write a weblog commenting on the attached pdf article, engineering homework help

User Generated

Noqhyynu-a18

Engineering

Description

Here are some links to help you create your weblog:

Best blog sites: http://www.dearblogger.org/blogger-or-wordpress-better

Wordpress: https://wordpress.com/

Blogger getting started guide: https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/1623800?hl=en

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Engineering Professionals’ Expectations of Undergraduate Engineering Students MONICA F. COX, PH.D.; OSMAN CEKIC, PH.D.; BENJAMIN AHN; AND JIABIN ZHU ABSTRACT: This paper presents the results of a study that sought to identify constructs that engineers in academia and industry use to describe attributes they consider important for undergraduate engineering students to possess. We explicitly targeted the attributes of leadership, recognizing and managing change, and synthesizing engineering, business, and social perspectives. Our findings indicate ways that engineering students can engage in technical and nontechnical activities that enhance their undergraduate engineering experiences. The final goal of this ongoing effort is to develop, validate, and implement a tool that examines undergraduate students’ embodiment of the three targeted attributes. N In 2005, Purdue University began a curricular initiative called the Purdue Engineer of 2020 (Meckl et al. 2009a). Mostly based on the National Academy of Engineering’s (2004) Engineer of 2020 report, this initiative includes eight abilities (e.g., decision making, teamwork), six knowledge areas (e.g., analytical skills, engineering fundamentals), and six qualities (e.g., strong work ethic, adaptability in a changing environment) that Purdue engineering students are encouraged to embrace for the 21st century. This paper presents information from an empirical study about the attributes engineers in academia and industry identify as being important for undergraduate engineering students to possess. Of the abilities, ational initiatives have explored the attributes undergraduate engineering students need to be successful workers in industry once they graduate with their engineering degree (Lang et al. 1999). Among these desired attributes are the ability to communicate effectively; to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; to function on multidisciplinary teams; to understand the impacts of engineering solutions in global and societal contexts; and to engage in lifelong learning [Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) 2001; McMasters 2004]. APRIL 2012 60 Leadership and Management in Engineering knowledge areas, and qualities identified in a study sponsored by a Purdue University Engineer of 2020 seed grant (Meckl et al. 2009b), we examined the attributes of “leadership” (referred to as leadership throughout the paper), “recognize and manage change” (referred to as change throughout the paper) and “synthesize engineering, business, and social perspectives” (referred to as synthesis throughout the paper). We targeted these three attributes because of their alignment with a graduatelevel Leadership, Policy, and Change course taught in the College of Engineering at Purdue University for students in the School of Engineering Education (Cox et al. 2009) and with national and global initiatives highlighting the importance of professional skill and leadership development among engineering students (Graham et al. 2009). Although the importance of leadership is mentioned in the literature, few empirical studies have examined the leadership attributes of college students in engineering (Komives et al. 2007; Kouzes and Posner 2008). In engineering, leadership is promoted in the form of minors, formal undergraduate degree programs, formal graduate degree programs, and graduate courses (Graham et al. 2009). In addition, leadership has been identified as a skill that needs to be included in the curricula for future engineers (Cox et al. 2009) and that allows an individual to cope effectively with change in systems or organizations (Kotter 1990). Unfortunately, many engineering faculty members have not been trained formally to teach leadership and as a result, have not explored ways to include leadership principles in their courses. The issue is also relevant to discussions in the engineering community of ways to develop future engineering leaders. About the same time that leadership development models for college students emerged, the engineering education community also started to focus on the leadership abilities of graduating engineers (American Society for Engineering Education 1994; Farr et al. 1997). One of the most important developments in this area was ABET’s (2001) Engineering Criteria 2000 (EC2000), which included criteria emphasizing the ability to work on teams, to communicate, to engage in lifelong learning, and to develop social and ethical responsibility as program outcomes. After publication of EC2000, leadership development gained momentum in engineering education. Leadership was pronounced one of the most important elements needed in graduating engineers. Since then, the emphasis on leadership in engineering has increased and has been included in STEM education policy reports by the National Research Council (2006), the National Academy of Engineering (2004, 2005), and Sheppard et al. (2007). Recently, Graham and colleagues (2009) consulted more than 70 individuals and reviewed 40 programs internationally to identify good practices in leadership development in engineering fields. They found that many programs are less than 10 years old and that most of the programs were not focused specifically on engineering students. With the new developments in leadership development of engineering students