In this paper we explore the ability of educational frameworks focused on developing the entrepreneurial mindset to be used to develop students’ abilities to approach convergent problems. While there is not a single widely accepted definition of convergence, there are some general aspects noted by the NSF including: socially relevant, multidisciplinary, complex, and not being adequately addressed by current methods and practices. Convergent problems require existing disciplines to collaborate to create new knowledge, skills, and approaches in order to be appropriately addressed. We believe that there are aspects of the entrepreneurial mindset and the learning of it that can support the development of knowledge, skills, and attitudes to approach convergent problems. This is relevant because most work on convergent problems happens at the graduate level and beyond and our interest is to create experiences for undergraduates that prepare them to embark on this work after graduation.
This study maps entrepreneurial mindset learning (EML) onto a framework based on prior work on convergence to identify the aspects of EML that directly support convergence work or preparation for convergence work. The existing dataset of KEEN cards is used as a proxy for existing work in this space, as well.
If existing work in EML can address some or all of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed for convergent problem solving then engineering educators have a set of tools and practices that can contribute towards creating engineers who are better prepared to work on the hard problems of tomorrow.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on October 18, 2024
What is Convergence?: A Systematic Review of the Definition of and Aspects of Convergent Work
Abstract—Wicked problems, the National Academy of Engineering’s
Grand Challenges, the United Nations’ Sustainability
Goals, and similar complex, global-scale endeavors fall under
the broad umbrella of “convergent” work. Over the past two
decades there has been an increase in interest and funding for
work in this space. The NSF has two programs focused in
this area, Growing Convergence Research and the Convergence
Accelerator. Boston University’s College of Engineering recently
announced a focus on convergent projects and work. The National
Academic of Engineering also has the Grand Challenge Scholars
program with over 100 participating schools. The list continues
to grow. The broad concept of convergence seems to be quite
simple: combine the ideas, skills, and/or methods of multiple
disciplines to create something new. More specific definitions
vary and while the interest in convergence and convergent
problems continues to increase, there is no easily operational
definition of convergence. This is especially true with respect
to undergraduate-level education where students have limited
experience and knowledge to carry out such efforts.
To better understand the variation that exists within the
literature on convergence we conducted a systematic review
to explore how convergence is defined in scholarly literature.
We have identified a small number of categories within the
definition space and conducted a thematic analysis of the aspects
of each. The results show that there is a fairly consistent focus
on the work being socially-relevant and on creating something
new such as an idea, method, product, or process to address
desired needs. Additionally, doing convergent work requires the
integration of aspects of multiple disciplines and is conducted
by diverse teams. Lastly, the disciplinary backgrounds of those
teams almost always includes the natural and biological sciences
with a subset the following disciplines: information or computing
sciences, engineering, social sciences, and humanities. While there
is some consistency in the definition, there also seems to be space
for some variation which leaves for some level of choice in the
definition.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2022271
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10530543
- Publisher / Repository:
- IEEE
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 979-8-3503-3642-9
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 5
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- convergence, complexity, systems engineering, grand challenges, transdisciplinary
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- College Station, TX, USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)The role of modern engineers as problem-definer often require collaborating with cross-disciplinary teams of professionals to understand and effectively integrate the role of other disciplines and accelerate innovation. To prepare future engineers for this emerging role, undergraduate engineering students should engage in collaborative and interdisciplinary activities with faculties and students from various disciplines (e.g., engineering and social science). Such cross-disciplinary experiences of undergraduate engineering students are not common in today’s university curriculum. Through a project funded by the division of Engineering Education and Centers (EEC) of the National Science Foundation (NSF), a research team of the West Virginia University developed and offered a Holistic Engineering Project Experience (HEPE) to the engineering students. Holistic engineering is an approach catering to the overall engineering profession, instead of focusing on any distinctive engineering discipline such as electrical, civil, chemical, or mechanical engineering. Holistic Engineering is based upon the fact that the traditional engineering courses do not offer sufficient non-technical skills to the engineering students to work effectively in cross-disciplinary social problems (e.g., development of transportation systems and services). The Holistic Engineering approach enables engineering students to learn non-engineering skills (e.g., strategic communication skills) beyond engineering math and sciences, which play a critical role in solving complex 21st-century engineering problems. The research team offered the HEPE course in