This paper is situated in the recent interest within engineering education communities in adopting transdisciplinary practices as well as the evolving scholarship and discussions on transdisciplinarity (TD) in broader contexts over the past few decades. We first introduce a historical overview of the discussions and scholarly work on TD, from which we identify some features of a transdisciplinary orientation. Further, we examine the website information of nine TD-explicit initiatives and seven cross-disciplinary initiatives in postsecondary settings across the world—in light of two general approaches to TD (the Nicolescuian approach and the Zurich approach) and the identified TD-oriented features. Our reviews exhibit the commonalities and differences between transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary initiatives, and a notable divide between TD-related theories and practices. Our findings also reveal opportunities and challenges in pursuing transdisciplinary activities in engineering education and practice. We call for a fundamental conceptual change to enable a real transformation toward transdisciplinarity.
{"title":"Exploring Transdisciplinarity in Engineering Education and Practice: A Review of Literature and Existing Initiatives","authors":"Qin Liu, Helen Tran","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15953","url":null,"abstract":"This paper is situated in the recent interest within engineering education communities in adopting transdisciplinary practices as well as the evolving scholarship and discussions on transdisciplinarity (TD) in broader contexts over the past few decades. We first introduce a historical overview of the discussions and scholarly work on TD, from which we identify some features of a transdisciplinary orientation. Further, we examine the website information of nine TD-explicit initiatives and seven cross-disciplinary initiatives in postsecondary settings across the world—in light of two general approaches to TD (the Nicolescuian approach and the Zurich approach) and the identified TD-oriented features. Our reviews exhibit the commonalities and differences between transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary initiatives, and a notable divide between TD-related theories and practices. Our findings also reveal opportunities and challenges in pursuing transdisciplinary activities in engineering education and practice. We call for a fundamental conceptual change to enable a real transformation toward transdisciplinarity.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"59 1 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":"128861070","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}
In response to the contagious disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a number of health and safety measures were enacted across Canada in March 2020. These measures included the physical closure of postsecondary institutions, including the authors’ institution Carleton University. The physical closure resulted in an abrupt transition from normal in-person teaching to emergency remote teaching (the term emergency remote teaching is used to distinguish it from online teaching, which is not subject to the challenges and constraints associated with an emergency situation). Emergency remote teaching continued at Carleton University for the entire 2020/21 academic year. There were increased resources, training opportunities, supports, and time to prepare for teaching, as compared to the sudden change in the Winter 2020 term. Simultaneously, there were still many ongoing challenges and constraints in the pursuit of optimal remote teaching and learning. Midway through the Fall 2020 term, a questionnaire on the student experience with emergency remote teaching was developed and delivered to undergraduate students in the Department of Systems and Computer Engineering at Carleton University. This paper presents the findings of this questionnaire from the 159 respondents. Results suggest that, on average, academic and intellectual student engagement was slightly worse for emergency remote teaching versus normal in-person teaching. Emergency remote teaching posed some difficulties and challenges, but also provided some advantages that were preferred (e.g., less travel time, ability to rewatch asynchronous lectures). There was a notable worsening of social student engagement, which was associated with increased feelings of isolation and decreased mental health and well-being. There was also a number of students who faced technical barriers with respect to remote teaching, with only 22% indicating that they experienced few or inconsequential technical barriers. This research adds to the discourse on emergency remote teaching, including the lens of engineering education. The paper can help inform future transitions to emergency remote teaching, with some insights potentially useful for online teaching, which is anticipated to continue to increase in its prevalence.
