This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.

Dr. Angela Bielefeldt
Department of Civil, Environmental & Architectural Engineering and Engineering Plus Program, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder CO, 80309, USA

Basic Info

Basic Info is private.

Research Keywords & Expertise

0 Sustainability Education
0 Ethics education
0 Service-Learning
0 Engineering education research
0 Professional social responsibility

Fingerprints

Service-Learning
Professional social responsibility
Ethics education
Engineering education research

Honors and Awards

The user has no records in this section


Career Timeline

The user has no records in this section.


Short Biography

The user biography is not available.
Following
Followers
Co Authors
The list of users this user is following is empty.
Following: 0 users

Feed

Journal article
Published: 01 May 2021 in Environmental Engineering Science
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Ethical reasoning is an important ability for engineers working with marginalized communities in global contexts. However, the ethical awareness and development that are critical for this work may not be included in traditional engineering education. This article presents faculty perspectives on the ethical and societal issues (ESI) that should be taught and the pedagogies that are used to prepare students for development engineering. Among 60 survey respondents who taught courses focused on global and/or development (GD) issues, the ESI topics that were particularly congruent included poverty, sustainability, social justice, and engineering decisions under uncertainty. Faculty interviews highlighted that GD should foreground the human side of engineering, respectful partnerships with communities grounded in an asset perspective, and considerations of historical elements. Discussions, case studies, design, and reflection are impactful pedagogies that can complement learning through service to achieve ESI educational goals.

ACS Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt; Madeline Polmear; Daniel W. Knight; Nathan Canney; Christopher Swan. Educating Engineers to Work Ethically with Global Marginalized Communities. Environmental Engineering Science 2021, 38, 320 -330.

AMA Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt, Madeline Polmear, Daniel W. Knight, Nathan Canney, Christopher Swan. Educating Engineers to Work Ethically with Global Marginalized Communities. Environmental Engineering Science. 2021; 38 (5):320-330.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt; Madeline Polmear; Daniel W. Knight; Nathan Canney; Christopher Swan. 2021. "Educating Engineers to Work Ethically with Global Marginalized Communities." Environmental Engineering Science 38, no. 5: 320-330.

Journal article
Published: 01 October 2020 in Journal of Civil Engineering Education
Reads 0
Downloads 0

This research characterized faculty perceptions about the role of cocurricular activities in educating civil engineering students about ethics and/or the societal impacts of engineering (ESI). Among all survey respondents—those who mentored cocurricular activities and those who did not—41% believed that undergraduate students in their program learned about ESI via an engineering professional society, an engineering service group, or other cocurricular activity. In contrast, nearly all of the advisors of cocurricular activities (including research and design competitions) indicated that students learned about one or more among 18 specific ESI topics via the activity. Presentations, discussions, design projects, and working with a community were thought to impact students’ ethical development. Cocurricular activities have the potential for significant contributions to students’ ESI education; however, elective participation may limit their widespread impact.

ACS Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt; Jake Lewis; Madeline Polmear; Daniel Knight; Nathan Canney; Christopher Swan. Educating Civil Engineering Students about Ethics and Societal Impacts via Cocurricular Activities. Journal of Civil Engineering Education 2020, 146, 04020007 .

AMA Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt, Jake Lewis, Madeline Polmear, Daniel Knight, Nathan Canney, Christopher Swan. Educating Civil Engineering Students about Ethics and Societal Impacts via Cocurricular Activities. Journal of Civil Engineering Education. 2020; 146 (4):04020007.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela R. Bielefeldt; Jake Lewis; Madeline Polmear; Daniel Knight; Nathan Canney; Christopher Swan. 2020. "Educating Civil Engineering Students about Ethics and Societal Impacts via Cocurricular Activities." Journal of Civil Engineering Education 146, no. 4: 04020007.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES DURING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SUMMER RESEARCH PROGRAMAbstractIntensive summer research programs have the opportunity to help students achieve a widevariety of learning outcomes, while also deepening their interest in graduate school andincreasing their overall confidence. This research explores the learning outcomes from an NSF-funded Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) site in environmental engineering. Theten-week REU site included lab, field, and modeling projects on the quality and treatment ofwater, soil, and air. The participant demographics were over-represented compared to theapplicant pool for females (54%) and minorities (~13-18%/grant cycle). The majority of thestudent participants were majoring in environmental and/or civil engineering (62%), with anumber of students from other engineering majors (17% chemical, mechanical, biological) andsciences (chemistry, physics, environmental science, biology, geology).Demographics of Participants in Environmental Engineering REU Site at __ UniversityYears # % % % non PhD % non host % students female minority school school Fr /So / Jr / Sr2000-2004 39 79 21 13 79 0 / 26 / (64)2006-2008 30 73 27 33 90 0 / 50 / 43 / 72010-2011 19 79 42 37 76 5 / 32 / 37 / 26Rigorous pre- and post- surveys were initiated in 2006. The pre- and post- surveys includedLikert-based questions where students rated their knowledge, abilities, and likelihood ofpursuing MS and PhD degrees (scale 0 = none to 4=excellent). Comparing the pre- and post-ratings of knowledge and skills, 9 of 26 items showed significant gains in 2010 compared to 14items in 2011 (p<0.05) were foundbetween non-Hispanic whites vs. minorities (22 items), freshman+ sophomores vs.juniors+seniors (13 items), students with minimal vs. extensive previous research experience (14items), and civil+ environmental engineering majors compared to non-engineering majors (5items). No gender differences were found. Surveys were also administered to faculty mentorsand additional mentors (post-doctoral researchers, graduate students). Student from alldemographics (age, major, etc.) could be successful given appropriate mentoring. Further datawill be presented and elaborated on in the full paper.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Student Learning Outcomes from an Environmental Engineering Summer Research Program. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.1186.1 -25.1186.21.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Student Learning Outcomes from an Environmental Engineering Summer Research Program. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.1186.1-25.1186.21.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Student Learning Outcomes from an Environmental Engineering Summer Research Program." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.1186.1-25.1186.21.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Engineering Students’ Views of the Role of Engineering in SocietyA developed sense of social responsibility should be inherent in the engineering profession suchthat any project can be seen as service to a community. Academic institutions carry theresponsibility of teaching engineering students not only technical skills but also professionalskills that relate to social responsibility, such as ethics and societal impacts. Teaching techniquessuch as project-based service learning (PBSL) could increase a student’s awareness of socialresponsibility due to the community engagement (typically with underserved populations) andthe reflective aspect inherent in PBSL.For this study a survey of civil and environmental engineering students from all academic yearsis underway using a mixed-method tool designed to assess moral/ethical development,professional development, and the combination of the two as professional social responsibility.Pre-post survey methods are being used, with over 400 students having responded to the pre-survey. The post- survey will be distributed in December, at the end of the semester. Theclasses targeted for this study include freshman introductory classes, a sophomore/juniorenvironmental engineering fundamentals class, senior design capstone and graduate levelstructures and community development classes.Results from the pre- survey will inform the level of understanding of social responsibly atwhich students enter the semester (or the university as freshman). Two short answer questionshelp reveal what personal and collegial experiences have influenced the students’ perceptions.The pre-post assessment will tell us if certain classes and/or teaching methods have differentialeffects in changing social responsibly awareness. Finally, the demographic information will giveinsight into if there are differences across academic year, major, or gender for levels of socialresponsibility understanding.

