Search

This paper reflects on the significance of ABET’s “maverick evaluators” and what it says about the limits of accreditation as a mode of governance in US engineering education. The US system of engineering education operates as a highly complex system, where the diversity of the system is an asset to robust knowledge production and the production of a varied workforce. ABET Inc., the principal accreditation agency for engineering degree programs in the US, attempts to uphold a set of professional standards for engineering education using a voluntary, peer-based system of evaluation. Key to their approach is a volunteer army of trained program evaluators (PEVs) assigned by the engineering professional societies, who serve as the frontline workers responsible for auditing the content, learning outcomes, and continuous improvement processes utilized by every engineering degree program accredited by ABET. We take a look specifically at those who become labeled “maverick evaluators” in order to better understand how this system functions, and to understand its limitations as a form of governance in maintaining educational quality and appropriate professional standards within engineering education. ABET was established in 1932 as the Engineers’ Council for Professional Development (ECPD). The Cold War consensus around the engineering sciences led to a more quantitative system of accreditation first implemented in 1956. However, the decline of the Cold War and rising concerns about national competitiveness prompted ABET to shift to a more neoliberal model of accountability built around outcomes assessment and modeled after total quality management / continuous process improvement (TQM/CPI) processes that nominally gave PEVs greater discretion in evaluating engineering degree programs. However, conflicts over how the PEVs exercised judgment points to conservative aspects in the structure of the ABET organization, and within the engineering profession at large. This paper and the phenomena we describe here is one part of a broader, interview-based study of higher education governance and engineering educational reform within the United States. We have conducted over 300 interviews at more than 40 different academic institutions and professional organizations, where ABET and institutional responses to the reforms associated with “EC 2000,” which brought outcomes assessment to engineering education, are extensively discussed. The phenomenon of so-called “maverick evaluators” reveal the divergent professional interests that remain embedded within ABET and the engineering profession at large. Those associated with Civil and Environmental Engineering, and to a lesser extent Mechanical Engineering continue to push for higher standards of accreditation grounded in a stronger vision for their professions. While the phenomenon is complex and more subtle than we can summarize in an abstract, “maverick evaluators” emerged as a label for PEVs who interpreted their role, including determinations about whether certain content “appropriate to the field of study,” utilizing professional standards that lay outside of the consensus position held by the majority of the member of the Engineering Accreditation Commission. This, conjoined with the engineers’ epistemic aversion to uncertainty and concerns about the legal liability of their decisions, resulted in a more narrow interpretation of key accreditation criteria. The organization then designed and used a “due-process” reviews process to discipline identified shortcomings in order to limit divergent interpretations. The net result is that the bureaucratic process ABET built to obtain uniformity in accreditation outcomes, simultaneously blunts the organization’s capacity to support varied interpretations of professional standards at the program level. The apparatus has also contributed to ABET’s reputation as an organization focused on minimum standards, as opposed to one that functions as an effective driver for further change in engineering education.

Since the United States’ National Academy of Engineering’s Grand Challenges were first publicly articulated in 2008, engineering educators have used its ideas to motivate their work. While there is a sense of moral imperative around pursuing selected Challenges, work that critically examines the ethics of the Grand Challenges has so far been rare. In this paper, examining the process surrounding the framing of the Grand Challenges generates a series of ethical questions about both the specifics of the Challenges and the processes that gave rise to them. A Grand Challenges lesson plan for classroom implementation focuses students on the ethics of problem framing, and the consideration of social justice questions as an integral part of professional ethics.

This article examines how people access, evaluate and process information and reviews the psychology of risk perception literature in order to draw out key considerations for effective message design. Two case studies of chemical consumer products illustrate the implementation of the mental models methodology in designing risk communications, combining a quantitative technical assessment of a hazard with qualitative methodologies for assessing beliefs and behaviors that are key determinants of risk. The case studies emphasize the importance of considering not only intrinsic properties of a hazard but also the specific cultural and behavioral decision-making context.

Roma Agrawal9s Built is a full-throated celebration of structural engineering, interspersed with clearly explained, hand-illustrated lessons on engineering fundamentals, including statics, fluids, and strength of materials. She is passionate about her profession, and with carefully curated and beautifully narrated historical and contemporary examples, she reveals the nuts and bolts of engineering ingenuity.

