1

Educating the

well-rounded engineer

Insights from the Academic Pathways Study

2009 October 20Frontiers in Education 2009

Cindy Atman, DirectorCenter for the Advancement of Engineering EducationUniversity of Washington

Based upon work supported by National Science Foundation Grant No. ESI-0227558. Opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

Academic Pathways Study

APS lead: Sheri Sheppard

APS team: Cynthia Atman, Lorraine Fleming, Ronald Miller, Karl Smith, Reed Stevens, Ruth Streveler

CAEE Leadership team: Robin Adams, Cynthia Atman, Sheri Sheppard, Lorraine Fleming, Larry Leifer, Ronald Miller, Barbara Olds, Karl Smith, Reed Stevens, Ruth Streveler, Jennifer Turns

2FIE 2009, Atman

2

CAEE-related sessions at FIE How Do Engineering Educators

Take Student Difference Into Account?Yesterday, 4:30–6:00 pm (M4E); B. Sattler, J. Turns, K. Gygi

Research Findings on Engineering Student Learning and Engineering TeachingToday, 10:00–11:30 am, El MiradorEast (T2A); D. Chachra et al.

Developing Engineering Student’s Philosophical Inquiry Skills Today, 3:30–5:00 pm, El MiradorWest (T4B); R. Korte & K. Smith

Outside the Classroom: Gender Differences in Extracurricular Activities of Engineering StudentsTomorrow, 8:00–9:45 am, La Condesa West (W1D); D. Chachra, H. L. Chen, D. Kilgore, S. D. Sheppard

We are Teaching Engineering Students What They Need to Know, Aren’t We?Tomorrow, 8:00–9:45 am, La Espada (W1E); H. Matusovich, R. Streveler, R. Miller

3FIE 2009, Atman

Selected APS findings:

Successful engineering students

Learning skills and language of engineering,e.g., teamwork, communication

Becoming more confident with design

Developing identity as engineers

Better understanding what engineers do,e.g., through co-ops, internships

Good persistence rates, but little in-migration

4FIE 2009, Atman

3

Selected APS findings:

ChallengesHeavy workload, competitive culture

Disconnect between early math/science courses and “real engineering”

Difficult transition from individual work on “textbook” problems to teaming on open-ended problems

Gendered experiences, confidence

5FIE 2009, Atman

6FIE 2009, Atman

4

Which three are the most

important?

Contemporary issues

Societal context

Global context

Conducting experiments

Professionalism

Management skills

Science

Business knowledge

Leadership

Engineering tools

Life-long learning

Data analysis

Math

Creativity

Design

Ethics

Engineering analysis

Teamwork

Communication

Problem solving

7FIE 2009, Atman

Importance (seniors)

8FIE 2009, Atman

Global contextSocietal context

Contemporary issues

5

Preparedness(seniors, self-report)

9FIE 2009, Atman

Contemporary issues

Global context

Societal context

The well-rounded engineer

Understanding engineering as discipline and profession

Life-long learning

“…the engineer of 2020 will learn

continuously throughout his or her career, not just about engineering but also about history, politics, business, and so forth.”

Consideration of broader context“Successful engineers in 2020 will, as they always have, recognize the broader contexts that are intertwined in technology and its application in society.”

10FIE 2009, Atman

6

Research methods & samples

NSSE national sample (2002, 2006–2007)

National Survey of Student Engagement

N = 11,819; matched pairs (first-year and senior) from 247 institutions

Longitudinal cohort (2003–2007)

Surveys, structured interviews, ethnographic interviews and observations, engineering design tasks

N 160,* from four campuses

Broad national sample (Spring 2008)

APPLES2 survey

N = 4,266,* cross-sectional sample from 21 engineering colleges

Workplace cohort (2007)

Interviews

N = 17, early-career engineers at a U.S.-based, global manufacturer

*Oversampled for underrepresented groups

11

N

L

B

W

FIE 2009, Atman

12

engineering curriculum

1 2 3 4

Undergraduate engineering education

FIE 2009, Atman

A. Pathways in

B. Pathways through

C. Pathways out

7

1 2 3

13

A. Pathways in

1 2 3 4

FIE 2009, Atman

Outline

A. Pathways in

Student motivation

B. Pathways through

1. What we offer

2. What students learn

C. Pathways out

Career choices

Early-career engineers

14FIE 2009, Atman

8

Motivation to study engineering

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Intrinsicpsychological

Intrinsicbehavioral

Socialgood

Financial Mentorinfluence

Parentalinfluence

Mea

n s

core

Motivational construct

15FIE 2009, Atman

B

Seniors

N = 1,130

Motivation to study engineering

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Intrinsicpsychological

Intrinsicbehavioral

Socialgood

Financial Mentorinfluence

Parentalinfluence

Mea

n s

core

Motivational construct

womenmen

16FIE 2009, Atman

B

Seniors

*p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001; N = 326 women + 795 men

*** *** *

9

RECAP:

Student motivationEngineering majors are motivated in part by

the opportunity to be well-rounded.