at the undergraduate level, it becomes imperative to explore how these programs or courses are affecting the undergraduate students who enroll in them and who will be future engineering leaders. One validated instrument designed to measure the leadership skills of college students is the student version of the Leadership Practices Inventory (SLPI), developed by Kouzes and Posner (1998; see also BACKGROUND Professional Skills Development in Engineering Studies have explored engineering students’ development of professional skills. Table 1 summarizes the focus of some of these studies, the data collection methods used to explore research questions in these studies, and the major findings of each study. These findings identify a broad range of professional attributes needed by undergraduate engineering students, particularly in areas in which students are deficient given current curricular practices in engineering. Focus on Targeted Attributes Leadership, change, and synthesis have been explored separately and in a variety of contexts, particularly outside of engineering (Kotter 1990, 1996; Bolman and Deal 2003; Kouzes & Posner 1998; Northouse 2007; Schein 1992). Within the context of engineering, leadership has appeared in several studies, but change and synthesis as defined in this paper have not appeared in the literature exploring the desired attributes of undergraduate engineering students. In fact, change usually refers to curricular changes or reform (Merton et al. 2009), and synthesis usually refers to traditional definitions of engineering synthesis or to integration of engineering topics across multiple years of a curriculum (Bordogna et al. 1993). To gain an understanding of ways to synthesize engineering, business, and social perspectives, engineering students often work in multidisciplinary teams, conduct service learning projects, or engage in capstone design projects that include students or experts with experiences related to this paper’s definition of synthesis. Leadership and Management in Engineering 61 APRIL 2012 APRIL 2012 62 Leadership and Management in Engineering Desired attributes of engineering graduates from an industrial perspective Competency gaps in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) community college and university graduates as perceived by industry and business leaders McMasters and Matsch (1996) Meier et al. (2000) Martin et al. (2005) Alignment of outcomes of revised engineering programs with the needs of industry Views of students and graduates on the content of their courses as preparation for working as professional engineers in industry Perceived importance of American Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) attributes as identified by aerospace engineers Keenan (1993) Lang et al. (1999) Engineering students’ transition from college to entry-level positions Focus Katz (1993) Reference Phase 1—Literature review and practitioner interviews Phase 2—Surveys and focus groups with business professionals Phase 3—Survey analysis Discussions with individuals in industry, academia (including students), and government Survey responses from 167 students in enhanced engineering curricula and from 353 students in traditional curricula 172 survey items developed by the Industry–University–Government Roundtable for Enhancing Engineering Education that address Criterion 3 of ABET’s (2001) Engineering Criteria 2000 Interviews with 16 chemical engineering undergraduate students at a Cape Town, South Africa, university about their current skills that prepare them for jobs in industry Interviews with students, professors, and professional engineers Data collection Table 1. Past Studies Exploring Students’ Professional Skill Development Students identified their technical backgrounds, problem-solving skills, formal communication skills, and lifelong learning abilities as strengths. Weaknesses included working in multidisciplinary teams, leadership, practical preparation, and management skills. Many students have no practical engineering experience and do not know how to work in teams or in a large-scale system. Faculty have little to no experience working with industry. Industry needs to work with academia to make their needs clear. Apprenticeships are recommended for students. Some competencies that should be added to STEM programs include information sharing and cooperation with coworkers, teamwork, adaptation to changing work environments, and ethical decision making and behavior. Highest ranked items are located in Appendix B of Lang et al.’s (1999) paper. Students have problems working on teams, communicating, and understanding workplace expectations. Engineering graduates who took more courses in nontechnical areas thought they were better prepared for industrial jobs. Major findings Graduates need increased technical communication skills. Career advancement is positively related to engagement in technical communication activities. One-page survey given to engineering students enrolled at the university between 1994 and 1996 METHODS To identify the elements of leadership, change, and synthesis that were most important to experts in engineering, we collected qualitative data via semistructured interviews with 11 engineers from industry and 12 engineering faculty members. PARTICIPANTS Industry Experts We recruited 11 industry experts from the industrial advisory boards of several departments in a college of engineering at a large Midwestern university. These experts were diverse in gender, rank, engineering discipline, years of industry experience, and leadership styles. Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the industry participants. Effectiveness of current engineering courses at a university and areas and methods for optimally expanding and improving the technical communications program Major findings Data collection Academic Experts To recruit experts from academia, we sent recruitment e-mails to individuals with faculty appointments in a college of engineering at a large Midwestern university. We selected 12 engineering faculty participants on the basis of the diverse perspectives they contributed to the study and on their level of involvement in leadership development efforts on campus. Interviews were scheduled and conducted at a time and place of participants’ choosing. To achieve congruence among answers, we used the same interview protocol as that used to interview industry participants. Gender, rank, Sageev and Romanowski (2001) Focus Reference Table 1. (Continued.) Cox et al. 2010). The SLPI was inappropriate for use in this study because the students whom we surveyed were already in leadership positions and because academic and industrial employees’ definitions of desired leadership characteristics might be different from those used in developing the SLPI. A standardized instrument is needed that is specifically designed to explore and measure undergraduate engineering students’ leadership skills and attributes and their ability to embrace change and to synthesize multiple perspectives. The literature lacks such a survey instrument or even operational definitions of leadership, change, and synthesis in engineering fields as observable and measurable attributes. In an effort to develop such an instrument for engineering students, we solicited operational definitions of leadership, change, and synthesis from engineering professionals working in industry and academia via one-on-one interviews. This paper presents those definitions as constructs that will be used to develop a survey instrument that measures attributes of leadership, change, and synthesis in undergraduate engineering students. Leadership and Management in Engineering 63 APRIL 2012 each attribute might be useful in enhancing the professional life of an engineer, and (3) the operational definition of each attribute (using measurable verbs and descriptive adjectives). We also solicited real-life examples for each attribute to clarify the concept and to add to the operational definition of the attribute. Before conducting interviews with faculty and industry experts, we sought to operationalize each of the three attributes within the context of engineering. We conducted literature reviews to identify such definitions, but the search was futile; we found no specific definitions of the three abilities within the context of engineering. field of study, years of industry experience, and leadership styles of the participants from academia are displayed in Table 3. Data Collection We conducted interviews with academic and industry experts using an interview protocol containing 17 semistructured questions about participants’ education, position, and experiences as leaders and about the Purdue Engineer of 2020 attributes of “leadership,” “recognize and manage change,” and “synthesizing engineering, business, and social perspectives.” We asked interviewees about (1) the importance of each attribute, (2) the ways Table 2. Characteristics of Industry Experts Interviewed Industry experience (years) Rank Field Male 39 Sales manager Male 11 Team leader Male 21 Female 22 Managing director Asset manager Male 26 Director Female 27 Male 33 Chief engineer Vice president of technology Chemical engineering Chemical engineering Chemical engineering Chemistry and chemical engineering Chemical engineering Electrical engineering Mechanical engineering Male 31 Director Chemical engineering Male 15 Manager of employee development Mechanical engineering Male 32 Engineer Interdisciplinary engineering Female 20 Director Civil engineering Gender APRIL 2012 64 Self-reported leadership style One that is typically called the “servant leader.” Not a micromanager; coach. The leader can get through obstacles and find ways to get the jobs done. My leadership style is extremely collaborative. It is a feminine leadership style. Enable employees to have the tools that they have to have to effectively solve the problem. I do not micromanage; pretty hands-off. I tend to not be a detailed person. I tend to produce results because I think I am a good judge of talent, and I am very able to get people excited about what we are working on. I have lived with being transparent. And the advantage of that is it communicates an awful lot to my superiors, to my peers, and to my subordinates. Really, leadership is about enabling people. I just have to make sure that I know how to go about finding the right resources so I can remove barriers so you can do your function. Here is all this work out here to do. And we can come together as a team and help these people and provide a service. Very direct. Very practical. Fluid and, I would say, innovative. Leadership and Management in Engineering Table 3. Characteristics of Academia Experts Interviewed Industry experience (years) Rank Tenure start 10 Professor Female None Female Male 1 (after B.S.) None Associate professor Professor Male Gender Male Ph.D. field Self-reported leadership style 1993 Environmental engineering 1998 Electrical engineering and computer science Civil engineering Participatory (others’ participation is important; I try to set the vision; I do not have to receive credit for success). Flexible, adaptive, and inconsistent. 