Developing Change-Making Engineers

• In Event: Changing the Professional Formation of Engineers: Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer Science Departments

Abstract

Purpose
We envision an engineering canon that empowers graduates to impact society by innovating within the contexts of social justice, peace, humanitarian advancement, and sustainable practices.

Theoretical framework
Under what conditions does shared leadership produce transformational change in higher education? With funding from the National Science Foundation as a catalyst, this university applies a transformational leadership approach (Avolio & Bass 1995; Bass 1997; Burns 1978) to generate “revolutionary” change within the engineering programs. In the context of engineering education, limited research has specifically examined how leadership affects organizational changes. One notable exception is the analysis offered by Ruth Graham, a consultant for the Royal Academy of Engineering, who suggests that “successful programs of major change [in engineering education] typically eschew an incremental approach; they opt for new approaches, developed in-house to suit institutional priorities and are deliberately designed to be different… successful systemic change often springs from a widespread acknowledgement among faculty that educational reform is unavoidable; a shared recognition that forges a sense of common purpose” (Graham, 2012a). A report published by the UK Royal Academy of Engineering suggests that what characterizes resilient changes in engineering education is the extent to which engineering programs are able to collect evidence, engage engineering leaders (department heads and deans), and consult external perspectives, among other practices (Graham, 2012b).

Methods & data sources
Faculty focus groups were conducted to assess preliminary responses to the proposal. Subsequently, we employed an active participatory approach to engage faculty members in a discussion about changemaking. This process elicited a number of themes.

Results & Scholarly significance
Preliminary results indicate that transformational leadership practices are successful when: external stakeholders are engaged with the intention of connecting technical topics to professional practice; a discussion of changemaking social principles aligns with technical topics; and when new faculty members are included as leaders of the project planning process.
Three successful outcomes include:
A new program in general engineering provides a safe incubator for new ideas, classes and collaborations. An example of an innovative class is “Drones for Peace”- a collaboration between an engineering professor and a peace studies professor including students from engineering, peace, and other departments across campus.
User-Centered Design: the first engineering course of its type in the US required of all students that satisfies a campus-wide diversity requirement. This emphasizes the socio-technical nature of engineering for students early in the curriculum.
Industry Scholars: a program developed by the school’s advisory board with participants from all programs. This program targets first and second year engineering students and helps them learn about professional skills from industry practitioners and connect to internships.

Authors

• Susan M. Lord, University of San Diego

• Michelle M. Camacho

• Chell Roberts

• Rick Olson

• Ming Huang

• Leonard Perry