Social good

Potentially part of intrinsic psychological, behavioral

17FIE 2009, Atman

DISCUSSION:

Pathways in

Do these findings matchyour experiences on your campus?

18FIE 2009, Atman

10

1 2 3 4

19

B. Pathways through

math

science

engineeringanalysis capstone

internship/research

FIE 2009, Atman

design

Outline

A. Pathways in

Student motivation

B. Pathways through

1. What we offer

2. What students learn

C. Pathways out

Career choices

Early-career engineers

20FIE 2009, Atman

11

Engineering vs. other majors:

Educational experiences (seniors)

HIGH

Culminating senior experience

95%

Practicum/co-op/ internship/field experience

86%

LOW

Study abroad 22%

Indep. study/self-designed major

23%

Foreign language coursework

34%

21

(% engineering seniors)

FIE 2009, Atman

N

Engineering vs. other majors:

Educational experiences

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Engineering Science, Tech.,Math

Computer Science

Business Social Sciences

Arts & Humanities

Other

Foreign languageCulminating experience

22FIE 2009, Atman

N

Seniors

12

What counts as engineering?

23FIE 2009, Atman

1 2 3 4well-defined

problems

single solution

individual

“idealized world”open-ended

problems

multiple solutions

teams

“real world”

L

RECAP:

What we offerCompared with other majors, we offer more

opportunities for practice, but place less emphasis on opportunities for a well-rounded education.

The structure of our curriculum often begins with “idealized world” that doesn’t necessarily require well-roundedness, and doesn’t get to “real world” which requires well-roundedness until the later years.

24FIE 2009, Atman

13

Outline

A. Pathways in

Student motivation

B. Pathways through

1. What we offer

2. What students learn

C. Pathways out

Career choices

Early-career engineers

25FIE 2009, Atman

Engineering vs. other majors:

Engagement and outcomes scales

HIGH

FY higher order thinking practices

71

FY gains, practical competence

73

Sr gains, practical competence

82

LOW

26

FY gains, gen ed 62

Sr gains, personal & social developm’t

49

Sr integrative learning practices

55

Sr reflective learning practices

54

(0–100 scale)

FIE 2009, Atman

N

14

Abstracting

Brainstorming

Building

Communicating

Decomposing

Evaluating

Generating alternatives

Goal setting

Identifying constraints

Imagining

Iterating

Making decisions

Making trade-offs

Modeling

Planning

Prototyping

Seeking information

Sketching

Synthesizing

Testing

Understanding the problem

Using creativity

Visualizing

Important design activities

“Of the twenty-three design activities below, please put a check mark next to the SIX MOST IMPORTANT:

27FIE 2009, Atman

L

Important design activities

28

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

IteratingSketching

SynthesizingDecomposing

Making trade-offsAbstractingPrototyping

ImaginingModeling

Generating alternativesEvaluating

Identifying ConstraintsBuilding

Seeking InformationGoal Setting

VisualizingTesting

Using creativityMaking decisions

BrainstormingPlanning

CommunicatingUnderstanding the problem

% participants including item among six "most important"

Year 1

FIE 2009, Atman

L

N = 89

15

Important design activities, changes

29

Vis

ual

izin

g*

*

Pla

nn

ing

*

Co

mm

un

icat

ing

*

Usi

ng

cre

ativ

ity

Bu

ildin

g

Pro

toty

pin

g

Eva

luat

ing

Mo

del

ing

Iter

atin

g*

*

IDin

g c

on

stra

ints

**

*

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%d

iffe

ren

ce in

% f

rom

Yea

r 1

to 4

up inYear 4

down inYear 4

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; N = 89

FIE 2009, Atman

L

What counts as engineering:

The student experience

30FIE 2009, Atman

1 2 3 4well-defined

problems

single solution

individual

“idealized world”open-ended

problems

multiple solutions

teams

“real world”

L

16

Alternating design tasks

31FIE 2009, Atman

1 2 3 4Midwest

floodsMidwest

floods

Streetcrossing

Streetcrossing

L

Midwest floods design task

10-minute, paper-and-pencil design task

“Over the summer the Midwest experienced massive flooding of the Mississippi River. What factors would you take into account in designing a retaining wall system for the Mississippi?”