The potential risk from cultural and religious practices involving mercury in Latino and Caribbean communities raises central methodological and ethical questions for risk assessment and risk communication. Here, specific cultural practices unfamiliar to most risk professionals carry significant inherent risks in the eyes of those professionals but not necessarily in the eyes of practitioners. Practitioners' past experience and history as targets of religious suppression and anti-immigrant sentiment create a reluctance to engage with researchers or public health officials in risk assessment or preventive risk communication efforts. The potential for the risk--in this case mercury contamination in dwellings--to extend beyond the practicing community to future occupants adds to public health concern. Understanding the risks of these practices requires both an understanding of the cultural and political context, beliefs, and behaviors of mercury users and an understanding of the fate and transport of mercury in typical use scenarios. In this study, we employed ethnographic methods (interviews and participant observation) to understand beliefs and behavior about mercury use as well as quantitative modeling and measurement to estimate and assess potential exposures. This represents a new methodology tailored to situations in which traditional activities or observances that are integral components of cultural identity pose risks in and of themselves. Our findings indicate that there are different types of mercury use stemming from different cultural and religious traditions that result in different levels of exposure. Many of the mercury uses that can result in the highest exposures to mercury vapors have previously been attributed to the religious tradition of Santeria, but appear instead to have their roots outside of the religion.

On December 6, 2014, Engineering, Social Justice, and Peace (ESJP) co-hosted a one-day workshop with Critical Stage and the University of Western Australia titled “Conversations about Critical Action.” The workshop was hosted at the North American Cultural Lab in Highland Lake, New York. An interdisciplinary group of 14 participants from Australia, England, Canada, and the United States met, representing academics, artists, actors, directors, film-makers, activists, teachers and engineers whose common interest is in making a difference both individually and as a community.The conversation focused on critical reflections of past, present and future actions with the goal of enhancing social justice in discussing the workshop’s main theme: How might I be the person I would most like to be and contribute to making the world more socially just?Using an Open Space Technology format and Talking Circle processes with an interactive approach, the workshop participants developed self-organized sessions.

Assessing label effectiveness requires knowing how consumers currently use a product, what strategies for risk mitigation are most effective, and how label reading, comprehension and compliance relate to mitigatory behavior. W***c offer an integrative approach for determining the information content of warnings. It begins with a product risk assessment. Structured, open-ended interviews with consumers then identify gaps in knowledge, whose criticality is determined by the risk assessment. The approach is applied to reducing risk from methylene chloride paint strippers. Consumer interviews indicate prevalent mitigation behaviors, while a quantitative exposure model identifies which actions are most effective in reducing risk. Labels are then evaluated for content and presentation, using the model to estimate exposure to methylene chloride. The results are used to develop recommendations for improving the effectiveness of paint-stripper labels.

Having lived the injustices of engineering education as usual, as a first year professor I quickly became concerned with how students related to one another in my engineering thermodynamics class. At the suggestion of a friend, I picked up bell hooks’s Teaching to Transgress; this began 10 years of transforming the course using critical, feminist, and engaged pedagogies, a process that required change in content as well as approaches to teaching and learning. I teach technical material alongside its critiques. Students analyze energy flows in engines and refrigeration systems while they ponder how power constructs scientific knowledge, investigate the ethics of energy disasters at Fukushima and the BP Deepwater rig, uncover contributions to thermodynamics outside of Western Europe, and explore North-South conflicts over action on climate change. A subsequent book project hopes to encourage other thermodynamics faculty to teach modules from this course, raising a new set of questions about the potential for transformation and co-optation. Doing this work has revealed both the importance and the limitations of teaching toward social justice in a core engineering course. In this chapter I reflect upon the institutional considerations of course development, from ABET accreditation and federal funding to departmental student and faculty cultures of resistance, revealing both “how I got away with it” and what the costs and benefits have been personally and professionally.

As energy technology evolves to meet demands for development and ecological sustainability, engineers need to have up-to-date skills and knowledge to meet the creative challenges our energy problems demand. However, current engineering thermodynamics textbooks are grounded in historical developments of the steam engine in Europe and subsequent fossil fuel technologies. A set of course modules has been designed to take a fresh look at the engineering knowledge and skills required for current and emerging energy challenges. Stand-alone modules facilitate integration with existing courses and curricula and are adaptable to a variety of settings. Modules employ innovative engineering pedagogies that foster student engagement. Because energy engineers will need the full range of capabilities outlined in ABET's learning outcomes, modules address outcomes not often addressed in conventional thermodynamics courses: design within realistic social and technical constraints, professional ethics, effective communication, understanding social contexts of engineering, lifelong learning, and a knowledge of contemporary issues. Modules also focus on policy analysis for energy technology selection, and incorporate contributions from the global South. The mini-workshop will demonstrate the use of the modules in core engineering courses. Participants will individually design a plan for implementing a module of their choice in one of their courses.

