Search for: All records

Engineering programs have long struggled with balancing curricula that are rigorous enough to prepare graduates to be capable practitioners and educational experiences that are engaging enough to retain undergraduate students. Over the past 60 years, data collected from a variety of institutions across the United States capture an alarming trend – only about half of students who start in an engineering program will actually graduate with an engineering degree. Several studies found that the first-year engineering curricula, which traditionally consist of physics, chemistry, and mathematics courses, are ineffective in motivating students to persist in a program. Many students who leave after their first or second year explain that they came to dislike engineering or lost interest in the profession altogether. Together, these findings suggest a mismatch between what incoming students think engineering is and what message they receive during their first two years of a program. To address retention issues in the first year of an engineering program, many institutions now employ a first-year design experience intended to expose students early on to the true nature of engineering [4]. However, the engineering science courses that occupy a significant proportion of the middle two years of a program still most often utilize traditional lecture-based pedagogy and simplified close-ended textbook problems, which do not typically allow students to make the connection between these classes and the engineering design process or the engineering profession. These types of closed-ended problems also do not provide students with the opportunity to engage in the kind of decision-making that leads to developing sound engineering judgement. Recent work developing and studying the effects of open- ended modeling problems define an opportunity to provide students with challenging problems that simultaneously reinforce their understanding of course material and expose them to the realities of engineering practice. This NSF-funded work proposes introducing two different pedagogies into a Mechanical Engineering program at the University of Iowa. The first pedagogy is designed to provide a more holistic contextualization of engineering practice by introducing students to the history of the profession. The second instructional technique is intended to provide students with context for how engineering science concepts are implemented in authentic engineering practice and how engineering judgement is essential in that implementation. This work will aim to understand how historical and/or technical contextualization of what it means to practice engineering can influence the intentions of students, particularly those identifying as underrepresented minorities and women, to persist in a discipline that historically struggles to retain them. With this understanding, changes can be made to undergraduate engineering education to better retain students. 

This work presents the first year of work on a project addressing the productive beginnings of engineering judgment in undergraduate engineering students. In particular, we discuss a new research question about how open-ended modeling problems (OEMPs), which engage students in engineering judgment, foster the growth of conceptual knowledge. Because OEMPs are open-ended with multiple answers, they are different from the typical well-defined “textbook” problems given in engineering science courses where students learn canonical mathematical models and apply relevant formulas to find a single correct answer. By looking at the conceptual gains that result from assigning an OEMP, we aim to convince other instructors to create and assign open-ended questions. More practice using engineering judgment will give students experience with engineering judgment before receiving their engineering degree. Ideally, this will increase the number of graduates prepared for real-world engineering application. 

This work-in-progress study aims to qualitatively examine undergraduate students’ understanding of ethical dilemmas in aerospace engineering. Macroethics is particularly relevant within the aerospace industry as engineers are often asked to grapple with multi-faceted issues such as sustainable aviation, space colonization, or the military industrial complex. Macroethical education, the teaching of collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about technology, is traditionally left out of undergraduate engineering curricula. This lack of macroethics material leaves students underprepared to address the broader impacts of their discipline on society. Including macroethical content in the classroom helps novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work on humanity. Previous literature has explored how specific pedagogical interventions impact students’ decision-making, but few studies delve into undergraduate students’ awareness and perceptions of the issues themselves. Thus, it is essential to examine how students’ perceptions of macroethical dilemmas are evolving in order for instructors to effectively meet the needs of their students. This study addresses the need to better understand student awareness of macroethical issues by extending upon previous research to qualitatively analyze responses from an iteration of a macroethical perceptions survey (n = 81) administered to undergraduate aerospace engineers at a large, Midwestern, predominantly white, research-intensive, public university. Our prior work has been used to develop and iterate upon a mixed-methods survey that seeks to understand students’ perceptions of ethical issues within the aerospace discipline. In the most recent version of our survey instrument, thirty-one Likert-scale questions asked about students’ feelings towards the current state of aerospace engineering and their ideal state of the aerospace field. Within this survey, eight Likert-scale prompts are followed by open-ended questions asking students to explain their answers in-depth. For instance, if students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘It is important to me to use my career as an aerospace engineer to make a positive difference in the world.’, a follow-up item asked students to explain what positive differences they would like to make in the world. Student responses were analyzed using a combination of a deductive and inductive thematic analyses. Researchers first applied an a priori coding scheme onto responses that was initially developed using constructivist grounded theory, then used inductive analysis to account for new themes that naturally emerged within the data. The analysis delved deeper into students’ moral engagement towards ethical issues, their perceptions of who is affected by these dilemmas, and how they have seen these dilemmas addressed in both academic and professional settings. Preliminary results from the study identified that students have a wide spectrum of awareness of relevant issues and express varying levels of acceptance about the state of aerospace engineering.While some students exhibited signs of inattentiveness, or limited ability to consider viewpoints beyond their own, others demonstrated abilities to see multiple perspectives and critically analyze systems of power that influence how macroethical issues are addressed. Similarly, students also demonstrated varying degrees of acceptance, some demonstrating signs of apathy or moral disengagement regarding the field of aerospace engineering, others indicating signs of conflict, or a heightened state of stress about opposing ideals and values, and a final group of students indicating a desire to challenge or reform the existing culture of the discipline. These emergent themes will be used to inform teaching practices concerning engineering ethics education, refine future iterations of macroethics lesson content and survey instruments, and further incentivize the integration of macroethical content throughout aerospace engineering curricula. 