Spring 2020 semester, where engineering students collaborated with social science students (i.e., students from economics and strategic communication disciplines) to solve a contemporary, complex, open-ended transportation engineering problem with social consequences. Social science students also received the opportunity to develop a better understanding of technical aspects in science and engineering. The open ended problem presented to the students was to “Restore and Improve Urban Infrastructure” in connection to the future deployment of connected and autonomous vehicles, which is identified as a grand challenge by the National Academy of Engineers (NAE) [1].more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Whether doctoral students are funded primarily by fellowships, research assistantships, or teaching assistantships impacts their degree completion, time to degree, learning outcomes, and short- and long-term career outcomes. Variations in funding patterns have been studied at the broad field level but not comparing engineering sub-disciplines. We addressed two research questions: How do PhD student funding mechanisms vary across engineering sub-disciplines? And how does variation in funding mechanisms across engineering sub-disciplines map onto the larger STEM disciplinary landscape? We analyzed 103,373 engineering and computing responses to the U.S. Survey of Earned Doctorates collected between 2007 and 2016. We conducted analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc comparisons to examine variation in funding across sub-disciplines. Then, we conducted a k-means cluster analysis on percentage variables for fellowship, research, and teaching assistantship funding mechanism with STEM sub-discipline as the unit of analysis. A statistically significantly greater percentage of biomedical/biological engineering doctoral students were funded via a fellowship, compared to every other engineering sub-discipline. Consequently, biomedical/biological engineering had significantly lower proportions of students supported via research and teaching assistantships than nearly all other engineering sub-disciplines. We identified five clusters. The majority of engineering sub-disciplines grouped together into a cluster with high research assistantships and low teaching assistantships. Biomedical/biological engineering clustered in the high fellowships grouping with most other biological sciences but no other engineering sub-disciplines. Biomedical/biological engineering behaves much more like biological and life sciences in utilizing fellowships to fund graduate students, far more than other engineering sub-disciplines. Our study provides further evidence of the prevalence of fellowships in life sciences and how it stretches into biomedical/biological engineering. The majority of engineering sub-disciplines relied more on research assistantships to fund graduate study. The lack of uniformity provides an opportunity to diversify student experiences during their graduate programs but also necessitates an awareness to the advantages and disadvantages that different funding portfolios can bestow on students.
-
In 2016, the National Science Foundation (NSF) identified 10 “Big Ideas” for advancing science and engineering research and guiding long-term US research investments. Navigating the New Arctic (NNA) was one of those big ideas, highlighting NSF’s continued commitment to funding research to help societies respond to a warming Arctic. NNA focuses on convergence—collaborations formed from deep integration across disciplines and knowledge systems to address vexing and complex research challenges that are pivotal for meeting societal needs (Wilson, 2019). The NNA initiative has funded over 100 individual and collaborative research projects since 2017, addressing topics ranging from thawing permafrost, to shifting weather patterns, increasing shipping, and adapting food systems. Research teams funded by NNA to work across the Arctic are composed of scientists from diverse disciplines, Indigenous knowledge holders, practitioners, planners, and engineers.more » « less
-
Many of the National Academy of Engineering’s grand challenges are related to environmental engineering. There is broad recognition that these challenges will require environmental engineers to integrate concepts from the natural and physical sciences, social sciences, business, and communications to find solutions at the individual, company, community, national and global levels. Montana State University is in the process of revolutionizing the curriculum and culture of its environmental engineering program to prepare and inspire a new generation of engineers through a project sponsored by the Revolutionizing Engineering Departments program at the National Science Foundation. At the core of the approach is transformation of the hierarchical, topic-focused course structure into a model of team taught, integrated, and project-based learning courses grouped around the key knowledge threads of systems thinking, professionalism, and sustainability. Multi-disciplinary faculty developed specific and detailed program outcomes after review of ABET program outcomes; the Fundamentals of Engineering exam; Body of Knowledge documents from the American Academy of Environmental Engineers (AAEE), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the American Society for Engineering Management (ASEM); the Engineering for One Planet report sponsored by the Lemelson Foundation; and the KEEN Framework on the Entrepreneurial Mindset. The resulting outcomes were organized into competency strands and competency domains. Currently, outcomes spanning the spectrum of content are being crafted into integrated and project-based courses in each year of the undergraduate curriculum. This paper reviews the lessons learned from the process of developing knowledge threads, competency strands and domains, and specific program outcomes with a multidisciplinary group of faculty, as well as the challenges of developing integrated and project-based courses within an established undergraduate curriculum.more » « less