32FIE 2009, Atman

L

17

Year 3 floods task responses

33FIE 2009, Atman

L

people

safetyenvironment

Floods coding scheme

34FIE 2009, Atman

broad context

close context

L

18

35

Close/broad contextual factors

Broad context factors: social, natural, riverbank, surroundings, etc. “aesthetic appeal – is it going to draw local

complaint?” “the surrounding habitat – make sure little or no

damage is done to the environment” “would wall impact use of the river by industry?”

Close context factors: technical, wall, logistical, water, etc. “cost of materials” “check the budget available for the operation” “how to contain the river water that has flooded out”

L

FIE 2009, Atman

36

More factors in Year 3

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Year 3

Year 1

average number of factors

N = 69 (longitudinal sample)p < 0.001 (total factors)

L

FIE 2009, Atman

19

37

More close context in Year 3

close

close

broad

broad

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Year 3

Year 1

average number of factors

N = 69 (longitudinal sample)p < 0.001 (total factors and close context factors)

L

FIE 2009, Atman

Gender differences

Important design activities

Women were less likely to select Building, more likely to select Seeking information and Goalsetting.

Midwest floods

Women cited more factors than men.

Specifically, women cited more broad context factors than men.

38FIE 2009, Atman

L

20

Alternating design tasks

39FIE 2009, Atman

1 2 3 4Midwest

floodsMidwest

floods

Streetcrossing

Streetcrossing

L

RECAP:

What we offer, what students learn

Just as they are given more opportunitiesto practice than other majors…

…students report greater gainsin practical competence.

Just as opportunities to become well-rounded are not emphasized…

…students report fewer gains in areasrelated to well-roundedness (e.g., life-long

learning skills, personal development).

40FIE 2009, Atman

21

RECAP:

What we offer, what students learn

Reflecting the trajectory of their curriculum, from “idealized world” to “real world,” from well-defined problems to more open-ended design…

…students develop in their use ofthe language of engineering and design

Reflecting the emphasis on practical competence relative to well-roundedness…

…students may not exhibit adequate attentionto context when engaged in design.

41FIE 2009, Atman

DISCUSSION:

Pathways through

42FIE 2009, Atman

Do these findings matchyour experiences on your campus?

22

2 3 4

43

C. Pathways out

FIE 2009, Atman

Outline

A. Pathways in

Student motivation

B. Pathways through

1. What we offer

2. What students learn

C. Pathways out

Career choices

Early-career engineers

44FIE 2009, Atman

23

Career choices

Students who complete a major in engineering are not necessarily committed to careers in engineering or even STEM.

Commitment to engineering career after graduation varies with institution.

Student career decisions strongly swayed by specific, significant experience, e.g., internship, faculty interaction, mentor advice.

45FIE 2009, Atman

BL

Early career engineers

Perception of not doing a lot of “real engineering”

“I don’t feel like I’ve had to actually do engineering”

Problems highly uncertain, ambiguous, complex

“In the real world, it’s a lot more difficult to model things…There’s a lot more variables involved…”

More practical, hands-on work“There’s no mathematical formula you could use, like you would in school…”

46FIE 2009, Atman

W

24

RECAP:

Pathways outGraduates don’t always choose engineering

careers

When they do, they don’t always feel well-rounded enough

47FIE 2009, Atman

Outline

A. Pathways in

Student motivation

B. Pathways through

1. What we offer

2. What students learn

C. Pathways out

Career choices

Early-career engineers

48FIE 2009, Atman

25

49

1 2 3 4

FIE 2009, Atman

Supporting student pathways

Student voices: Significant learning opportunities

Relevant and meaningful (applicable, experiential, real-world, hands-on)

Challenge, conflict, dilemma, frustration, and/or obstacles

Promotes self-directed learning

Student ownership of the experience

Facilitates a broader vision, shows how the pieces fit together

50FIE 2009, Atman

L

26

Senior-year setbacks

Compared with first-years, seniors…

…are less involved in engineering courses.