ACS Style

Nathan E. Canney; Angela Bielefeldt. Engineering Students' Views of the Role of Engineering in Society. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.558.1 -25.558.20.

AMA Style

Nathan E. Canney, Angela Bielefeldt. Engineering Students' Views of the Role of Engineering in Society. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.558.1-25.558.20.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nathan E. Canney; Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Engineering Students' Views of the Role of Engineering in Society." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.558.1-25.558.20.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Findings from the Faculty Survey on Learning Through ServiceThe rapid pace of technological progress and future challenges for globalization, sustainability,complexity, and adaptability of engineering professionals call for a paradigm shift in engineeringeducation. Learning Through Service (LTS), an innovative pedagogical method that incorporates serviceas a means to meet academic learning outcomes, is part of such a paradigm shift. Being inclusive, LTS isan umbrella term used to cover an array of efforts, from volunteerism to service-learning. LTS is knownto seed development on multiple levels, from technical knowledge and cognitive development topersonal and professional growth, and is also known to attract women. With strong impacts on theepistemology of engineering educators impacting learning via LTS, this study is focused on gaining adeeper understanding of the motivations, challenges, and strategies faced by engineering faculty thatintegrate LTS in their curricular and extra-curricular engineering education endeavors. Suchunderstanding will facilitate the engagement of faculty across many disciplines to take part in LTS effortsand thus impact student learning via authentic and meaningful service experiences.To this end, we developed a faculty survey for LTS with the purposes of gathering insight into not onlythe types of LTS experiences (e.g. curricular, extracurricular, etc.) and the characteristics of suchexperiences (e.g. group-based, type of community partner, duration, course characteristics, etc.), butalso the benefits and barriers faced during LTS design, management, and assessment -all from a facultyperspective. Faculty attitudes on LTS efforts and impacts to their students, themselves, theirinstitutions, their partners were also measured. The survey includes Likert scale items, open-endedquestions, and multiple choice items. Phase I of our effort was inspired by an existing faculty survey onservice-learning from the University of Massachusetts, Lowell. This existing survey was refined andexpanded by a collaborative team of LTS content experts and assessment specialists who identifiedcritical LTS characteristics from the literature and personal experiences to develop new items that wouldprovide a more comprehensive understanding of LTS efforts. Phase II of survey development involvedrecruitment of additional content experts for feedback on content validity. Herein, we present initialfindings from a cohort of about thirty LTS experts who were administered the survey via an onlinesurvey tool at a recent multidisciplinary LTS Experts Summit organized as part of the Engineering FacultyEngagement Learning Through Service (EFELTS) project funded by the National Science Foundation.Acknowledging the diversity of LTS efforts available, we present the wide range of LTS characteristics,faculty attitudes of LTS, faculty ratings of student learning gains, and faculty ratings on LTS benefits andbarriers to implementation. Key findings from surveyed LTS faculty experts suggest that major barriersfor LTS implementation are 1) the lack of policy on the place of LTS in promotion and tenure, 2) theperceived workload of LTS efforts, and 3) the course size. In regards to major benefits, surveyed LTSexperts find such experiences to not only be academically rigorous and enabling for students to meetcourse and program objectives, but also more motivating for engineering students, who tend to learnthe subject matter more effectively in LTS courses versus non-LTS courses. Such findings offer a richunderstanding of the LTS endeavors faced by faculty. A major impact of such findings is to develop aframework upon which LTS-interested faculty can be empowered to initiate and/or improve their ownLTS efforts, which will ultimately impact student learning and development in engineering and beyond.

ACS Style

Olga Pierrakos; Anna Zilberberg; Christopher W. Swan; Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; John J. Duffy; Sean McVay. Faculty Survey on Learning Through Service: Development and Initial Findings. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.635.1 -25.635.22.

AMA Style

Olga Pierrakos, Anna Zilberberg, Christopher W. Swan, Angela Bielefeldt, Kurt Paterson, John J. Duffy, Sean McVay. Faculty Survey on Learning Through Service: Development and Initial Findings. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.635.1-25.635.22.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Olga Pierrakos; Anna Zilberberg; Christopher W. Swan; Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; John J. Duffy; Sean McVay. 2020. "Faculty Survey on Learning Through Service: Development and Initial Findings." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.635.1-25.635.22.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

A Model for the Development of Personal and Professional Social Responsibility for EngineersMany professional engineering societies have identified the need to develop more holisticengineers, armed with both technical and professional skills, to address the complex globalproblems facing our society. Two professional skills include an understanding of the global andsocietal contexts for engineering solutions and of professional and ethical responsibility whichwill guide engineering students as professionals. A developed sense of social responsibility,both personal and professional, contextualized within the engineering profession, encompassesthese skills and would create an engineering body which views all projects as a service to theircommunity.To assess the degree of understanding of social responsibility, both personal and professional, anew model was developed as a foundation for assessment. This new model synthesizedSchwartz’s cognitive model for altruistic helping behavior, Delve’s behavioral model forcommitment levels to social issues and volunteering, and Ramsey’s development model for theintegration of social issues into scientific processes. Schwartz’s model forms a linear, sequentialpath describing an individual’s moral and emotional development up to the point of takingaction, and forms the basis for the Community Service Attitudes Scale. Delve’s model is alsolinear and sequential, explaining the progression from peripheral volunteering to totalcommitment to a social issue, and forms the basis for the Scale of Service Learning Involvement.Incorporating these models into the new model describes the emotional/moral personaldevelopment, professional development, and the growth of social responsibility from peripheralvolunteering to full commitment to social issues using professional abilities. It is assumed thatthe new model will also be sequential for fully developed professional social responsibility, but itis possible for an individual to develop the personal sense of social responsibility without aninclusion of their professional abilities.The new model acknowledges two realms – personal social awareness and professionaldevelopment – which may progress independently until a point at which the individual realizesthat their professional abilities give them the ability to solve social issues, and moreover thatthere is an inherent professional responsibility to do so (see figure). At this stage, a deeperunderstanding of professional social responsibility is developed, leading to professionals whopossess a drive to solve social problems and see all of their work as service to their community.An assessment tool based upon the 12 steps of this new model is under development. A pilotstudy examining undergraduate and graduate civil and environmental engineering students isunderway. The assessment tool is a Likert-style survey with some short answer questions forqualitative support and draws many items from previously developed tools. Principalcomponents analysis on the first version of the instrument led to a revised instrument that will beadministered in Dec. 2011. Reliability and validity will be determined based upon the pilotstudy results. These results, supported by qualitative results, will also confirm the accuracy ofthe new model.Because this model is generic to professional development, it could be used beyond engineeringand applied to business, medicine, law or any other profession where there is an expectation ofsocial responsibility development. FIGURE 1. PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY DEVELOPMENT MODEL