1997 15 Assistant professor Professor 2002 Female None Professor 1982 Male None Professor 1970 Female 17 Professor 2006 Male 1 1987 Male None Male 12 Associate professor Assistant professor Associate professor Professor Female None 2007 2007 2000 1996 A mixture of consensus building and decision making. Mechanical engineering Hands-on and an enabler. Chemical engineering Hands-off; I try to recruit or hire the best people and to clearly define people’s roles in an organization or in a group. Aeronautics and Not dictatorial; I nudge everyone astronautics onto the same page. Chemical engineering Contextual; classic when I am clearly put in charge and more collegial at other times. Veterinary medicine Visionary; I pay less attention to and surgery details. I am strong headed; I have difficulty listening sometimes but am aware of this issue. Mechanical engineering I build consensus among different constituents. Mechanical engineering I try not to control students. Aeronautics and astronautics Environmental science and engineering Data Analysis We transferred electronic transcripts of the interviews to Atlas.ti (ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development, Berlin) for analysis. Phrases or ideas were the unit of coding, rather than individual words. The initial reading of two transcripts provided some common codes that we later transferred to a code book (MacQueen et al. 1998). We then reread the transcripts and updated the code book as new codes emerged. The code book included a definition for each code and descriptions of the nuances between codes. We later opened the code book to other engineering education researchers not directly affiliated with this Leadership and Management in Engineering I offer guidance but keep a focus on my own project. I am very democratic; I value input from everyone in my unit. study for discussion. Following discussions with them, we revised the definitions to provide clarification. Furthermore, for codes that might lead to confusion, we included descriptions of situations to help identify where the code should and should not be used. RESULTS We gathered data on the constructs that emerged from the interviews with the experts from industry and academia in a table format. Tables 4–6 present constructs for leadership, change, and synthesis, respectively. 65 APRIL 2012 Table 4. Leadership Constructs Identified by Engineering Experts Construct Definition Leadership Characteristics of a leader or leadership, leadership examples, or desired characteristics of leaders or leadership Self-reported leadership styles of the respondents, some informed by the literature and others not Ability to inspire people through good relationships, to share a vision, and to energize people to achieve that vision Ability to go above and beyond the call of duty, be a go-getter, do more than expected with an assignment, and initiate new tasks or projects without being told to do so Ability to provide the necessary tools (tangible or intangible) for employees to perform their duties or jobs without a need for micromanagement; selection of the right people for the right job Unique and sometimes unconventional ideas and methods to achieve a goal Ability to work with and organize people from different backgrounds in work-related situations Actionable process of getting things done or evaluating leadership by looking at the success or the failure of a project or the completion of tasks Ability to identify the talents and strengths of followers and to assign tasks based on their abilities Ability to communicate or present ideas to other members of the group Ability to use technical skills and respondents’ views of technical competence as part of leadership skills Innate comfort in making decisions and being confident that they are the right decisions Ability to consider multiple inputs in directing or leading groups Ability to take risks in making decisions, speaking out, or admitting to being wrong Ability to get the job done by assigning tasks to people who are competent in achieving them Ability to process data and base decisions on the data Ability to consider followers’ comments and be aware of their concerns Ability to be accountable for one’s actions and tasks Ability to think innovatively or differently from others Ability to instill trust in followers by keeping promises and being and acting competent in technical matters and in relationships with other people Ability to take risks and learn from mistakes Ability to organize and lead groups Commitment to teamwork and awareness that a task is something that the whole group, company, or organization should achieve together Explicit use of coaching or guiding Curiosity and will to succeed Cognitive abilities Leadership style Motivation Proactive Empowerment Vision People skills Outcomes driven Know the people Communication Technical competence Confident See big picture Courage Delegate Input driven Ability to listen Responsibility Outside the box Trust Willing to be wrong Organization Common goal Coach people Drive Reasoning and intelligence Fairness Ownership Integrity Ability to instill trust in followers by being fair and treating them equitably Accountability for both accomplishments and failures and ability to assume responsibility even for tasks not assigned explicitly to the individual Trustworthiness and adherence to one’s word APRIL 2012 66 Leadership and Management in Engineering Table 5. Change Constructs Identified by Engineering Experts Construct Technological advancement Process change People skills Different areas of competency Change management Flexible Awareness Organizational change Competition Social change Economic change Lifelong learning Definition Use of new technologies in one’s professional life and adjustments based on technology Familiarity with the way things are done and the process for getting these things done Ability to work with people from different backgrounds, disciplines, or cultures and with different perspectives Ability to work on different kinds of jobs, across disciplines, and with diverse technologies Ability to deal with and manage the change process Ability to be