspect. Specification grading bridges normative and competencybased grading paradigms and has been shown to be effective in the engineering education setting. We applied specification grading to Renaissance Engineering 1. In all assignments, including the final case study, students are asked to satisfy a number of requirements distributed across four levels of competencies: Level 1: Foundational requirements for being a well-adjusted citizen, Level 2: Foundational requirements for being a contributing engineer, Level 3: Advanced requirements for being a well adjusted citizen, and Level 4: Advanced requirements for being a contributing engineer.\u0000Students are assigned grades from D to A based on their requirement satisfaction. Students have a limited number of chances to revise and resubmit their work if they have failed to satisfy all requirements in order to demonstrate competency. If they fail to meet multiple level 1 requirements after resubmission, they will fail the course. During the Fall-2021 term, we faced a number of unexpected challenges and surprises. Compared to previous years, this cohort - having experienced tremendous difficulties through the pandemic - were more tentative and insecure and took to a new grading scheme with notable trepidation initially. Surprisingly, many students had notable difficulty following clear written instructions, which is likely another pandemic-induced abnormality. Nevertheless, the majority of the students became comfortable with the scheme by the end of the term and achieved satisfactory learning outcomes. Significantly, while the majority of the students (~58%) achieved A or B grades, a significant minority (~18%) of students had failed the course. The course is offered to a new cohort of students in Winter 2022. Following a system thinking approach, we adjusted the grading scheme implementation based on our experience and learnings from the Fall-2021 term through winter term that led us to new and consistent findings. However, the benefits of specification grading in ensuring students meet critical competencies is particularly relevant for a professional education program such as engineering. Indeed, the bimodal grad","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117071977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This teaching practice paper describes and reflects on the Engineering Observation, a multimodal communication assignment in a first-year engineering communication and design course. The assignment is designed to accomplish two major goals. First, it fills a pedagogical gap by establishing multimodality and engineering discourse as the foundations of communications instruction and practice in the course, while also establishing communication as an integral part of—and not separate from—design practice. Second, it helps solve problems stemming from the complexity and scale common to large design courses by contributing to the systematic stability of the course. This second goal depends on framing such a course as a system, from the “ecological perspective.” These dual goals are found to be inherently connected, and deliberate care has been given to ensure that they are aligned, mutually supportive, and as effective as possible while ensuring that the assignment supports, and does not negatively impact, connected aspects of the course. Finally, I assess the assignment in its current iteration and consider future directions for the assignment itself as well as this research.
{"title":"Communication as Design: How a Multimodal Assignment Establishes Communication’s Role in Engineering Design and Provides Stability to a Large Course System","authors":"E. Nolan","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15875","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15875","url":null,"abstract":"This teaching practice paper describes and reflects on the Engineering Observation, a multimodal communication assignment in a first-year engineering communication and design course. The assignment is designed to accomplish two major goals. First, it fills a pedagogical gap by establishing multimodality and engineering discourse as the foundations of communications instruction and practice in the course, while also establishing communication as an integral part of—and not separate from—design practice. Second, it helps solve problems stemming from the complexity and scale common to large design courses by contributing to the systematic stability of the course. This second goal depends on framing such a course as a system, from the “ecological perspective.” These dual goals are found to be inherently connected, and deliberate care has been given to ensure that they are aligned, mutually supportive, and as effective as possible while ensuring that the assignment supports, and does not negatively impact, connected aspects of the course. Finally, I assess the assignment in its current iteration and consider future directions for the assignment itself as well as this research.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116778229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores the tension between entrenched engineering beliefs about technological development and the limits of growth required for a sustainable planet. In a second year required Engineering & Society course, students were asked to use a postsustainability trilemma framework to explain one of three possible approaches to sustainability and analyze it as an ethical or unethical choice: Techno-business-as-usual; Environmental Authoritarianism and Post-Growth. This work-in-progress paper, which is part of a larger project, focuses on an examination of students who selected environmental authoritarianism as their selected approach. Analysis, based on the papers and student interviews, demonstrated both problematic assumptions about environmental authoritarianism, and different relationships between moral foun
{"title":"Questioning Green Growth and Sustainable Development in Undergraduate Engineering","authors":"L. Romkey, Robert K. Irish","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15978","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15978","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the tension between entrenched engineering beliefs about technological development and the limits of growth required for a sustainable planet. In a second year required Engineering & Society course, students were asked to use a postsustainability trilemma framework to explain one of three possible approaches to sustainability and analyze it as an ethical or unethical choice: Techno-business-as-usual; Environmental Authoritarianism and Post-Growth. This work-in-progress paper, which is part of a larger project, focuses on an examination of students who selected environmental authoritarianism as their selected approach. Analysis, based on the papers and student interviews, demonstrated both problematic assumptions about environmental authoritarianism, and different relationships between moral foun","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114650745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Student awareness of complex problems increased by collaborating in teams through curricular and co-curricular deliveries. Pedagogical partnerships between faculty and students were created to investigate the Canadian Engineering Grand Challenge (CEGC), access to affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy. The open-ended and broad nature of the CEGC represented a natural fit for the design thinking process (DTP) framework where users and their needs are identified, and the problem statement and specification are formulated. The difficulties encountered by students while navigating the complex nature of the CEGC will be reported and steps for success are identified.