Contributors Michael Alley, The Pennsylvania State University; Cindy Atman, University of Washington; David DiBiasio, Worcester Polytechnic Institute; Cindy Finelli, University of Michigan; Heidi Diefes-Dux, Purdue University; Anette Kolmos, Aalborg University; Donna Riley, Smith College; Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University; Maryellen Weimer, The Pennsylvania State University; Ken Yasuhara, University of Washington Background Although engineering education has evolved in ways that improve the readiness of graduates to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century, national and international organizations continue to call for change. Future changes in engineering education should be guided by research on expertise and the learning processes that support its development. Purpose The goals of this paper are: to relate key findings from studies of the development of expertise to engineering education, to summarize instructional practices that are consistent with these findings, to provide examples of learning experiences that are consistent with these instructional practices, and finally, to identify challenges to implementing such learning experiences in engineering programs. Scope/Method The research synthesized for this article includes that on the development of expertise, students' approaches to learning, students' responses to instructional practices, and the role of motivation in learning. In addition, literature on the dominant teaching and learning practices in engineering education is used to frame some of the challenges to implementing alternative approaches to learning. Conclusion Current understanding of expertise, and the learning processes that develop it, indicates that engineering education should encompass a set of learning experiences that allow students to construct deep conceptual knowledge, to develop the ability to apply key technical and professional skills fluently, and to engage in a number of authentic engineering projects. Engineering curricula and teaching methods are often not well aligned with these goals. Curriculum-level instructional design processes should be used to design and implement changes that will improve alignment.

In a Heat and Mass Transfer class, seven female junior and senior engineering students were engaged with a rare, contentious, but potentially empowering feminist critique of fluid mechanics. French thinker Luce Irigaray's “The ‘Mechanics’ of Fluids” was taught as part of an NSF-funded project implementing liberative pedagogies in engineering education. The goals of engaging students with Irigaray's argument were to encourage them (1) to think critically about fluid mechanics, heat and mass transfer, and gender in engineering; (2) to learn to situate themselves within what is traditionally a male-oriented discourse, and take some ownership over it as a form of liberation; and (3) to re-imagine feminist engineering approaches to heat and mass transfer as a form of reflective action. We first motivate our approach of teaching engineering methods and their critiques in dialogue. We then introduce the work's theoretical positions in the context of later feminist critiques and describe how it can be in dialogue with engineering and that in spite surface readings to the contrary.

Frontiers in Education has a history of special sessions focused on alternative and/or feminist pedagogies, and they have tended to attract a wide range of participants with varying levels of experience with such pedagogies. This special session is designed as an introduction to various alternative teaching philosophies and pedagogies, building on the past interest in such sessions and on the increasing interest in exploring philosophies of education in the context of engineering education. We will introduce participants to various theoretical frameworks of alternative pedagogies through a summary model, and facilitate small group discussions of three cases where alternative pedagogies have been or could be implemented. It is hoped that this introductory session will make such alternative pedagogical ideas more accessible to a larger number of CSET educators, allowing them to better participate in the rich and thriving conversation developing at FIE on using philosophies of engineering and education to envision new models for CSET education.

The goal of this special session is to examine the way we as engineers frame stories about engineers and engineering, and to ask: do we need to embrace new stories? We will explore traditional stories about engineers and engineering ethics and ask, how might these stories, and the kind of engineering practice and education they inspire, change if framed from a feminist perspective? The outcomes of this session are to build a greater community interested in social engagement, engineering ethics, and feminist methodologies as they apply to engineering.

The goals of the proposed special session are the following: (1) Describe ongoing efforts at various institutions which attempt to integrate the issues of poverty, environmental degradation and war into existing engineering courses; (2) Describe process(es) used in developing course modules; (3) Provide an interactive, experiential process whereby the session participants will begin to develop their own course modules for use in their respective courses; (4) Further develop a community interested in increasing awareness of issues of poverty, environmental degradation and war within engineering education and the engineering profession; and (5) Explore options for establishing closer ties between the course modules and real-world community agencies/organizations.

Faculty and students in several disciplines at four institutions in the United States and Nicaragua are collaborating on technology entrepreneurship education for economic empowerment in Esteli, Nicaragua. The project aims to demonstrate a new paradigm for development that is rooted in education. The effort will focus on design and delivery of new curriculum for collaborative, interdisciplinary product development. To demonstrate the curriculum, the effort will launch cross- cultural student teams to identify and develop markets, partners, and technology for entrepreneurial ventures in Nicaragua, utilizing Nicaraguan materials and skills. The envisioned long term goal is local economic empowerment and a sound, collaborative process for technology innovation and product development that is both replicable and transferable. The proposed program includes six sequential phases; phase one is complete and phase two is in progress. This paper discusses the goals, results, and assessment of the first two phases in the context of the ongoing project.

