ASEE 2024 Paper—Examining Cultural Elements to Enable Change
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The future of engineering education requires engineering faculty, schools and programs to enact change in the curriculum to respond to the complex challenges in our world today and to recognize the socio-enviro-technical nature of engineering practice. Engineering leadership education is premised on the principle that developing strong leadership competencies is essential to effectively and appropriately enable the contextual application of the traditional technical competencies that are often the primary focus of undergraduate engineering programs. In our 2023 paper entitled Engineering Leadership: Bridging the Culture Gap in Engineering Education [1] we argued that a major barrier to change in engineering education, including the incorporation of engineering leadership into the curriculum, is the culture that exists in our institutions. We proposed that the elements and dynamics of this culture can be examined in the form of co-contraries (or opposites that need each other) and that the relative emphasis in these co-contraries reflects the engineering educational culture in a department, an institution or in engineering education as a whole. Example cultural co-contraries identified include: the power distance dynamic between the student and the professor; the nature of the distribution of effort between teaching and research; and the tension between technical and non-technical content emphasis and delivery. In this paper we aim to look more deeply at cultural constructs associated with engineering education through a targeted literature review and integrative analysis of engineering education culture, the engineering culture of professional practice, the general theoretical constructs of culture and cultural dimensions in societal and organizational contexts with the explicit purpose of developing a foundational understanding of the cultural co-contraries observed and discussed in our 2023 paper. This foundational understanding can then be used to build a model for characterizing engineering education culture and evaluating positive cultural change and resistance to change in engineering education. We believe that capturing and understanding the cultural constructs associated with engineering practice and engineering education will not only be helpful in effecting change in engineering education, it will also support the need for engineering leadership and followership education to be explicitly taught as core concepts at both the undergraduate and graduate level to support the requisite systemic changes in engineering practice and education to address the complex socio-enviro-technical challenges that engineering must address. The paper supports LEAD division priorities of "Inform" and "Explore".
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».