{"title":"Two tales of the Design Thinking Process for the Sustainable Energy Canadian Engineering Grand Challenge","authors":"C. Moresoli, Monika Mikhail","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15910","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15910","url":null,"abstract":"Student awareness of complex problems increased by collaborating in teams through curricular and co-curricular deliveries. Pedagogical partnerships between faculty and students were created to investigate the Canadian Engineering Grand Challenge (CEGC), access to affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy. The open-ended and broad nature of the CEGC represented a natural fit for the design thinking process (DTP) framework where users and their needs are identified, and the problem statement and specification are formulated. The difficulties encountered by students while navigating the complex nature of the CEGC will be reported and steps for success are identified.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126169084","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Austin Martins-Robalino, Aurora Wang, Bronwyn Chorlton, J. Gales
Trends in engineering education have shifted over time, with teaching methods adapting to facilitate student learning [1], and the importance of equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI) coming to the forefront [2]. It is important to understand the trends in engineering education to assess where we are coming from and where things currently stand in terms of teaching methods, culture, and pedagogy, to guide engineering educators and researchers moving forward. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of thematic trends in past CEEA papers over the previous five years (2017-2021), exploring shifts and evolutions in the major topics discussed as well as looking at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on engineering education research. Papers were analyzed from the 2017-2021 CEEA proceedings. By studying the frequency of main themes in papers for each year, the popularity of subjects that have been trending were determined, allowing for an analysis of the major trends seen year over year. During the period under review, institutions across Canada transitioned to online learning in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in a prevalent thematic shift in paper topics towards an increased interest regarding pure online delivery of a course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the 2021 proceedings, which saw 41 (41.8%) papers discuss online learning in some form, research into this topic generally had little traction with 2017 having the next highest frequency of 17 (10.2%) publications, and 2018-2020 each having under five publications on this topic. Up until 2021, the focus on teaching beyond conventional formats had been primarily on mixed delivery (such as flipped classrooms and blended learning), as opposed to purely online. Other trends observed from the analysis include the importance of K-12 outreach with this theme seeing most focus at the CEEA 2020 conference with seven (7.9%) papers discussing this topic. In addition to the changing trends in topics, a discussion on the ambiguity of research and practice-based papers and their definition was undertaken. This analysis will assist engineering educators to understand the research topics of interest that past CEEA submissions have gravitated towards, and will highlight topics that are important, but are presently understudied.
{"title":"Thematic Review of Canadian Engineering Education Research between 2017-2021","authors":"Austin Martins-Robalino, Aurora Wang, Bronwyn Chorlton, J. Gales","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15952","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15952","url":null,"abstract":"Trends in engineering education have shifted over time, with teaching methods adapting to facilitate student learning [1], and the importance of equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI) coming to the forefront [2]. It is important to understand the trends in engineering education to assess where we are coming from and where things currently stand in terms of teaching methods, culture, and pedagogy, to guide engineering educators and researchers moving forward. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of thematic trends in past CEEA papers over the previous five years (2017-2021), exploring shifts and evolutions in the major topics discussed as well as looking at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on engineering education research. Papers were analyzed from the 2017-2021 CEEA proceedings. By studying the frequency of main themes in papers for each year, the popularity of subjects that have been trending were determined, allowing for an analysis of the major trends seen year over year. During the period under review, institutions across Canada transitioned to online learning in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in a prevalent thematic shift in paper topics towards an increased interest regarding pure online delivery of a course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the 2021 proceedings, which saw 41 (41.8%) papers discuss online learning in some form, research into this topic generally had little traction with 2017 having the next highest frequency of 17 (10.2%) publications, and 2018-2020 each having under five publications on this topic. Up until 2021, the focus on teaching beyond conventional formats had been primarily on mixed delivery (such as flipped classrooms and blended learning), as opposed to purely online. Other trends observed from the analysis include the importance of K-12 outreach with this theme seeing most focus at the CEEA 2020 conference with seven (7.9%) papers discussing this topic. In addition to the changing trends in topics, a discussion on the ambiguity of research and practice-based papers and their definition was undertaken. This analysis will assist engineering educators to understand the research topics of interest that past CEEA submissions have gravitated towards, and will highlight topics that are important, but are presently understudied.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122016269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：