Effective teachers use a variety of pedagogies to engage a wider diversity of students, providing a more equitable classroom. In this workshop, participants will explore the use of feminist and liberative pedagogies in CSET classrooms. These pedagogies are founded on the ideals of social justice and democracy. The workshop will include discussions of classroom management strategies, critiques and redesign of the engineering process, and assessment and evaluation of student learning. Participants will leave the workshop with a list of concrete ideas for implementing feminist and liberative pedagogies and an annotated bibliography of helpful references. This workshop continues the collaborative work of these authors, presented in a 2004 Special Session and a 2005 Paper Session at FIE conferences.

A case study of the Montreal Massacre was employed in a core engineering thermodynamics class, using two video news clips to spur discussion about the event and about the intersection of gender identity and feminist politics with the engineering profession. In the pilot test of our lesson plan, students discussed strategies for addressing overt and subtle sexism, negotiating questions of dress in the profession, the ways they use gendered behavior or gender distancing as strategies, work-life balance, competition and women's success as a threat. Such concerns are not typically included in professionalization aspects of engineering curricula, but their importance for both women and men is evident. We present our lesson plan and discussion outcomes, and address multiple contexts in which this case can be utilized to teach about gender and engineering.

In Spring 2004, students in Smith College's new Picker Engineering Program teamed up with the community-based organization Nuestras Raices in Holyoke, MA to address the problem of wood-fired oven emissions posed by the successful and expanding operation of Nuestras' entrepreneurial project, the El Jardin Bakery. This partnership between El Jardin and the Picker Engineering Program developed in the context of a new course, “Engineering and Global Development,” which aimed to achieve such pedagogical goals as: developing an understanding and critical view of globalization and global development engineering; developing analytic and implementation skills related to the design and construction of technological solutions in developing settings; and critiquing the “expert” model learning relationships that operate both in the classroom and in the community. Though global in overall perspective, the course engaged multifaceted challenges of engineering, economic and human development. We found these challenges analogous across communities that are similarly distressed by pressures of globalization and human need, such as those affecting low-income, poorly-resourced communities worldwide. We also found the ambitious marriage among engineering education, development studies, and liberative pedagogies to provide profound challenges equaled by pedagogical, educational, and experiential rewards.

We adopted a comparative approach to evaluate and extend a generic methodology to analyze the different sets of beliefs held about chemical hazards in the workplace. Our study mapped existing knowledge structures about the risks associated with the use of perchloroethylene and rosin-based solder flux in differing workplaces. “Influence diagrams” were used to represent beliefs held by chemical experts; “user models” were developed from data elicited from open-ended interviews with the workplace users of the chemicals. The juxtaposition of expert and user understandings of chemical risks enabled us to identify knowledge gaps and misunderstandings and to reinforce appropriate sets of safety beliefs and behavior relevant to chemical risk communications. By designing safety information to be more relevant to the workplace context of users, we believe that employers and employees may gain improved knowledge about chemical hazards in the workplace, such that better chemical risk management, self-protection, and informed decision making develop over time.

Use of elemental mercury in certain cultural and religious practices can cause high exposures to mercury vapor. Uses include sprinkling mercury on the floor of a home or car, burning it in a candle, and mixing it with perfume. Some uses can produce indoor air mercury concentrations one or two orders of magnitude above occupational exposure limits. Exposures resulting from other uses, such as infrequent use of a small bead of mercury, could be well below currently recognized risk levels. Metallic mercury is available at almost all of the 15 botanicas visited in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, but botanica personnel often deny having mercury for sale when approached by outsiders to these religious and cultural traditions. Actions by public health authorities have driven the mercury trade underground in some locations. Interviews indicate that mercury users are aware that mercury is hazardous, but are not aware of the inhalation exposure risk. We argue against a crackdown by health authorities because it could drive the practices further underground, because high-risk practices may be rare, and because uninformed government intervention could have unfortunate political and civic side effects for some Caribbean and Latin American immigrant groups. We recommend an outreach and education program involving religious and community leaders, botanica personnel, and other mercury users.

Communication about risks offers a voluntary approach to reducing exposure to pollutants. Its adequacy depends on its impact on behavior. Estimating those impacts first requires characterizing current activities and their associated risk levels, and then predicting the effectiveness of risk-reduction strategies. Characterizing the risks from chemical consumer products requires knowledge of both the physical and the behavioral processes that influence exposures. This article presents an integrated approach that combines consumer interviews, users' beliefs and behaviors, and quantitative exposure modeling. This model was demonstrated in the context of consumer exposure to a methylene chloride-based paint stripper, showing how it could be used to evaluate current levels of risk and predict the effectiveness of proposed voluntary risk-reduction strategies.

This article provides an overview of the development and implementation of the McGill University Health Centre model for forecasting patient services in the year 2004, and advice on how to apply the model. Critical success factors and case examples are highlighted. The insights provided will be of value to hospitals and other institutions that recognize the necessity of engaging in long-range planning and forecasting.