skip to main content

Title: Conceptual Growth in Engineering Practice: Conceptual Growth in Engineering Practice
Authors:
 ;  ;  ;  
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10064542
Journal Name:
Journal of Engineering Education
ISSN:
1069-4730
Publisher:
Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. de Vries, E. ; Hod, Y. ; & Ahn, J. (Ed.)
  2. This paper provides an example of how an NSF-funded project, Professional Engineering Pathways Study [EEC-1360665, 1360956, and 1360958] or PEPS has incorporated a community of practice approach to disseminate the use of evidence-based decisions to design activities that assist engineering students in making career choices. The paper will discuss the elements of a community of practice, how it has been used in PEPS, and how other projects might use this approach to bring about other kinds of change. Key words: Community of practice, educational reform
  3. Who and by what means do we ensure that engineering education evolves to meet the ever changing needs of our society? This and other papers presented by our research team at this conference offer our initial set of findings from an NSF sponsored collaborative study on engineering education reform. Organized around the notion of higher education governance and the practice of educational reform, our open-ended study is based on conducting semi-structured interviews at over three dozen universities and engineering professional societies and organizations, along with a handful of scholars engaged in engineering education research. Organized as a multi-site, multi-scale study, our goal is to document differences in perspectives and interest the exist across organizational levels and institutions, and to describe the coordination that occurs (or fails to occur) in engineering education given the distributed structure of the engineering profession. This paper offers for all engineering educators and administrators a qualitative and retrospective analysis of ABET EC 2000 and its implementation. The paper opens with a historical background on the Engineers Council for Professional Development (ECPD) and engineering accreditation; the rise of quantitative standards during the 1950s as a result of the push to implement an engineering science curriculum appropriate tomore »the Cold War era; EC 2000 and its call for greater emphasis on professional skill sets amidst concerns about US manufacturing productivity and national competitiveness; the development of outcomes assessment and its implementation; and the successive negotiations about assessment practice and the training of both of program evaluators and assessment coordinators for the degree programs undergoing evaluation. It was these negotiations and the evolving practice of assessment that resulted in the latest set of changes in ABET engineering accreditation criteria (“1-7” versus “a-k”).« less