ACS Style

Nathan E. Canney; Angela Bielefeldt. A Model for the Development of Personal and Professional Social Responsibility for Engineers. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.70.1 -25.70.19.

AMA Style

Nathan E. Canney, Angela Bielefeldt. A Model for the Development of Personal and Professional Social Responsibility for Engineers. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.70.1-25.70.19.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nathan E. Canney; Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "A Model for the Development of Personal and Professional Social Responsibility for Engineers." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.70.1-25.70.19.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

K-12 Engineering for Service: Do project-based service-learning design experiences impact attitudes in high school engineering students?Despite well-intentioned efforts, our nation’s education system is still not proficiently arming ourK-12 students with the tools to succeed and compete in science, technology, engineering, andmath (STEM) fields. To help close achievement gaps, engineering in K-12 classrooms offers areal-world application of the fundamental science and math principles that students learnthroughout their STEM education.K-12 engineering efforts are increasing around the nation, often grounded in current research oninquiry- and project-based learning, which has become popular as a result of the research inneuroscience and psychology on cognitive development. The past decade’s increase in project-based instructional methods in K-12 education has researchers touting its success as a catalyst forincreasing student learning of basic skills, complex problem solving, as well as professionalskills and creativity. As a result, the K-12 engineering community has tailored project-basedengineering design experiences for K-12 audiences. Project-based service-learning (PBSL)design experiences reportedly offer an added benefit of providing students with meaningfullearning experiences in a (often local) community-based context. Our preliminary analysissupports PBSL engineering design instruction as an intervention to increase high school studentinterest in engineering and possible persistence into engineering undergraduate enrollment.One goal of this paper is to further examine the impact of PBSL in existing high schoolengineering design courses. Specifically, we compared three sections of a 10th grade CreativeEngineering Design course at a partner high school course engaged in service-based projectswith four sections of the course engaged in non-service based projects at the same school. Usingmultiple quantitative data analysis methods informed by current education research, we analyzedhow the context of service-based engineering impacts students’ attitudes, efficacy, and identitywith regard to engineering and community service. We also examined any differential impactson students by gender and ethnicity. Specifically this research paper addresses, “When comparedto conventional design experiences, do PBSL design opportunities significantly increase K-12student identity and interest in engineering futures and, if so, are certain groups differentiallyaffected?”

ACS Style

Malinda S. Zarske; Janet L. Yowell; Jacquelyn F. Sullivan; Angela Bielefeldt; Daniel W. Knight; Travis O'hair. K-12 Engineering for Service: Do Project-based Service-learning Design Experiences Impact Attitudes in High School Engineering Students? 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.870.1 -25.870.15.

AMA Style

Malinda S. Zarske, Janet L. Yowell, Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, Angela Bielefeldt, Daniel W. Knight, Travis O'hair. K-12 Engineering for Service: Do Project-based Service-learning Design Experiences Impact Attitudes in High School Engineering Students? 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.870.1-25.870.15.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Malinda S. Zarske; Janet L. Yowell; Jacquelyn F. Sullivan; Angela Bielefeldt; Daniel W. Knight; Travis O'hair. 2020. "K-12 Engineering for Service: Do Project-based Service-learning Design Experiences Impact Attitudes in High School Engineering Students?" 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.870.1-25.870.15.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Service-Based Engineering Projects: Do they make a difference to students of different genders or engineering majors?Service learning courses have been well-established in the social sciences, and are evolving inengineering colleges as a mechanism to elevate student professional skills and provideengineering students with meaningful learning experiences in a community-based context.However, the potential for learning through service is still not often integrated throughoutengineering education curricula.Practicing engineering in a community context, partnered with a strong emphasis on teamworkand reflection, project-based service-learning (PBSL) programs have been suggested as effectiveapproaches to recruit and retain more students, including women and minority students, into thepipeline of engineering education and the engineering workforce. Unfortunately, little researchhas been reported to confirm this hypothesis. In fact, what, if any, groups of students areimpacted by service-learning experiences?The University’s First Year Engineering Projects (FYEP) course has been evolving over the lastdecade into a successful avenue for increasing the knowledge, skills, and retention of its studentsin engineering. One goal of this paper is to examine the impact of a community-based context infirst-year courses. Specifically, we compared five sections of the FYEP course who engaged inservice-based projects with five sections of the course who engaged in non-service basedprojects, all during the same semester. Using multiple methods informed by current educationresearch, we analyzed how the context of service-based engineering impacts students’ technicaland professional skills, confidence, attitudes towards community service, and intent to completetheir incoming major. We also examined any differential impacts on students by gender andmajor. Lastly, we looked at retention into the next year of engineering courses for all the studentswho enrolled in FYEP during this semester. Specifically this paper addresses, “When comparedto conventional design experiences, do service-based design opportunities significantly impactfirst-year engineering undergraduate student skills, attitudes, and retention by gender ormajor?”

ACS Style

Malinda S. Zarske; Derek T Reamon; Angela Bielefeldt; Daniel W. Knight. Service-based First-year Engineering Projects: Do They Make a Difference? 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.1157.1 -25.1157.15.

