What Does It Take to Become a Good Engineer?: Identifying Cross-National Engineering Student Profiles According to Perceived Importance of Skills
What Does It Take to Become a Good Engineer?: Identifying Cross-National Engineering Student Profiles According to Perceived Importance of Skills
复制标题
成为一名优秀工程师需要什么？：根据技能的重要性识别跨国工程学生的概况
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Niels Mejlgaard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sanne Haase;Helen L. Chen;S. Sheppard;A. Kolmos;Niels Mejlgaard
未来的工程师除了数学和科学技能外，还应具备一系列能力。本文以工科学生为对象，探讨他们认为成为一名优秀工程师需要什么。通过对美国和丹麦一年级工程专业学生关于数学/科学技能、人际关系和专业技能对成功工程的重要性的看法进行大规模调查，确定了这些学生的概况。根据两国两种技能类型中每一种的高和低重要性评估的组合，将一年级学生分为四组。这导致分析衍生的群体强调数学/科学技能，人际交往和专业技能，这两种技能类型，而不是任何技能。这些群体之间的差异和相似之处进行了探讨，在相对群体规模和性别组成，信心水平，学习工程的动机。研究结果表明，四个工程师学生群体在动机和信心方面具有不同的特征，并且可能需要不同的教育方法才能成为具有广泛思维的工程师。除了对每个国家内部的群体差异进行探索性调查外，本文还考察了这四个群体特征是否局限于全国范围内，或者两国工程专业学生是否存在共同的倾向。该文件有助于工程教育的文献，并为通知工程教育工作者和机构世界各地的新见解的期望和实际的学生谁是在他们的道路工程教育的开始的看法。
Engineers of the future are expected to possess a range of competencies in addition to math and science skills. This paper turns toengineering students to explore what they think it takes to become a good engineer. Profiles are identified by means of a large-scalesurvey-based investigation of the perceptions of first year engineering students in the US and in Denmark with respect to theimportance of math/science skills and interpersonal and professional skills for successful engineering. Four groups of first yearengineering students are defined according to combinations of high and low importance assessments of each of the two skill typesin both countries. This leads to analytically derived groups emphasizing math/science skills, interpersonal and professional skills,both skill types, and none of the skills. Differences and similarities between these groups are explored in terms of relative groupsizes and gender composition, levels of confidence, and motivation to study engineering. The findings show that the fourengineering student groups have distinct profiles with different characteristics in terms of motivation and confidence and whichmay each require different educational approaches to become broad thinking engineers. Apart from the exploratory investigation ofgroup differences within each country, the paper also examines whether the four group profiles are nationally confined or ifcommon tendencies shared by engineering students in both countries exist. The paper contributes to the literature on engineeringeducation and serves to inform engineering educators and institutions worldwide with new insights into the expectations andperceptions of actual students who are at the very beginning of their pathway to an engineering education.