This work-in-progress study aims to qualitatively examine undergraduate students’ understanding of ethical dilemmas in aerospace engineering. Macroethics is particularly relevant within the aerospace industry as engineers are often asked to grapple with multi-faceted issues such as sustainable aviation, space colonization, or the military industrial complex. Macroethical education, the teaching of collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about technology, is traditionally left out of undergraduate engineering curricula. This lack of macroethics material leaves students underprepared to address the broader impacts of their discipline on society. Including macroethical content in the classroom helps novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work on humanity. Previous literature has explored how specific pedagogical interventions impact students’ decision-making, but few studies delve into undergraduate students’ awareness and perceptions of the issues themselves. Thus, it is essential to examine how students’ perceptions of macroethical dilemmas are evolving in order for instructors to effectively meet the needs of their students. This study addresses the need to better understand student awareness of macroethical issues by extending upon previous research to qualitatively analyze responses from an iteration of a macroethical perceptions survey (n = 81) administered to undergraduate aerospace engineers at a large, Midwestern, predominantly white, research-intensive, public university. Our prior work has been used to develop and iterate upon a mixed-methods survey that seeks to understand students’ perceptions of ethical issues within the aerospace discipline. In the most recent version of our survey instrument, thirty-one Likert-scale questions asked about students’ feelings towards the current state of aerospace engineering and their ideal state of the aerospace field. Within this survey, eight Likert-scale prompts are followed by open-ended questions asking students to explain their answers in-depth. For instance, if students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘It is important to me to use my career as an aerospace engineer to make a positive difference in the world.’, a follow-up item asked students to explain what positive differences they would like to make in the world. Student responses were analyzed using a combination of a deductive and inductive thematic analyses. Researchers first applied an a priori coding scheme onto responses that was initially developed using constructivist grounded theory, then used inductive analysis to account for new themes that naturally emerged within the data. The analysis delved deeper into students’ moral engagement towards ethical issues, their perceptions of who is affected by these dilemmas, and how they have seen these dilemmas addressed in both academic and professional settings. Preliminary results from the study identified that students have a wide spectrum of awareness of relevant issues and express varying levels of acceptance about the state of aerospace engineering.While some students exhibited signs of inattentiveness, or limited ability to consider viewpoints beyond their own, others demonstrated abilities to see multiple perspectives and critically analyze systems of power that influence how macroethical issues are addressed. Similarly, students also demonstrated varying degrees of acceptance, some demonstrating signs of apathy or moral disengagement regarding the field of aerospace engineering, others indicating signs of conflict, or a heightened state of stress about opposing ideals and values, and a final group of students indicating a desire to challenge or reform the existing culture of the discipline. These emergent themes will be used to inform teaching practices concerning engineering ethics education, refine future iterations of macroethics lesson content and survey instruments, and further incentivize the integration of macroethical content throughout aerospace engineering curricula. 

Absent from the undergraduate aerospace curricula at many universities is any acknowledgement of macroethics, the ways in which engineering impacts society positively and negatively. For example, aviation makes the world a smaller place, but aircraft emissions also contribute to climate change. Satellite internet megaconstallations provide internet access to places that were previously unconnected, but also contribute to light pollution that negatively impacts astronomy. And, many career pathways in the aerospace industry relate to military and weapons technology design, development, operations or maintenance, resulting in significant macroethical dilemmas regarding the interconnections between engineering and violence. Without putting aerospace engineering in its social context, students are left ill-prepared to recognize and address challenging ethical questions and issues they will encounter in their future engineering careers. Alternatively, aerospace engineering curricula should support the development of the critical consciousness required to reflect on the social impact of the field and students’ present and future roles within it. We are addressing this pressing need with integrated curriculum development research initiatives. Our multi-institutional team is composed of aerospace and engineering education research faculty, graduate students in engineering education, undergraduate students in engineering, and practitioners in the aerospace industry. This paper highlights the results thus far and describes the ongoing work of the project, one year into NSF IUSE grants DUE-2236148 and DUE-2236227. 

This work-in-progress paper presents the development of a survey designed to understand undergraduate aerospace engineering students’ views on macroethics in the field. Macroethics describes the real world ethical implications of engineering technology and the collective social responsibility of the aerospace engineering profession. As macroethics education is currently lacking in most undergraduate aerospace curricula in the United States, we are developing a survey intended to measure students’ current perceptions, knowledge, and beliefs about macroethics in the field. Insight into our students’ current beliefs and perceptions is imperative to develop new curricula and more generally alter the culture and direction of the aerospace engineering field from striving for apoliticalization to embracing the sociotechnical. A mixed-methods survey was taken by 158 undergraduate aerospace engineering students at two large, research-intensive universities in the United States. This paper presents confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of Likert-scale data to further the development of the survey. The survey items were initially designed to address two proposed research questions: RQ1) To what degree are students aware of the importance of macroethical issues in the field of aerospace engineering?, RQ2) Do aerospace engineering students feel that their undergraduate education is preparing them to address macroethical issues? While confirmatory factor analysis does not confirm these two survey constructs for which the survey items were designed, an exploratory factor analysis results in five factors, each highlighting a different aspect of students’ perceptions of macroethical aerospace engineering education: 1) The criticality of the relationship between aerospace engineering and society, 2) The ease or difficulty of being an ethical aerospace engineer, 3) Technical determinism and aerospace career pathways, 4) Macroethics discussions within aerospace coursework, and 5) The ability of faculty to facilitate conversations on the macroethics of aerospace. These five factors provide a new basis upon which we will generate additional survey items in the future. Through this process, we will develop a survey that can effectively measure students’ beliefs and experiences in regards to the macroethical implications of the field of aerospace engineering. 

This work-in-progress paper presents the development of a survey designed to understand undergraduate aerospace engineering students’ views on macroethics in the field. Macroethics describes the real world ethical implications of engineering technology and the collective social responsibility of the aerospace engineering profession. As macroethics education is currently lacking in most undergraduate aerospace curricula in the United States, we are developing a survey intended to measure students’ current perceptions, knowledge, and beliefs about macroethics in the field. Insight into our students’ current beliefs and perceptions is imperative to develop new curricula and more generally alter the culture and direction of the aerospace engineering field from striving for apoliticalization to embracing the sociotechnical. A mixed-methods survey was taken by 158 undergraduate aerospace engineering students at two large, research-intensive universities in the United States. This paper presents confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of Likert-scale data to further the development of the survey. The survey items were initially designed to address two proposed research questions: RQ1. To what degree are students aware of the importance of macroethical issues in the field of aerospace engineering? RQ2. Do aerospace engineering students feel that their undergraduate education is preparing them to address macroethical issues? While confirmatory factor analysis does not confirm these two survey constructs for which the survey items were designed, an exploratory factor analysis results in five factors, each highlighting a different aspect of students’ perceptions of macroethical aerospace engineering education: 1. The criticality of the relationship between aerospace engineering and society 2. The ease or difficulty of being an ethical aerospace engineer 3. Technical determinism and aerospace career pathways 4. Macroethics discussions within aerospace coursework 5. The ability of faculty to facilitate conversations on the macroethics of aerospace These five factors provide a new basis upon which we will generate additional survey items in the future. Through this process, we will develop a survey that can effectively measure students’ beliefs and experiences in regards to the macroethical implications of the field of aerospace engineering. 

Absent from the undergraduate aerospace curricula at many universities is any acknowledgement of macroethics, the ways in which engineering impacts society positively and negatively. Without putting aerospace engineering in its social context, students are left ill-prepared to recognize and address challenging ethical questions and issues they will encounter in their future engineering careers. Alternatively, aerospace engineering curricula should support the development of the critical consciousness required to reflect on the social impact of the field and students’ present and future roles within it. We are addressing this pressing need with integrated research and curriculum development. Our multi-institutional team is composed of aerospace and engineering education research faculty, graduate students in engineering education, undergraduate students in engineering, and practitioners in the aerospace industry. The overarching objective of our design-based research project is to investigate how a macroethical curriculum can be effectively integrated into aerospace engineering science courses. To do this, we ask two research questions to inform the curriculum: RQ1) What are undergraduate students’ current awareness and perceptions of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering?, and RQ2) In what ways do students feel their education is or is not preparing them to address macroethical issues? We also pose a question to assess our curriculum: RQ3) How does the macroethical curriculum impact students’ perceptions and awareness of macroethical issues and their desire to engage with the macroethical implications of their future work? In this poster, we will describe the development and iteration of macroethics lessons in multiple aerospace engineering courses, along with an assessment of the lessons through instructor reflections and quantitative student feedback. We will also describe the development of a survey to conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses of students’ awareness and perception of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering. We will also present preliminary results of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. 

In order to perform highly dynamic and agile maneuvers, legged robots typically spend time in underactuated domains (e.g. with feet off the ground) where the system has limited command of its acceleration and a constrained amount of time before transitioning to a new domain (e.g. foot touchdown). Meanwhile, these transitions can instantaneously change the system’s state, possibly causing perturbations to be mapped arbitrarily far away from the target trajectory. These properties make it difficult for local feedback controllers to effectively recover from disturbances as the system evolves through underactuated domains and hybrid impact events. To address this, we utilize the fundamental solution matrix that characterizes the evolution of perturbations through a hybrid trajectory and its 2-norm, which represents the worst-case growth of perturbations. In this paper, the worst-case perturbation analysis is used to explicitly reason about the tracking performance of a hybrid trajectory and is incorporated in an iLQR framework to optimize a trajectory while taking into account the closed-loop convergence of the trajectory under an LQR tracking controller. The generated convergent trajectories recover more effectively from perturbations, are more robust to large disturbances, and use less feedback control effort than trajectories generated with traditional methods.