AMA Style

Malinda S. Zarske, Derek T Reamon, Angela Bielefeldt, Daniel W. Knight. Service-based First-year Engineering Projects: Do They Make a Difference? 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.1157.1-25.1157.15.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Malinda S. Zarske; Derek T Reamon; Angela Bielefeldt; Daniel W. Knight. 2020. "Service-based First-year Engineering Projects: Do They Make a Difference?" 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.1157.1-25.1157.15.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Similarities and Differences in Architectural, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Students’ Perceptions of the Body of KnowledgeThe skills and attributes desired for architectural (AR), civil, and environmental (EV) engineershave much in common. The structural and construction management sub-disciplines overlap to alarge extent between civil and architectural engineering. The water resources and environmentalsub-disciplines overlap to a large extent between civil and environmental engineering. Energyissues are popular among both architectural and environmental engineering students. Therefore,at many universities, the curricula for AR, civil, and EV engineering have significantcommonalities. At __ University all three programs share ~32% of the required course credits incommon, with a minimum of an additional 12% in common between Civil:AR and 10% incommon between Civil:EV. To explore similarities and differences in these disciplines asperceived by students, their opinions on a Body of Knowledge (BOK) survey, senior exit survey,and Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam performance were compared.The BOK survey was distributed to students as part of the lifelong learning module in the threeseparate capstone design courses. Students were asked to rank the ASCE’s 24 BOK2 outcomesfrom most to least important to their future careers. Among students in all three majors, designand problem solving were by far the top ranked outcomes; communication and teamwork wererated between 3 to 6 by all majors; and there was also consensus among the bottom rated items(public policy 22, social science 23, humanities 24). Outcomes with the greatest divergencebetween the majors were: mechanics, natural science, contemporary issues, math, andsustainability. Items with the greatest differences of opinion within AR majors based on max –min rank were: sustainability, science, and experiments (ranked by some as high as 1 and othersas low as 24). Among civil engineering students the greatest differences of opinion were for theoutcomes sustainability, ethics, math, and breadth. Finally, among EV students the greatestdifferences of opinion were for math and communication. Students also rated which outcomesthey felt needed greater coverage in the curriculum at __ University. On average, sustainabilityranked first or second in all three majors, and design ranked in the top three in all majors. Bothcivil and architectural engineering seniors rated problem solving and business & public policy inthe top five. Technical specialization was ranked 4 and 6 by environmental and architecturalmajors, respectively.Differences in the perceptions of senior students were also determined from graduating seniorsurveys administered by the College of Engineering. For example, using the calendar year 2010data, civil engineers ranked the importance of math, lifelong learning, and research higher thanarchitectural engineering majors. The perceived achievement of the outcomes was higher forarchitectural engineering vs. civil engineering majors for: communicate via drawings, designexperiments, teamwork, and modern tools; civil students were higher in knowledge ofcontemporary issues. Environmental engineers ranked their achievement higher in oralcommunication, written communication, social context, and ethics. In addition, theFundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam is required for students in all three majors, and theresults were compared. Recognizing similarities and differences points to items that areimportant for all students and should be emphasized, as well as the need to allow studentsflexibility to develop a skill set best suited to their future career aspirations.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Similarities and Differences in Architectural, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Students’ Perceptions of the Body of Knowledge. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.1158.1 -25.1158.19.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Similarities and Differences in Architectural, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Students’ Perceptions of the Body of Knowledge. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.1158.1-25.1158.19.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Similarities and Differences in Architectural, Civil, and Environmental Engineering Students’ Perceptions of the Body of Knowledge." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.1158.1-25.1158.19.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Competitions for Environmental Engineering Capstone Design Projects: Student Preferences and Learning OutcomesIn recent years, teams of students in the Environmental Engineering capstone senior designcourse at __ University (_U) have participated in two different design competitions or a varietyof other projects. For three years, teams have participated in the regional competition organizedby the local Water Environment Federation (WEF) chapter; in one year, the _U students won thenational competition. For two years, teams have participated in the AECOM design competition,and one _U team won the competition. This paper will compare and contrast the studentpreferences for different project types and the learning outcomes from the different projects.At the beginning each semester, students rated their project preferences and were placed ontoteams of 3 to 6 students. The design competitions were less popular than service learningprojects. In fall 2004 and 2006, student interest was insufficient to participate in the Metcalf &Eddy design competition. In spring 2009, student interest was equal in the regional WEF designcompetition to upgrade a local municipal wastewater treatment plant and a ___ University designcompetition for Haliburton with large cash prizes for the winners; no students preferred a realproject on end-of-life vehicle salvage for a client. In spring 2010, two international serviceprojects for developing communities were the most popular, followed by a _U service project,the AECOM drinking water project, the regional WEF competition drinking water project, andthe AECOM wastewater project; a single student team worked on each of the five most popularprojects. In spring 2011, the most popular projects were the service project for _U, the threeservice projects for local businesses/ communities, followed by the regional WEF designcompetition, the AECOM drinking water project, and the AECOM wastewater project.The learning outcomes evident from the graded course deliverables were similar in meeting thestated course objectives. Word content analyses on the final design reports revealed somedifferences between the competition projects and service learning projects, particularly withrespect to sustainability concepts. The social pillar was typically represented to a greater degreein the service learning projects as compared to the design competitions. Content analyses of theindividual student reflection essays will be presented in the conference paper.The design competition projects can provide strong learning outcomes. However, the AECOMproblems lack of a specific location and data. By comparison, the regional WEF designcompetition is based on a real project submitted by a local municipal utility. The ability to tourthe facility, receive detailed monitoring data from the plant, and interact with utility personnel isa strength of the WEF project. In both competition projects, the students practiced for the oralpresentations more than the non-competition teams, in particular extra time before the nationallevel competition. To date, multiple teams at our university have not competed on the sameproject, although this is possible and appears common at other universities for both designcompetitions. It was initially difficult to get students interested in participating in the designcompetitions, but now both competitions appear to have gained momentum and interest amongour students. In particular, alumni who participated on the winning teams have returned tomentor later student teams. These competition projects are recommended as good learningexperiences in capstone design courses.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Competitions for Environmental Engineering Capstone Design Projects: Student Preferences and Learning Outcomes. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.336.1 -25.336.18.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Competitions for Environmental Engineering Capstone Design Projects: Student Preferences and Learning Outcomes. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.336.1-25.336.18.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Competitions for Environmental Engineering Capstone Design Projects: Student Preferences and Learning Outcomes." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.336.1-25.336.18.

