A Case Study of Integrating Leadership Competencies in a Global Engineering Design Course: A Work in Progress
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Engineering is becoming increasingly global with more companies establishing global partnerships, alliances, and cross-border mergers for increased competitiveness [1]. For instance, the recent merger between two tech companies, Broadcom and VMWare, required approval from twelve countries [2]. Thus, educators have been exploring strategies for incorporating global engineering leadership into the engineering curriculum to help students gain these complex collaboration competencies needed for the 21st-century workforce. Complex collaboration projects, which allow students to work together with diverse stakeholders across disciplinary, cultural, or geographical boundaries, are an attractive approach, but also result in conflict [3]. Nevertheless, boundaries, which can be seen as differences or unfamiliar practices that give rise to these issues, can also provide opportunities for learning to occur [4][5]. Hence, this study examines how students can be supported to build engineering leadership competences within global learning experiences. Specifically, it asks a) what boundaries were encountered in globally situated engineering design projects and b) how can these boundaries enable students make productive progress in their designs? This research is situated within a global engineering design (GED) course that tasked students to apply engineering leadership and management skills to the development of design prototype solutions for globally situated project contexts. The course prioritized communication and collaborative optimization [6] by engaging students to intentionally utilize project management roles, methods, and tools. The study is informed by two theoretical perspectives. First, adult learning theory [7] guided students' experiential learning with real-world challenges and tangible outcomes, as well as the application of inclusive teamwork and reflective practices. While boundary crossing concepts [4] allowed for the investigation of students' team interactions and learning experiences in their design project settings. Using a case study method [8, 9], this paper reports on students' design projects from the GED course and aims to build a deeper understanding of the students' boundary crossing experiences. This method is suitable as it provides insights into the complexities of crossing boundaries in an authentic global learning course. Data were collected from team meeting recordings and course artifacts to gain insights into the teams' boundary-crossing interactions, conflict management and decision-making practices. The team recordings were transcribed and thereafter a thematic analysis was utilized to inductively code the collated students' data to capture boundary-crossing situations and associated conflicts. These were then categorized and systematically examined for emerging themes around the students' productive exchanges and learnings within their global team projects. Our preliminary findings identified three themes around students' cultural and knowledge boundary-crossing experiences with associated cognitive and process conflicts, namely 1) unfamiliarity with global community policy and regulations, 2) unfamiliarity with design for global conditions, and 3) unfamiliarity with cultural and environmental impact. Thereafter students utilized divergent thinking and mental modelling approaches to cross these boundaries and advance their design work. This study is significant as it demonstrates focus areas and strategies for scaffolding students' leadership experiences in global learning contexts. Furthermore, this research contributes to the theory and practice of global engineering leadership and learning across boundaries in engineering education.
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 | 0,001 |
| 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) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».