adaptable to environmental changes and new ideas, processes, or innovations Ability to recognize change and act on that change Ability to make adjustments or changes in a company’s organizational structure or work environments Changes that are a result of a competitive industrial environment Societal changes and their influence on engineers’ ability to perform their jobs Influence of the larger economic climate on work environments Learning of new skills over the course of one’s career Table 6. Synthesis Constructs Identified by Engineering Experts Construct Social responsibility Holistic thinking Business perspectives Customer orientation Politics Cost Definition Responsibilities to society, the environment, and humankind Ability to make decisions based on multiple points of view or considerations Consideration of business elements during product design Ability to listen to customers and consider their needs during product design and development Political environment in relation to the engineering profession Ability to consider the social or financial costs of products during the design and production process DISCUSSION Several of the leadership constructs that the engineering leaders identified did not differ greatly from typical definitions and characteristics of leadership that have been reported in the business, organizational, and other leadership literatures. The constructs of synthesis and change, however, were defined in new ways by these engineering professionals. Since we did not find any literature that explicitly discussed engineering students’ abilities to recognize and manage change and to synthesize engineering, business, and social perspectives, the constructs our sample identified within these two attributes add much to a larger conversation about the operationalization of these attributes among engineering students from the perspectives of engineering professionals. Leadership and Management in Engineering Of the leadership constructs that the interviewees identified, two are closely affiliated with the field of engineering or with characteristics of engineers. First, technical competence was identified as being important for a leader. This construct implies that although professional skills are extremely important, leaders must be credible in their disciplines. Second, being data driven was identified as an important element of leadership. More specifically, engineering leaders are expected to use the data around them to make sound decisions. Engineering professionals defined change in several different ways. Technological advancement emerged as one construct that explicitly relates to engineering, since engineers are expected to work in environments in which the technology is always changing. These professionals identified nonengineering change 67 APRIL 2012 constructs related to professional characteristics (i.e., being flexible, understanding the role of competition in change, and having an awareness of the need to change), people (i.e., having people skills and engaging in lifelong learning), knowledge (i.e., demonstrating different areas of competency), process (i.e., knowing the process for getting things done and managing change), and different types of change (i.e., organizational, social, and economic). For the synthesis constructs, although all elements relate to nonengineering concepts, these constructs are very much aligned with current engineering trends (e.g., sustainability and green engineering) and relate to several attributes that other authors have identified as important (Prados et al. 2005; Shuman et al. 2005). Synthesis constructs include an awareness of the political, business, and societal aspects of engineering. Synthesis also relates to the elements of globalization and an awareness of nonengineering aspects of professionalism. People elements are reflected in interviewees’ references to social responsibility and the need to orient oneself to customers and their needs. Interviewees also emphasized that engineering students must understand several nonengineering fields and ideas, think holistically, and consider both business (e.g., cost and budgetary issues) and political perspectives when making decisions. about these themes and their placement in the context of the leadership, change, and synthesis constructs are presented in Table 7. Implications for Practice The following lessons for improving the training of engineers can be learned from the interviews we conducted with the engineering professionals in this study: • Leadership, change, and synthesis constructs can be incorporated into the existing engineering curriculum without adding new courses to an already bloated plan of study. • Leadership, change, and synthesis constructs can be incorporated in assessments of student learning (e.g., framing formative or summative questions within the context of these leadership questions). • Engaging students in authentic individual in-class projects will allow them to explore the implications of their work for engineering and for other sectors (e.g., business and the larger society). • Students can engage in activities within their projects that relate to engagement with diverse stakeholders. Questions of interest might relate to how a technological innovation might affect clients, managers, or society. Future Work We developed pilot survey items from the constructs listed in Tables 4–6 and sent this survey to four experts for review (i.e., one engineering graduate student Commonalities across the Three Attributes We organized the findings by five themes: people, society, organization, competency, and money. Details Table 7. Themes Identified Related to Leadership, Change, and Synthesis Theme Description People Respondents identified people skills as an important theme related