Conference paper
Published: 11 September 2020 in 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service Summit: Best Practices and Affinity MappingAlthough research has shown that different Learning Through Service (LTS) activities cansuccessfully meet a variety of learning outcomes for engineering students, the best practices,benefits, and challenges from a faculty perspective are poorly understood. A fall 2011 summitbrought together ~30 individuals to explore these questions. LTS as defined for the summitincluded both service-learning (in courses) and extracurricular activities with significant learningoutcomes (such as working on a design project for Engineers Without Borders). There are somecommon issues for these activities, as well as very unique attributes. The summit participantsindividually generated ideas about design of LTS, management of LTS, and assessment of LTSfrom a faculty perspective. About one-third of the group focused on each of these three themeareas. For each of these three elements, best practices, benefits, and pitfalls were explored.After the individual ideas were recorded on post-it notes, sub-groups of four to twelveindividuals clustered the ideas into broader theme areas. Similar exercises were conducted fromthe perspectives of the University, students, and community partners; this paper will focus on thefaculty perspective. The individual thoughts and themes will be analyzed and presented in theconference paper. Some preliminary findings are presented below.From a faculty perspective, LTS design best practices included: leadership; various programfeatures; resources; logistical support; training; community partners; promotion and tenureissues; student learning outcomes and ABET; and multi-disciplinary elements. Personal benefitsto faculty included adventure, leadership, delight, and teaching. Professional benefits to facultypotentially included funding, research, teaching, leadership, and recognition. A number ofpitfalls were also noted including time, rigid curricula, peer attitudes, resources, training,burnout, legal liability, assessment, student engagement, and communication with communitypartners.The group felt that engineering LTS assessment best practices may not yet be available. Forfaculty outcomes, assessment should include both professional development and selfdevelopment aspects. From the professional development side, faculty must be able todistinguish between assessment of LTS and LTS-related research. A good practice is to alignassessments with university goals, and student outcomes that encompass both the ABET A-Kand broader outcomes. Community assessment was believed to be one of the weakest elements.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; Chris Swan; John J. Duffy; Olga Pierrakos; Nathan E. Canney. Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service Summit: Best Practices and Affinity Mapping. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 25.546.1 -25.546.16.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt, Kurt Paterson, Chris Swan, John J. Duffy, Olga Pierrakos, Nathan E. Canney. Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service Summit: Best Practices and Affinity Mapping. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():25.546.1-25.546.16.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; Chris Swan; John J. Duffy; Olga Pierrakos; Nathan E. Canney. 2020. "Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service Summit: Best Practices and Affinity Mapping." 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 25.546.1-25.546.16.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The EFELTS Project - Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through ServiceAbstractThis paper outlines the development of a three-year effort that focuses on Learning ThroughService (LTS) – a pedagogical method that combines academic learning with service. EFELTSinvolves investigators from five, diverse institutions invoking a 4D Process (Discover, Distill,Design, and Disseminate) to a) evaluate the impacts on faculty currently engaged in LTS efforts(Goal 1) and b) empower additional faculty to implement LTS (Goal 2).Major activities to be undertaken during the EFELTS effort include: a) surveying and interviewing engaged faculty; b) convening a meeting of “expert” in LTS program/course designs, implementations, and assessments; c) conducting intensive faculty training workshops on LTS that lead to new LTS efforts at course and program levels; and d) sustaining faculty engagement via a continued dissemination of efforts.Assessment research methodologies (development and use) are integrated throughout theseactivities.Expectations from the effort range from engaging faculty to implement and support LTS inengineering education to expanding the list of appropriate teaching, learning and assessmentmethodologies that are appropriate and enhance engineering education. The EFELTS effort isalso expected to:  Expand the use of LTS in engineering education AND highlight LTS as a viable research endeavor and scholarly activity;  Explore the synergy and differences between curricular and extracurricular service activities in engineering education;  Identify challenges and facilitators to LTS for different faculty and institution types;  Place an importance on pedagogy in the development of future engineering faculty;  Create service-minded engineers who assist communities-in-need through engineering; and  Study whether service is, and should be, an accepted part of the engineering profession.

ACS Style

Christopher W. Swan; John J. Duffy; Kurt Paterson; Angela Bielefeldt; Olga Pierrakos. The EFELTS Project: Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 22.1444.1 -22.1444.14.

AMA Style

Christopher W. Swan, John J. Duffy, Kurt Paterson, Angela Bielefeldt, Olga Pierrakos. The EFELTS Project: Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():22.1444.1-22.1444.14.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Christopher W. Swan; John J. Duffy; Kurt Paterson; Angela Bielefeldt; Olga Pierrakos. 2020. "The EFELTS Project: Engineering Faculty Engagement in Learning Through Service." 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 22.1444.1-22.1444.14.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

In their own words: How engineering students view themselves as future engineers in societyAs the engineering profession advances, there is a recognition that engineers must interact acrossdisciplinary and cultural boundaries to successfully address complex problems. Directly orindirectly, an engineer’s work affects society and therefore it is critical that they give fullconsideration to those effects throughout the design process. The Engineering AccreditationCommission of ABET recognizes this in Criterion 3.h stating that students should possess “thebroad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global,economic, environmental, and societal context.” With the profession and engineering educatorspushing towards this goal, it seems critical to talk with students to find out how they view theengineering profession in society and, more specifically, how they see their roles, as futureengineers, in society.Twenty-five students representing Civil, Environmental, Mechanical, and AerospaceEngineering, mostly Juniors, Seniors and Graduate students, were engaged in conversationsaround their views of social responsibility and the role of engineering in society. Theseinterviews lasted 30-60 minutes and were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using emergentcoding consistent with ethnographic methods. Three different interview methods were used toelicit conversation; semi-structured interviews, interviews focused on questions from a surveyabout attitudes of personal and professional responsibility, and finally a variation of RappaportTimelines used to examine life events which students identified as formative for their views ofengineering and society. This paper discusses the main themes that emerged from theseinterviews, namely students’ perspectives on three key relationships: 1) themselves with society,2) engineering with society, and 3) themselves with engineering. Preliminary analysis highlightsa wide range of beliefs including minimalist perspectives of not intentionally harming people, todeeply held beliefs of responsibility due to one’s privilege. Students also appear to credithumanities courses and extracurricular activities more often as influencing their beliefs thanengineering courses.

ACS Style

Nathan E Canney; Tess Bowling; Angela Bielefeldt. In their own words: Engineering students’ views on the relationship between the engineering profession and society. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 23.724.1 -23.724.11.