…interact more frequently with instructors.

…are less satisfied with instructors.

…are less satisfied with their college experiences.

51FIE 2009, Atman

B

The well-rounded engineer

Understanding engineering as discipline and profession

Life-long learning

“…the engineer of 2020 will learn

continuously throughout his or her career, not just about engineering but also about history, politics, business, and so forth.”

Consideration of broader context“Successful engineers in 2020 will, as they always have, recognize the broader contexts that are intertwined in technology and its application in society.”

52FIE 2009, Atman

27

Recalling the large list of

learning outcomes

Contemporary issues

Societal context

Global context

Conducting experiments

Professionalism

Management skills

Science

Business knowledge

Leadership

Engineering tools

Life-long learning

Data analysis

Math

Creativity

Design

Ethics

Engineering analysis

Teamwork

Communication

Problem solving

53FIE 2009, Atman

54

Important skills/knowledge

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Contemporary issuesSocietal context

Global contextConducting experiments

ProfessionalismManagement skills

ScienceBusiness knowledge

LeadershipEngineering tools

MathData analysis

Life-long learningCreativity

DesignEthics

Engineering analysisTeamwork

CommunicationProblem solving

% participants including item among five "most important"

all (109)

Year 4

FIE 2009, Atman

L

28

55

Skills/knowledge preparedness

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Contemporary issuesBusiness knowledge

Global contextSocietal context

Management skillsConducting experiments

Engineering toolsDesign

ScienceEthics

CreativityEngineering analysis

Life-long learningLeadership

MathData analysis

ProfessionalismCommunicationProblem solving

Teamwork

% participants, "more prepared"

all (111)

Year 4

FIE 2009, Atman

L

Campuses responding

Bringing understanding of real engineering to the early years…

Enabling informed choices (major, career)

Enabling students who care about social good and broader goals to see that they fit

Empowering students to own their learning, become life-long learners

Helping students develop “interdisciplinary respect”

56FIE 2009, Atman

29

Campuses responding

Helping faculty and administrators recognize…

that listening to students is important,

that what we assess signals what we value, and

that when we reinforce one narrow model of engineering, we lose important voices and talent.

57FIE 2009, Atman

DISCUSSION

58FIE 2009, Atman

How are you supporting student pathways on your campus?

30

1 2 3 4

59

Many pathways

math

science

engineeringanalysis capstone

internship/research

FIE 2009, Atman

design

Paving

walkways

Student experiences vary widely.

It is important to support the many pathways that students take.

60FIE 2009, Atman

Building sidewalkswhere paths are worn

2.0, Flickr user “Trois Têtes (TT) / Gareth”

31

61FIE 2009, Atman

Selected APS referencesAtman, C. J., Kilgore, D., & McKenna, A. F. (2008). Characterizing design learning through the use of language: A mixed-methods study of engineering designers. J. of Engineering Education, 97(3).

Atman, C. J., Kilgore, D., Yasuhara, K., & Morozov, A. (2008). Considering context over time: Emerging findings from a longitudinal study of engineering students. Research on Engineering Education Symposium, Davos, Switzerland.

Korte, R., Sheppard, S. D., & Jordan, W. C. (2008). A qualitative study of the early work experiences of recent graduates in engineering. In Procs. of the 2008 ASEE Annual Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.

Lichtenstein, G., Loshbaugh, H. G., Claar, B., Chen, H. L., Jackson, K., & Sheppard, S. D. (2008). An engineering major does not (necessarily) an engineer make: Career decision-making among undergraduate engineering majors. J. of Engineering Education, 98(3).

Lichtenstein, G., McCormick, A. C., Sheppard, S. D., & Puma, J. (2009). Retention is not the problem: A national study of academic persistence and engagement of undergraduate engineers compared to other majors. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, California.

Sheppard, S. D., Atman, C. J., et al. (2009). CAEE TR-09-02, Exploring the engineering student experience: Findings from the Academic Pathways of People Learning Engineering Survey (APPLES).

Stevens, R., O’Connor, K., Garrison, L., Jocuns, A., & Amos, D.M. (2008). Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning. J. of Engineering Education, 97(3).

62FIE 2009, Atman

32

63

http://www.engr.washington.edu/caee/

This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. ESI-0227558, which funds the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE). Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

CAEE is a collaboration of five partner universities: Colorado School of Mines, Howard University, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, and University of Washington.

FIE 2009, Atman