Search

Many blame politicians, governments, and markets for the technically-driven problems the world faces (think war, climate change, surveillance, disinformation, and so on). But why is it that there are almost always engineers and corporations willing to design and build the technologies that cause those problems, many times in spite of knowing about the negative consequences of those technologies? I offer in this paper practical guidance on how to engage in activist engineering, the goal of which is to get engineers to step back from their work and be able to ask and have a conversation about the question, "What is the real problem, and does this problem 'require' an engineering solution?" Building on research in the history and philosophy of engineering, and engineering ethics and education, as well as current events—all of which highlight important issues of debate within engineering practice—I provide a list of questions that engineers can start with for self-reflection to better understand their motivations for doing engineering work, and to better understand the implications of their work. The questions relate to considerations engineers must make regarding the social, environmental, economic, and peace implications of their work, and relate to alternative and non-technical interventions to the problem at hand. I believe that each engineer should, in the end, be able to answer the questions: Why am I an engineer? For whose benefit do I work? What is the full measure of my moral and social responsibility? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Engineering education research in Canada is, in many ways, still establishing itself as a discipline, yet much is already being asked of it. The diversity of career pathways for engineering graduates, along with the increased complexity of global engineering challenges and the ramifications of technological opportunities, is raising important questions about current engineering education foci and practices. This paper brings together issues surfaced through the process of compiling a Special Theme on engineering education research in Canada, positioning the collection of papers in terms of the challenges and opportunities faced by this maturing Canadian research community. We seek to reconcile how this research can incorporate the theoretical and methodological depth valued in the social sciences while honoring the focus on effective instructional practices that has become an important strand of inquiry in engineering education. Challenges to the growth of engineering education research, such as funding and graduate student inclusion, are also discussed. In addition, we explore the emergence of teaching stream engineering faculty and problematize the role of research and scholarship in their career trajectories. Finally, we call for more strategic thinking to guide the evolution of engineering education research in Canada. We hope that, collectively, this editorial and the other four papers in this Special Theme will help to stimulate discussion about how we define and recognize excellence in the domain of engineering education research in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the curriculum of engineering leadership offerings in Canadian universities. We operationalize an adapted version of Lattuca and Stark's (2011) academic plan framework to analyze key documents of engineering leadership offerings embedded in the engineering curriculum in six different universities. In the process, we generate relevant categories for comparison that are specific to engineering leadership curricula, leading to a preliminary taxonomy for leadership education in a professional field. Using the process and taxonomy developed, findings show a range of purposes, content and sequencing, with a common core of instructional processes and resources. We also explore how accreditation, labour markets, internal resources and relationships shape curriculum decisions. This paper highlights changing trends in engineering education related to leadership skill development and provides insights for professional education more broadly on the influences and practical implementation of these changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of the curriculum for engineering education (course requirements as well as extra-curricular activities like study abroad and internships) should be based on a comprehensive understanding of engineers' responsibilities. The responsibilities that are constitutive of being an engineer include striving to fulfill the standards of excellence set by technical codes; to improve the idealized models that engineers use to predict, for example, the behavior of alternative designs; and to achieve the internal goods such as safety and sustainability as they are reflected in the design codes. Globalization has implications for these responsibilities and, in turn, for engineering education, by, for example, modifying the collection of possible solutions recognized for existing problems. In addition, international internships can play an important role in fostering the requisite moral imagination of engineering students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports the findings of a comparative study in which students' perceived attainment of the objectives of an engineering ethics education and their attitude towards engineering ethics were investigated and compared. The investigation was carried out in Japan and Malaysia, involving 163 and 108 engineering undergraduates respectively. The research method used was based on a survey in which respondents were sent a questionnaire to elicit relevant data. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed on the data. The results of the analyses showed that the attainment of the objectives of engineering ethics education and students' attitude towards socio-ethical issues in engineering were significantly higher and positive among Japanese engineering students compared to Malaysian engineering students. Such findings suggest that a well-structured, integrated, and innovative pedagogy for teaching ethics will have an impact on the students' attainment of ethics education objectives and their attitude towards engineering ethics. As such, the research findings serve as a cornerstone to which the current practice of teaching and learning of engineering ethics education can be examined more critically, such that further improvements can be made to the existing curriculum that can help produce engineers that have strong moral and ethical characters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sustainable engineering is a conceptual and practical challenge to all engineering disciplines. Although the profession has experience with environmental dimensions of engineering activities that in some cases are quite deep, extending the existing body of practice to sustainable engineering by including social and cultural domains is a significant and non-trivial challenge. Nonetheless, progress is being made, as a recent study undertaken by the Center for Sustainable Engineering in the United States demonstrates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research in engineering education has pointed to the need for new engineers to develop a broader skill-set with an emphasis on "softer" social skills. However, there remains strong tensions in the identity work that engineers must engage in to balance the technical demands of the discipline with the new emphasis on heterogeneous skills (Faulkner, Social Studies of Science 37:331–356, 2007). This study explores how three unconventional students experience these tensions in the final year of their construction engineering program, and as they move in and out of workplace field experiences. Results: Using a figured worlds framework (Holland et al., Identity and agency in cultural worlds, 1998), we explore the dominant subject positions for students in construction engineering classroom and workplaces in a 3-year Swedish engineering program. Results demonstrate that dominant subject positions for construction engineers can trouble students' identity work as they move across classroom and workplace settings. Conclusions: This study expands our knowledge of the complexity of students' identity work across classroom and workplace settings. The emergence of classroom and workplace masculinities that shape the dominant subject positions available to students are shown to trouble the identity work that students engage in as they move across these learning spaces. We examine students' identity strategies that contribute to their persistence through the field. Finally, we discuss implications for teaching and research in light of students' movements across these educational contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]