AMA Style

Nathan E Canney, Tess Bowling, Angela Bielefeldt. In their own words: Engineering students’ views on the relationship between the engineering profession and society. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():23.724.1-23.724.11.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nathan E Canney; Tess Bowling; Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "In their own words: Engineering students’ views on the relationship between the engineering profession and society." 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 23.724.1-23.724.11.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

ISES – A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering StudentsAbstractOver the last few years, concerns have escalated among many national organizations thattechnical expertise is no longer solely sufficient for the development of future engineers.Additionally, in the United States engineering programs continue to struggle to attract students,especially women and minorities, despite decades of strategies to change these patterns.Independent of these challenges, students’ interest has exploded in extracurricular service efforts,notably through Engineers Without Borders. In some institutions, this service involvement hasfueled the implementation of Learning Through Service (LTS) in curricula. A growing body ofevidence suggests that LTS may provide significant advantages to engineering students, butindividual studies to-date have been limited in their duration and scope of assessment.This paper outlines a three-year project that will measure various indicators related to desirableattributes of future engineers, how these indicators are impacted by LTS efforts, and how theydevelop over the time of undergraduate education. The proposed three-year project is acollaborative effort involving four institutions diverse in size and culture. The evaluationconsists of a sequential but staggered longitudinal study of engineering students at these fourinstitutions that have LTS programs, either curricular, extracurricular or both. The impacts ofLTS on engineering students’ traditional technical attributes as well as a mix of non-technicalattributes will be studied; along the way, information on interest and persistence in engineeringwill be gathered.It is expected that the study will significantly add to the growing body of evidence that LTS haspositive benefits for engineering students, particularly those from underrepresented groups.Specifically, this project will: Create a methodology to assess the development of students’ skills as well as attitudes, beliefs, and identities; Determine whether extracurricular and curricular LTS opportunities offer similar benefits to all students and their universities; and Provide insight on effective engineering course and program design. Support the concepts espoused by various national foundations / associations / academies on the value in creating broadly- or holistically-thinking engineers; Create service-minded engineers, and assist communities-in-need through engineering; and Improve the image of engineers in the eyes of the general public, through promotion of service projects.

ACS Style

Christopher W. Swan; Kurt Paterson; Olga Pierrakos; Angela Bielefeldt; Bradley A. Striebig. ISES: A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering Students. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 22.979.1 -22.979.17.

AMA Style

Christopher W. Swan, Kurt Paterson, Olga Pierrakos, Angela Bielefeldt, Bradley A. Striebig. ISES: A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering Students. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():22.979.1-22.979.17.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Christopher W. Swan; Kurt Paterson; Olga Pierrakos; Angela Bielefeldt; Bradley A. Striebig. 2020. "ISES: A Longitudinal Study to Measure the Impacts of Service on Engineering Students." 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 22.979.1-22.979.17.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Faculty Perspectives on Service-Learning in Engineering Education: Challenges and Opportunities Service-learning is a teaching method in which students participate in organized serviceactivity for academic credit to meet identified community issues, with reflection by the studentson their service experience to further their understanding of course content. Over the past twodecades, service-learning has proliferated in higher education as a viable teaching and learningmethod. The pedagogy continues to gain momentum, and many colleges and universities in theUnited States have designed their engineering curriculum with hands on activities, includingservice-learning. Nevertheless, despite the curriculum overhaul, and increase in service-learningcourses in engineering, there has been limited study to evaluate the experiences of facultymembers that integrate service-learning in their courses. This study investigates how engineering faculty across different schools and departmentsdesign their service-learning courses. A qualitative research method based on direct facultyinterviews is used to make sense of their first-hand experiences and the ways that they intersect.Specifically, thirty interviews were conducted with engineering service-learning practitioners toexplore their interests, challenges, and impact of service-learning. Analysis of the interviewreveals 1) faculty members who are passionate about service-learning tend to play a leading rolein promoting service-learning within their institution; 2) faculty’s primary interest in integratingservice-learning is predominantly motivated by their teaching and student learning; 3) thechallenges that faculty encounter is related to course design, resource limitations, increase inworkload, and lack of adequate support from their institutions. The discussion focuses on theareas that appear to limit the effectiveness of service-learning; limitations and directions forfuture research are identified.

ACS Style

Bowa George Tucker; David O Kazmer; Olga Pierrakos; Chris Swan; Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; Annie Soisson. Faculty Perspectives on Service-Learning in Engineering Education: Challenges and Opportunities. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 23.596.1 -23.596.18.