{"title":"Student Experience of Emergency Remote Teaching During COVID-19 Early in the 2020/21 Academic Year","authors":"A. Chan, Kay Daigle","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15828","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15828","url":null,"abstract":"In response to the contagious disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a number of health and safety measures were enacted across Canada in March 2020. These measures included the physical closure of postsecondary institutions, including the authors’ institution Carleton University. The physical closure resulted in an abrupt transition from normal in-person teaching to emergency remote teaching (the term emergency remote teaching is used to distinguish it from online teaching, which is not subject to the challenges and constraints associated with an emergency situation).\u0000Emergency remote teaching continued at Carleton University for the entire 2020/21 academic year. There were increased resources, training opportunities, supports, and time to prepare for teaching, as compared to the sudden change in the Winter 2020 term. Simultaneously, there were still many ongoing challenges and constraints in the pursuit of optimal remote teaching and learning. Midway through the Fall 2020 term, a questionnaire on the student experience with emergency remote teaching was developed and delivered to undergraduate students in the Department of Systems and Computer Engineering at Carleton University. This paper presents the findings of this questionnaire from the 159 respondents.\u0000Results suggest that, on average, academic and intellectual student engagement was slightly worse for emergency remote teaching versus normal in-person teaching. Emergency remote teaching posed some difficulties and challenges, but also provided some advantages that were preferred (e.g., less travel time, ability to rewatch asynchronous lectures). There was a notable worsening of social student engagement, which was associated with increased feelings of isolation and decreased mental health and well-being. There was also a number of students who faced technical barriers with respect to remote teaching, with only 22% indicating that they experienced few or inconsequential technical barriers.\u0000This research adds to the discourse on emergency remote teaching, including the lens of engineering education. The paper can help inform future transitions to emergency remote teaching, with some insights potentially useful for online teaching, which is anticipated to continue to increase in its prevalence.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"17 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":"125543214","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}
Kari Zacharias, Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Nettie Wallace, Kate Mercer
This paper reports the findings of an initial literature and website search of land-based education initiatives in Canadian post-secondary institutions. This work represents the first stage of a larger project, which aims to gather information about existing land-based education within Canadian post-secondary institutions and develop land-based curriculum for engineering students. The paper begins with a discussion of truth, reconciliation, Indigenization and decolonization in the context of education and land-based learning. It continues by presenting the authors’ positionalities, and then methods and findings. Preliminary findings from the initial search show that land-based approaches do not appear to be widespread within engineering faculties, programs, or courses in Canada. Additionally, more diversified knowledge gathering is required to better understand the current landscape of land education within Canadian post-secondary institutions.
{"title":"Surveying Land-Based Learning for Engineering Education: Preliminary Steps","authors":"Kari Zacharias, Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Nettie Wallace, Kate Mercer","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15942","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15942","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports the findings of an initial literature and website search of land-based education initiatives in Canadian post-secondary institutions. This work represents the first stage of a larger project, which aims to gather information about existing land-based education within Canadian post-secondary institutions and develop land-based curriculum for engineering students. The paper begins with a discussion of truth, reconciliation, Indigenization and decolonization in the context of education and land-based learning. It continues by presenting the authors’ positionalities, and then methods and findings. Preliminary findings from the initial search show that land-based approaches do not appear to be widespread within engineering faculties, programs, or courses in Canada. Additionally, more diversified knowledge gathering is required to better understand the current landscape of land education within Canadian post-secondary institutions.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"23 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":"121926786","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}
An overemphasis on following detailed procedures in second-year lab courses has indicated student passivity and disengagement from the purpose and meaning of laboratory experiments. To abate this, adjustments were made to course structure and deliverables to introduce an inquiry-based approach that required students to develop their own lab procedures based on stated objectives and an overview of the experimental equipment. Surveys were conducted and student feedback indicated that the majority students found the new approach to have increased their understanding of their experiments.
{"title":"Assessing the Shift to an Inquiry-Based Approach in 2nd Year Chemical Engineering Labs on Observed Student Engagement and Self-Reported Understanding","authors":"P. Chintalapati","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15868","url":null,"abstract":"An overemphasis on following detailed procedures in second-year lab courses has indicated student passivity and disengagement from the purpose and meaning of laboratory experiments. To abate this, adjustments were made to course structure and deliverables to introduce an inquiry-based approach that required students to develop their own lab procedures based on stated objectives and an overview of the experimental equipment. Surveys were conducted and student feedback indicated that the majority students found the new approach to have increased their understanding of their experiments.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"123 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":"123585572","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}
Graeme S. Noble, Josh Mogyoros, Laura Roa, Theresa Frost, Nicolas Ivanov, Nhien Tran-Nguyen, D. Kilkenny
Secondary school curricula in Canada for subjects like science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) often focus on surface-level learning. While frequently believed to be a precursor for later complex and in-depth studies, such approaches to teaching and learning fail to adequately prepare students for life outside of the classroom, including for future studies in their field of choice. In response to demands for STEM programming that inspires critical thought over rote standardizable knowledge, in 2016, Discovery was created. An interdisciplinary program operated out of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, Discovery symbolizes a participatory partnership between the University of Toronto and local secondary schools to support inquiry-based learning for entire classrooms of high school students on a longitudinal basis. Discovery Instructors—consisting of multilevel post-secondary students—work alongside secondary school educators to devise problem-based projects that address key Ontario curriculum targets. Over the course of a semester, high school students are guided by university Instructors to engage in collaborative projects in biology, chemistry, and physics to expand their learning portfolios beyond the confines of a traditional classroom. However, while Discovery seeks to diversify learning for all involved, educator development for Discovery Instructors has remained largely implicit. In this study, we will introduce a teaching development course into Discovery’s Instructor preparation. Within a blended online learning environment across seven weekly modules, Instructor assessment will consist directly of discussion boards containing content- and reflection-based prompts using holistic rubrics and indirectly via mentored students’ performance. A pilot program is currently underway with a sample of enrolled Instructors with data to be collected as the program progresses.