to the leadership and change attribute. Respondents cited the need to know the people one leads and to coach them. They emphasized consideration of the needs of clients as part of the synthesis attribute. For the change and synthesis attributes, respondents made connections to society. They noted that societal changes affect how engineers do their jobs and that engineers must take into consideration the impacts of their work on society, the environment, and humankind. Related to the change attribute, respondents noted that organizational change is inevitable and that as a result, engineers need to be aware of the environment in which they function. Regarding the leadership attribute, engineers need to know how to organize groups, be flexible, and show others the way to success. As part of the leadership attribute, a successful engineering leader must be technically knowledgeable and possess different areas of competency. Respondents identified a need for engineers to be sensitive to economic changes within their environments and to consider financial costs as they synthesize engineering and nonengineering perspectives. Society Organization Competency Money APRIL 2012 68 Leadership and Management in Engineering who worked in industry, one industry representative who still works in industry, and two engineering faculty members). These experts rated each item using a 4-point Likert scale, and their responses led to the selection of items (a procedure known as the Q-sort) that were included in a survey completed by 800 engineering undergraduate students at a large midwestern university. We will assess the reliability and validity of these survey items using exploratory factor analysis. The final goal of the project is to develop, validate, and implement a tool that examines undergraduate students’ embodiment of the three targeted attributes of leadership, change, and synthesis and to develop seminars and workshops aligned with these attributes. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). (1994). The green report: Engineering education for a changing world, ASEE, Washington, DC. 〈http://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/ publications/The-Green-Report.pdf〉 (Nov. 30, 2011). Bolman, L. G., and Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership, 3rd Ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Bordogna, J., Fromm, E., and Ernst, E. W. (1993). “Engineering education: Innovation through integration.” J. Eng. Edu., 82(1), 3–8. Cox, M. F., Berry, C. A., and Smith, K. A. (2009). “Development of a leadership, policy, and change course for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduate students.” J. STEM Educ., 10(3–4), 9–16. Cox, M. F., Cekic, O., and Adams, S. G. (2010). “Developing leadership skills of undergraduate engineering students: Perspectives from engineering faculty.” J. STEM Educ., 11(3–4), 25–36. Farr, J. V., Walesh, S. G., and Forsythe, G. B. (1997). “Leadership development for engineering managers.” J. Manage. Eng., 13(4), 38–41. Graham, R., Crawley, E., and Mendelsohn, B. (2009). “Engineering leadership education: A snapshot review of international good practice.” Bernard M. Gordon–MIT Engineering Leadership Program, Cambridge, MA. 〈http://web.mit.edu/gordonelp/ elewhitepaper.pdf〉 (Nov. 30, 2011). Katz, S. M. (1993). “The entry-level engineer: Problems in transition from student to professional.” J. Eng. Edu., 82(3), 171–174. Keenan, T. (1993). “Graduate engineers’ perceptions of their engineering courses: Comparison between enhanced engineering courses and their conventional counterparts.” High. Educ., 26(3), 255–265. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., and McMahon, T. R. (2007). Exploring leadership for college students who want to make a difference, 2nd Ed., Wiley, San Francisco. Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management, Free Press, New York. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change, Harvard Business School Press, New York. Kouzes, J. M., and Posner, B. Z. (1998). Student leadership practices inventory, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Kouzes, J. M., and Posner, B. Z. (2008). The student leadership challenge: Five practices for exemplary leaders, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Lang, J. D., Cruse, S., McVey, F. D., and McMasters, J. (1999). “Industry expectations of new engineers: CONCLUSION In this study, we looked at the views of faculty members and industry experts on leadership, change, and synthesis. Rather than focus on personal best stories of students (Kouzes and Posner 1998), we relied on engineering experts in industry and academia to define constructs in engineering leadership, ability to manage change, and ability to synthesize business and social perspectives and to relate them to undergraduate engineering education. The results revealed some differences in the views of the industry and academic experts. However, because academic and industrial tracks for engineering students are not separate, all of the different views should be considered in improving the education of undergraduate students as engineers. Furthermore, with this study, we hope to create a new area of discussion related to development of an instrument that will aid in the assessment of leadership, change, and synthesis abilities of undergraduate engineering students. In this way, employers (in either industry or academia) of engineers may empirically measure such attributes. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by an Engineer of 2020 seed grant from the Purdue University College of Engineering. REFERENCES Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). (2001). Engineering criteria 2000, third edition: Criteria for accrediting programs in engineering in the United States, ABET, Baltimore. 