AMA Style

Bowa George Tucker, David O Kazmer, Olga Pierrakos, Chris Swan, Angela Bielefeldt, Kurt Paterson, Annie Soisson. Faculty Perspectives on Service-Learning in Engineering Education: Challenges and Opportunities. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():23.596.1-23.596.18.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bowa George Tucker; David O Kazmer; Olga Pierrakos; Chris Swan; Angela Bielefeldt; Kurt Paterson; Annie Soisson. 2020. "Faculty Perspectives on Service-Learning in Engineering Education: Challenges and Opportunities." 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 23.596.1-23.596.18.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Incorporating Energy Issues into Environmental Engineering Abstract No single engineering discipline has integrated renewable and sustainable energy topics into their core curriculum. Environmental engineering programs may benefit from including sustainable energy in their curriculum. Many students in a freshman-level introductory Environmental Engineering (EVEN) course viewed EVEN as a potential major to study renewable energy, but many have since indicated that they plan to switch into other majors. Twelve of the 46 students in the class indicated that “energy” was their primary specialty choice (second only to 14 students stating an interest in water). Student interest in energy related topics was also strongly apparent among the applicants to a summer Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) program in EVEN, with 42 of 84 applicants stating an interest in working on research related to energy topics. These energy projects were the most popular among all of the 15 different research topics advertised. This paper describes the existing energy-related courses at the University of Colorado at Boulder. It also describes ways to incorporate sustainable energy into existing courses. Environmental engineering needs to determine what its niche will be in relation to sustainable energy topics, and train students in this important area. Background Energy-related issues are important to the sustainability of the planet, due to links with global climate change which has been associated with the combustion of fossil fuels. Energy issues are currently receiving a lot of news coverage. This is exciting many students about the possibilities of working in a career that would develop sustainable energy sources with fewer pollution effects. Meeting this challenge will require the efforts of scientists, engineers, and policy makers. Students with an interest in this field are currently struggling to determine the best major to pursue in college to enable them to pursue a career in this area. Catherine Peters proposed that civil/environmental engineering curricula should “teach students the fundamentals of sustainable energy, in addition to incorporating sustainable engineering and global warming issues14. To effectively engineer sustainable systems, energy flow must be understood. For example, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has estimated that about 4% of all electricity consumption in the U.S. is consumed by water and wastewater treatment and transmission, and that electricity accounts for 80% of municipal water treatment and distribution costs2. Environmental engineers have the potential to lead systematic analysis of products and processes from a life-cycle perspective. Environmental engineers may be the best suited of all the engineering disciplines to conduct these life-cycle analyses due to broad training in fundamentals that span almost the broadest range fundamental science and engineering disciplines. These topics include physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, and economics. Life cycle analyses (LCA) are also an important tool in traditional environmental engineering disciplines. Various water and wastewater treatment processes have undergone LCA by including energy, raw materials, pollution, and toxicity factors, with results published in peer reviewed literature6. This paper describes energy related curriculum and courses, and with how they relate to environmental engineering.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Incorporating Energy Issues Into Environmental Engineering. 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 13.729.1 -13.729.12.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Incorporating Energy Issues Into Environmental Engineering. 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():13.729.1-13.729.12.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Incorporating Energy Issues Into Environmental Engineering." 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 13.729.1-13.729.12.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The Enduring Impacts of Real Clients in Project-Based Service-Learning CoursesClient-based service-learning is increasingly prevalent in engineering education and is shown toimprove valuable technical and professional skills when properly executed. True service-learningavoids partnering students and community clients to provide services that do not meet anauthentic need in order to achieve desired student learning outcomes. Using this definition, themutually beneficial and direct interaction between the students and the client to solve a realproblem is indispensable for a service-learning experience. Conversely, other research suggeststhat working with a client is an unnecessary hassle; it is possible to create similar gains in bothstudents’ skills and attitudes toward community service as long as the project is representative ofan actual community issue.This paper examines to what extent the above claims are true and the impacts of directcommunity interaction on students’ attitudes and skills. To accomplish this, we analyze anestablished first-year engineering design course at a Large Public University, which reaches 42%of the first year engineering undergraduate student population per year and involves multipletypes of projects over each semester. Building upon previous research at this university, wedistinguish more rigorously between projects that involve a community client who is availablefor meetings and direct interaction, a theoretical or geographically distant client who does notinteract directly with students, and projects that are not client-centered. We compare students’professional and technical skills when in engaged in client-based projects to theoretical andnonexistent client projects. We also examine the endurance of gains in students’ practical skillsover time (1-2 years after the course) to determine if the skills gain in the service-learning groupremains elevated, in response to research that suggests student attitudes toward their technicalskills decline between first-year and capstone design projects. Using multiple methods informedby current education research, including examination of student attitude surveys and focusgroups with students, we provide support for the value that client-based service-learning projectsadd to overall student experiences. Specifically this paper addresses, “Do projects involvingdirect interaction with a community client have a greater and more enduring impact on students’skills and attitudes when compared to service-themed projects and projects lacking communitycollaboration?”

ACS Style

Malinda S Zarske; Dana E Schnee; Angela Bielefeldt; Derek T Reamon. The Impacts of Real Clients in Project-Based Service-Learning Courses. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 23.1213.1 -23.1213.19.

AMA Style

Malinda S Zarske, Dana E Schnee, Angela Bielefeldt, Derek T Reamon. The Impacts of Real Clients in Project-Based Service-Learning Courses. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():23.1213.1-23.1213.19.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Malinda S Zarske; Dana E Schnee; Angela Bielefeldt; Derek T Reamon. 2020. "The Impacts of Real Clients in Project-Based Service-Learning Courses." 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 23.1213.1-23.1213.19.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Service learning: Motivating students to engineer sustainablyAbstract The evolving engineering education paradigm is centered on the belief that solutions tocurrent and future problems must consider a human dimension. Inherent to this challenge is thenecessary expansion of technological solutions to encompass social, political, environmental,and economic dynamics of systems on a global scale. Correspondingly, the theme underlying allaspects of educational reform is adequate preparation for engineers to address global problems insustainable ways. Educators must work towards shifting engineering pedagogies to help studentslearn a more all-encompassing, human-centered, problem-solving approach. Across the country, institutions of higher education have undertaken the challenge ofincorporating sustainability into curricula through various forms of pedagogy. However, there islittle supporting evidence regarding the quality of these learning experiences, leaving theengineering education community with no robust or established way of measuring and/orcomparing the efficacy of different pedagogies. With recognition of the need to assesssustainable engineering programs, a deeper question is exhumed: What is the appropriateassessment measure(s) for a human centered learning experience? We contend that as teachingmethods shift towards a more holistic approach, assessment must evolve in parallel. Our research involves developing assessment instruments to measure the efficacy ofsustainable engineering courses or programs. Using two complementary instruments, we willexplore whether service learning has influenced students’ knowledge of and motivation topractice sustainable engineering. Our rationale for this exploration rests in the experientialaspects of learning through service; rather than learning about sustainable engineering in aclassroom, students are instilled with the humanistic nature of sustainable engineering throughcommunity involvement. The first instrument is an open-ended, reality-based question designedto measure students’ levels of understanding of sustainable engineering. The second instrumentis an online survey designed to measure students’ confidence, motivation and affect in thesustainable engineering domain. In this paper, we describe the instrument development andvalidation, the results of our pilot study, and future dissemination of validated assessmentinstruments.

ACS Style

Jonathan Wiggins; Mary E. McCormick; Angela Bielefeldt; Christopher W. Swan; Kurt Paterson. Students and Sustainability: Assessing Students' Understanding of Sustainability from Service Learning Experiences. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 22.1345.1 -22.1345.11.

AMA Style

Jonathan Wiggins, Mary E. McCormick, Angela Bielefeldt, Christopher W. Swan, Kurt Paterson. Students and Sustainability: Assessing Students' Understanding of Sustainability from Service Learning Experiences. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():22.1345.1-22.1345.11.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jonathan Wiggins; Mary E. McCormick; Angela Bielefeldt; Christopher W. Swan; Kurt Paterson. 2020. "Students and Sustainability: Assessing Students' Understanding of Sustainability from Service Learning Experiences." 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 22.1345.1-22.1345.11.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Global Interests and Experience among First-Year Civil Engineering StudentsAbstractGlobalization is one of the desired outcomes for civil engineers articulated in the ASCE Body ofKnowledge (BOK2). However, the general level of awareness and interest of our students inglobal issues is poorly understood. Anecdotal evidence for global interest is the high level ofstudent participation in Engineers Without Borders (EWB) around the country. Student interestand awareness of global issues may impact the ease with which civil engineering programs caninstill the requisite globalization knowledge, comprehension, and application competencies inour students. This project explored issues related to globalization among students enrolled in afirst-year introduction to civil engineering course. First, some of the students completed avoluntary survey at the beginning of the semester. In 2007, 2008, and 2010, 66%, 60%, and 56%of the students, respectively, self-reported that they had lived in and/or traveled to three or morecountries. Only a small fraction had participated in service activities outside the U.S.; 10%,10%, and 10% in 2007, 2008, and 2010, respectively. The same survey measured students’“universal diverse orientation” (UDO) using the previously-validated MGUDS-S instrument;these scores increased slightly over time from 12.8, 12.9, and 13.2 in 2007, 2008, and 2010,respectively. In 2010 the overall UDO score was higher among male students who had traveledto 3 or more countries compared to less widely traveled male students (13.5 vs. 12.6,respectively). Student opinions on four other questions related to international aspects andstakeholder impacts were also collected. Global travel experience was only found to correlate todifferences in the level of agreement (5-point Likert scale) for one of the four questions: Thetechnology that is used in the US is likely the best technology to use to solve similar technicalproblems in other countries; average response 3.5 for students with less global travel comparedto average response of 4.1 for students who had traveled to 3 or more countries. In the first homework assignment, students were asked to select the five knowledge orskills that they believed were the most important for civil engineers. They were given the BOK2as a reference for this assignment. In fall 2010 only 3 of 55 students rated globalization in theirtop 5; similar to the results from a survey of senior civil engineering students who rankedglobalization in the bottom 3 of the 24 BOK2 topics. For their term papers, students rated their interest level in topics which ranged from local(3 in state) to national (6 additional in U.S.) to international (6 projects). Their relative interest inthese topics indicates the degree to which the first year students are interested in civilengineering globally. In 2009 the topics most frequently rated in the top 4 (of 15 options) by thestudents were: China’s Olympic structures, the World Trade Center, and Palm Island. Thus 2 ofthe top 3 student choices were international projects. On average, two of the four projectsselected by individual students were international; only 1 of the 45 students did not select anyinternational projects in their top 4. Additional data on student interest in international vs.domestic projects will become available for the fall 2010 class. Due to group presentations bythe students to their peers, all students in the course learned something about both theinternational and domestic projects. Other required content in the course touches on global issues. Sustainable developmentchallenges were presented, particularly the need for water and sanitation, differences inenvironmental footprint, and the human development index. In the ethics unit, one of the threemoral exemplar choices was Fred Cuny, who worked in global development. When discussingthe ASCE Infrastructure Report Card some students were interested in how the U.S.infrastructure compared to global infrastructure, and the World Economic Forum GlobalCompetitiveness Report results were supplied to all students. In the final reflective essays for thecourse, 25% of the students in 2009 and only 14% of the students in 2008 included global,international, and/or third world issues in their final discussion. Content analysis of the finalcourse essays will also be conducted in 2010. This research found indications that many civil engineering students are interested inglobal issues. International examples were readily incorporated into the freshman introductorycourse, and could form the basis for examples in other courses. This cumulative exposure toglobal issues could develop the requisite globalization competencies in students. Some studentsmay also take advantage of significant international experiences through international certificateprograms, study abroad, and extracurricular service activities such as EWB.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Global Interests and Experience Among First-Year Civil Engineering Students. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 22.751.1 -22.751.21.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Global Interests and Experience Among First-Year Civil Engineering Students. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():22.751.1-22.751.21.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Global Interests and Experience Among First-Year Civil Engineering Students." 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 22.751.1-22.751.21.

Conference paper
Published: 04 September 2020 in 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Cultural Competency Assessment Abstract Cultural competency is defined as the ability to effectively interact with people from diverse cultures and recognize the importance of cultural differences. These skills will be increasingly important for environmental engineers who work on teams with professionals from diverse backgrounds and design solutions to global problems. For example, these skills are particularly important when engaging in projects for Engineers Without Borders (EWB) and similar organizations. In order to evaluate if curriculum help develop these skills in students, an assessment instrument is needed. A wide variety of such surveys have been developed and validated, although generally for settings outside engineering academia. In this research, the Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale short form (MGUDS-S) was used. It is a written 15 question survey with responses on a 6-point Likert scale. It evaluates universal-diverse orientation (UDO) and has been most widely used in medical school settings. The overall UDO score is composed of three subscales: diversity of contact, relativistic appreciation, and discomfort with differences. The author also added four of the Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitudes Survey (PFEAS) questions and eight self-created questions to the survey, in addition to five demographic questions. The self-created questions were specific to engineering. This survey was administered in three freshmen courses (environmental, civil, and undeclared engineering) and two senior design courses (environmental and civil engineering) in fall 2006. Four of the eight self-created questions were modified and two additional demographic questions were added prior to administering the survey in two freshmen courses (environmental and civil engineering) and an Engineering for the Developing World course for seniors and graduate students in fall 2007. The results from the survey and evaluation of its usefulness are presented. Background Cultural competency (CC) has many potential definitions.14,15,17,20,22 In this work CC is defined as the ability to effectively interact with people from diverse cultures and recognize the importance of cultural differences. This is closely related to concepts such as intercultural competence13, intercultural sensitivity 1,2,13, (cross)-cultural sensitivity 2,14,23, and cultural humility 14,22. In general, CC requires self-awareness, awareness of differences in cultures, and reflection on the implications of these differences. Cultural competency is important for engineers so that they can be effective in working on teams with engineers, scientists, and others from diverse races and cultural backgrounds. CC is also critical to enable engineers to understand the needs of global clients who will use the engineered product, process, or project. Without an understanding of cultural issues, it is impossible for engineers to create appropriate technology solutions to the problems they are asked to solve. Cultural competency is also important in a number of other disciplines including medicine15 and business23. This skill has become increasing important as the world “flattens”. In a survey of higher education institutions, Deardorff8 found that 54% of the 24 participating institutions (33% survey response rate; 54% private, 67% teaching) said they were encouraging cross-cultural development, but did not assess the cross-cultural competence of students in their programs.

ACS Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Cultural Competency Assessment. 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings 2020, 13.345.1 -13.345.13.

AMA Style

Angela Bielefeldt. Cultural Competency Assessment. 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. 2020; ():13.345.1-13.345.13.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Angela Bielefeldt. 2020. "Cultural Competency Assessment." 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings , no. : 13.345.1-13.345.13.