{"title":"Student-Teacher Becomes the Teacher-Student: Educator Preparation for Post-Secondary Students to Enrich High School Student STEM Learning in the Discovery Educational Initiative","authors":"Graeme S. Noble, Josh Mogyoros, Laura Roa, Theresa Frost, Nicolas Ivanov, Nhien Tran-Nguyen, D. Kilkenny","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15843","url":null,"abstract":"Secondary school curricula in Canada for subjects like science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) often focus on surface-level learning. While frequently believed to be a precursor for later complex and in-depth studies, such approaches to teaching and learning fail to adequately prepare students for life outside of the classroom, including for future studies in their field of choice. In response to demands for STEM programming that inspires critical thought over rote standardizable knowledge, in 2016, Discovery was created.\u0000An interdisciplinary program operated out of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, Discovery symbolizes a participatory partnership between the University of Toronto and local secondary schools to support inquiry-based learning for entire classrooms of high school students on a longitudinal basis. Discovery Instructors—consisting of multilevel post-secondary students—work alongside secondary school educators to devise problem-based projects that address key Ontario curriculum targets. Over the course of a semester, high school students are guided by university Instructors to engage in collaborative projects in biology, chemistry, and physics to expand their learning portfolios beyond the confines of a traditional classroom. However, while Discovery seeks to diversify learning for all involved, educator development for Discovery Instructors has remained largely implicit.\u0000In this study, we will introduce a teaching development course into Discovery’s Instructor preparation. Within a blended online learning environment across seven weekly modules, Instructor assessment will consist directly of discussion boards containing content- and reflection-based prompts using holistic rubrics and indirectly via mentored students’ performance. A pilot program is currently underway with a sample of enrolled Instructors with data to be collected as the program progresses.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"51 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":"117011947","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}
Nadine Ibrahim, C. Variawa, Shelir Ebrahimi, Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Gabriel Potvin, Renato Bezerra Rodrigues
The understanding of how engineering education might evolve to prepare future students for the opportunities and challenges that society will face is of great interest to educators and to the engineering profession. A special interest group of the CEEA-ACÉG was formed in 2017 with a mandate to facilitate the discussion on the identity and attributes of the Engineer of 2050. Among its other activities, this group ran three workshops (in 2017, 2018 and 2021) in which participants answered prompts on their vision of the future of the engineering profession, and the associated changes in engineering education necessary to train competent future engineers. This paper presents the results of a qualitative content analysis of the responses to these prompts, to highlight recurring themes and trends, and suggest some areas warranting further discussion or investigation. This work is intended to serve as a foundation on which the work of the special interest group can build in the coming years.
{"title":"Engineer of 2050: Thematic Analysis of CEEA-ACEG Workshop Provocations and Reflections","authors":"Nadine Ibrahim, C. Variawa, Shelir Ebrahimi, Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Gabriel Potvin, Renato Bezerra Rodrigues","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15930","url":null,"abstract":"The understanding of how engineering education might evolve to prepare future students for the opportunities and challenges that society will face is of great interest to educators and to the engineering profession. A special interest group of the CEEA-ACÉG was formed in 2017 with a mandate to facilitate the discussion on the identity and attributes of the Engineer of 2050. Among its other activities, this group ran three workshops (in 2017, 2018 and 2021) in which participants answered prompts on their vision of the future of the engineering profession, and the associated changes in engineering education necessary to train competent future engineers. This paper presents the results of a qualitative content analysis of the responses to these prompts, to highlight recurring themes and trends, and suggest some areas warranting further discussion or investigation. This work is intended to serve as a foundation on which the work of the special interest group can build in the coming years.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"19 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":"126524448","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}
Engineering Deans Canada (EDC) recently articulated Grand Challenges that recognize the role of engineers and the specific needs of Canadians in the form of Canadian Engineering Grand Challenges (CEGCs). The CEGCs offer a unique framework to motivate and engage engineering students from different disciplines and encourage collaboration and the sharing of their discipline expertise. The CEGCs also offer a framework for engineering students to develop leadership skills and gain awareness of their technological, innovation and stewardship roles. In this paper, we report on a student-led approach in the online environment for the creation of two workshops and one “Leadathon” case competition related to the CEGCs and leadership skills development. The activities were developed and delivered by a team of engineering students with the support of faculty members. We refer to this student-led model as “for-students-by-students’. Feedback collected from student facilitators and participants indicate that the resulting activities were effective in engaging students and raising awareness of the CEGCs and of their role to address societal problems as future engineers. We present the methodology that was adopted to leverage and take advantage of the online environment, while addressing differences in participant interactions and engagement from the perspective of opportunities and challenges. Finally we discuss potential avenues to integrate into the mainstream curriculum for-student-by-student model related to the interaction with CEGCs.
{"title":"Canadian Engineering Grand Challenges in co-curricular and online environment: Opportunities and Challenges","authors":"Nadine Ibrahim, John Donald, C. Moresoli","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15880","url":null,"abstract":"Engineering Deans Canada (EDC) recently articulated Grand Challenges that recognize the role of engineers and the specific needs of Canadians in the form of Canadian Engineering Grand Challenges (CEGCs). The CEGCs offer a unique framework to motivate and engage engineering students from different disciplines and encourage collaboration and the sharing of their discipline expertise. The CEGCs also offer a framework for engineering students to develop leadership skills and gain awareness of their technological, innovation and stewardship roles. In this paper, we report on a student-led approach in the online environment for the creation of two workshops and one “Leadathon” case competition related to the CEGCs and leadership skills development. The activities were developed and delivered by a team of engineering students with the support of faculty members. We refer to this student-led model as “for-students-by-students’. Feedback collected from student facilitators and participants indicate that the resulting activities were effective in engaging students and raising awareness of the CEGCs and of their role to address societal problems as future engineers. We present the methodology that was adopted to leverage and take advantage of the online environment, while addressing differences in participant interactions and engagement from the perspective of opportunities and challenges. Finally we discuss potential avenues to integrate into the mainstream curriculum for-student-by-student model related to the interaction with CEGCs.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"58 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":"129149113","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 practice paper describes the design and implementation of a “one shot” redesign of an introductory programming course intended to support students both in developing programming and coding skills, and in obtaining a software development position in a competitive hiring environment. The technological and pedagogical approaches used in this course were drawn from a combination of the archaic (e.g. command lines; shell scripting; and, console graphics) and the emerging modern (e.g. multilingual instruction; “Pythonic C++”; and, a code review exam). This paper discusses each approach and design feature of the course in terms of its pedagogical objectives; setup and implementation; operational challenges; and, perceived impact on student learning and both student and instructor experience.
{"title":"Integrating the Modern and the Archaic in an Introductory Programming Course - C++ 20; the Command Line; Multilingual Coding; and a Code Review Exam","authors":"Jason A. Foster","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15943","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15943","url":null,"abstract":"This practice paper describes the design and implementation of a “one shot” redesign of an introductory programming course intended to support students both in developing programming and coding skills, and in obtaining a software development position in a competitive hiring environment. The technological and pedagogical approaches used in this course were drawn from a combination of the archaic (e.g. command lines; shell scripting; and, console graphics) and the emerging modern (e.g. multilingual instruction; “Pythonic C++”; and, a code review exam). This paper discusses each approach and design feature of the course in terms of its pedagogical objectives; setup and implementation; operational challenges; and, perceived impact on student learning and both student and instructor experience.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"1 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":"133940324","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}
In the present era, only competent graduates can survive in the global economy. The Washington accord suggested twelve graduate attributes essential for competent engineering graduates. Various accreditation agencies measure the competency of engineering graduates in terms of these graduate attributes. This paper presented the perception of academicians’ and industry professionals’ regarding the most important skill needed for a competent engineering graduates. Also, the paper discussed how far the present undergraduate engineering curriculum prepares the engineering graduates to be industry ready. Identification of the most important skill needed for engineering graduate is done by employing one of the multi criteria decision method called Analytical hierarchy process (AHP). AHP incorporates several criteria and order of preference in evaluating and selecting the best option among many alternatives based on the desired outcome. The responses from academicians as well as industry professionals from Civil Engineering stream in Kerala, India were collected. The criteria weights were determined based on the procedure given by Saaty. The consistency index values reinforced the reliability of judgment. The study showcased that problem solving skill and teamwork are the most important skill needed for an engineering graduate from academicians’ viewpoint. According to industry professionals, engineering knowledge is more important than problem solving skills. Also, in the present study academicians and industry professionals unanimously suggested the revision of curriculum, internships for students, the collaboration between academicians and industry professionals both in academia and industry, exposure of students to real world problems are some of the means to develop competency in Civil Engineering graduates.
{"title":"Analyzing the Employability Skills of Engineering Graduates using AHP Techniques - A Case Study of Kerala State in India.","authors":"E. Suresh, Beena B.R.","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15882","url":null,"abstract":"In the present era, only competent graduates can survive in the global economy. The Washington accord suggested twelve graduate attributes essential for competent engineering graduates. Various accreditation agencies measure the competency of engineering graduates in terms of these graduate attributes. This paper presented the perception of academicians’ and industry professionals’ regarding the most important skill needed for a competent engineering graduates. Also, the paper discussed how far the present undergraduate engineering curriculum prepares the engineering graduates to be industry ready. Identification of the most important skill needed for engineering graduate is done by employing one of the multi criteria decision method called Analytical hierarchy process (AHP). AHP incorporates several criteria and order of preference in evaluating and selecting the best option among many alternatives based on the desired outcome. The responses from academicians as well as industry professionals from Civil Engineering stream in Kerala, India were collected. The criteria weights were determined based on the procedure given by Saaty. The consistency index values reinforced the reliability of judgment. The study showcased that problem solving skill and teamwork are the most important skill needed for an engineering graduate from academicians’ viewpoint. According to industry professionals, engineering knowledge is more important than problem solving skills. Also, in the present study academicians and industry professionals unanimously suggested the revision of curriculum, internships for students, the collaboration between academicians and industry professionals both in academia and industry, exposure of students to real world problems are some of the means to develop competency in Civil Engineering graduates.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"52 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":"134192461","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}
Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Randy Herrmann, Reed Forrest, K. Monkman
This practice paper introduces a new course designed by one Indigenous and one non-Indigenous engineering educator at the University of Manitoba to decolonize and Indigenize engineering. Working with an Indigenous teaching assistant, and supported by a doctoral student auditing the course, we facilitated a small group of Indigenous and non-Indigenous engineering students to think critically about making place and space for Indigenous Peoples and worldviews in engineering. Here, we share the course design, our reflections on the course, and our plans going forward. Our initiative is one answer the Calls to Action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of Canada to learn the truth about Canada as colonizer and use education as a tool for reconciliation. In doing so, we aim to provide engineering students with knowledges and perspectives for working successfully with First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples and communities in engineering practice in Manitoba, and in Canada.
{"title":"Decolonizing and Indigenizing Engineering: The Design & Implementation of a New Course","authors":"Jillian Seniuk Cicek, Randy Herrmann, Reed Forrest, K. Monkman","doi":"10.24908/pceea.vi.15886","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15886","url":null,"abstract":"This practice paper introduces a new course designed by one Indigenous and one non-Indigenous engineering educator at the University of Manitoba to decolonize and Indigenize engineering. Working with an Indigenous teaching assistant, and supported by a doctoral student auditing the course, we facilitated a small group of Indigenous and non-Indigenous engineering students to think critically about making place and space for Indigenous Peoples and worldviews in engineering. Here, we share the course design, our reflections on the course, and our plans going forward. Our initiative is one answer the Calls to Action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of Canada to learn the truth about Canada as colonizer and use education as a tool for reconciliation. In doing so, we aim to provide engineering students with knowledges and perspectives for working successfully with First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples and communities in engineering practice in Manitoba, and in Canada.","PeriodicalId":314914,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)","volume":"183 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":"134271537","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：