〈http://www.ele.uri.edu/ faculty/daly/criteria.2000.html〉 (Nov. 30, 2011). Leadership and Management in Engineering 69 APRIL 2012 A survey to assist curriculum designers.” J. Eng. Edu., 88(1), 43–51. MacQueen, K., McLellan, E., Kay, K., and Milstein, B. (1998). “Code book development for team based qualitative analysis.” Field Methods, 10(2), 31–36. Martin, R., Maytham, B., Case, J., and Fraser, D. (2005). “Engineering graduates’ perceptions of how well they were prepared for work in industry.” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., 30(2), 167–180. McMasters, J. H. (2004). “Influencing engineering education: One (aerospace) industry perspective.” Int. J. Eng. Educ., 20(3), 353–371. McMasters, J. H., and Matsch, L. A. (1996). “Desired attributes of an engineering graduate—An industry perspective.” AIAA Paper 96-2241, 19th American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Technology Conference, New Orleans. Meckl, P., Harris, M., and Jamieson, A. (2009a). “Purdue Engineer of 2020.” [Microsoft PowerPoint presentation]. 〈https://engineering.purdue .edu/Intranet/Groups/Committees/Engr2020/2020 Resources〉 (Nov. 30, 2011). Meckl, P., Harris, M., and Jamieson, A. (2009b). “Purdue’s Engineer of 2020 seed grant program.” [Microsoft PowerPoint presentation]. 〈https://engineering.purdue.edu/Intranet/Groups/ Committees/Engr2020/2020Resources〉 (Nov. 30, 2011). Meier, R. L., Williams, M. R., and Humphreys, M. A. (2000). “Refocusing our efforts: Assessing nontechnical competency gaps.” J. Eng. Edu., 89(3), 377–385. Merton, P., Froyd, J. E., Clark, M. C., and Richardson, J. (2009). “A case study of relationships between organizational culture and curricular change in engineering education.” Innovative Higher Educ., 34(4), 219–233. National Academy of Engineering. (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century, National Academies Press, Washington, DC. National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education APRIL 2012 to the new century, National Academies Press, Washington, DC. National Research Council (NRC). (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future, National Academies Press, Washington, DC. 〈http://www.nap.edu/ catalog/11463.html〉. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice, 4th Ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Prados, J. W., Peterson, G. D., and Lattuca, L. R. (2005). “Quality assurance of engineering education through accreditation: The impact of Engineering Criteria 2000 and its global influence.” J. Eng. Edu., 94(1), 165–184. Sageev, P., and Romanowski, C. J. (2001). “A message from recent engineering graduates in the workplace: Results of a survey on technical communication skills.” J. Eng. Edu., 90(4), 685–694. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership, 2nd Ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Sheppard, S., Colby, A., Macatangay, K., and Sullivan, W. (2007). “What is engineering practice?” Int. J. Eng. Educ., 22(3), 429–438. Shuman, L. J., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J. (2005). “The ABET ‘professional skills’—Can they be taught? Can they be assessed?” J. Eng. Edu., 94(1), 41–55. Monica F. Cox is associate professor, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. She can be contacted at mfc@ purdue.edu. Osman Cekic is assistant professor, School of Education, Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Canakkale, Turkey. Benjamin Ahn is doctoral student, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. Jiabin Zhu is doctoral student, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West LME Lafayette, IN. 70 Leadership and Management in Engineering Copyright of Leadership & Management in Engineering is the property of American Society of Civil Engineers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Engineering Professionals' Expectations of Undergraduate Students
The article "Engineering Professionals' Expectations of Undergraduate Students", was written by
"Monica F. Cox, PH. D, Osman Cekic, PH. D, Benjamin Ahn, and Jiabin Zhu". The main discussion of this
article is to give the readers and the audiences an important information about improving the leadership
skills for the students and having more knowledge about this engineering course". In this article, the
author enhances the capabilities of those students who are studying to be an engineering. The
engineering course is mainly all about construction works, where they will work on bridges, houses,
buildings, and roads. It was focusing on the definition, types, strengths, and in using the components of
the materials that used for the whole infrastructure plan. Including also those tools from small to large
as the crane. Also, includes those methods and techniques needed to build the infrastructure. The
author of this article carefully conducts an interview to some of the engineering experts.
The author of this article conducts an interview to some of the engineering experts that have
already taken on this field. In this interview, the experts stated some important information and details
about their experiences, works, capabilities, and giving some points on how they manage their teams to
have a strong foundation especially when it comes to their duties as engineers. They have also stated
that as engineers, it must be responsible to the environment, society, and to the humankind. Based on
them, a good leadership is "about enabling people" and being transparent wherever their designation is.
The experts shared their opinions and suggestions about engineering field that they have already
possessed. During the interviews, experts said that the...


Anonymous
Really great stuff, couldn't ask for more.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags