What Competencies Should Undergraduate Engineering Programs Emphasize? A Dilemma of Curricular Design that Practitioners' Opinions Can Inform.

Designing a curriculum is a multifaceted challenge. Issues concerning implementation of the curriculum plan must be considered simultaneously with questions about what competencies students should have upon graduation and what the relative emphasis should be among those competencies. These questions were addressed with data from twelve studies in which 10,203 engineering graduates rated the importance of various competencies. All the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) competencies are deemed important as well as additional competencies, including decision-making (highest importance), commitment to achieving goals, the ability to integrate theory and practice effectively in work settings, leadership skills, and project management (lowest importance). The pattern of importance ratings for respondents overall holds across sub-groups, with rare exceptions. Every statistically significant difference is for a subgroup based on work environment or academic discipline, not demographic, developmental, or time-related variables. This is consistent with Holland’s theory, which predicts that differences in the importance ratings of competencies will be based on undergraduate major and work environment. Engineering graduates perceive the competencies as professional competencies and technical competencies. In the meta-analysis, the sequence of professional competencies is: oral communication (most important), written communication, ethics, life-long learning, teamwork, contemporary issues, and understanding the impact of one’s work (least important). The sequence of technical competencies is: problem solving (most important), data analysis, engineering tools, design, “math, science, and engineering knowledge”, and experiments (least important). Engineering graduates across demographic groups and most majors and work environments consistently rate a top cluster of competencies – problem solving, communication, and data analysis – as significantly more important than a bottom cluster of competencies – contemporary issues, experiments, and understanding the impact of one’s work. Competencies in the intermediate cluster – ethics, life-long learning, teamwork, engineering tools, design, “math, science, and engineering knowledge” – may be statistically tied to the top or bottom clusters, depending on work environment or academic discipline. The few exceptions to this pattern pertain to repositioning of one or two competencies. Therefore, the clusters, the sequence for the professional competencies and the technical competencies are an excellent first approximation for curriculum design in any engineering major.Ph.D.EducationUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/60691/1/hpassow_1.pd

Engineering Students' Perceptions of and Attitudes Towards Cheating

Academic dishonesty has become a serious problem at institutions of higher learning. This is particularly true in engineering where, according to previous research, engineering undergraduates are among the most likely to cheat in college. To investigate this concern, the authors embarked on a research project whose goal was to develop a better understanding of what students and faculty perceive as cheating and to use this knowledge to help instructors and institutions increase the level of academic integrity among students. The primary instrument for this project was a seven‐page survey that was administered to 643 engineering and pre‐engineering undergraduates at eleven institutions, ranging from community colleges to large research universities. This manuscript provides an overview of the descriptive data from the PACES‐1 Survey organized around the following questions: what is student cheating and how often does it occur; why do students cheat; and what methods can be used to reduce or stop cheating?Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/94862/1/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00891.x.pd

Factors influencing engineering students’ decisions to cheat by type of assessment

Academic dishonesty (cheating) has been prevalent on college campuses for decades, and the percentage of students reporting cheating varies by college major. This study, based on a survey of 643 undergraduate engineering majors at 11 institutions, used two parallel hierarchical multiple regression analyses to predict the frequency of cheating on exams and the frequency of cheating on homework based on eight blocks of independent variables: demographics, pre-college cheating behavior, co-curricular participation, plus five blocks organized around Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior (moral obligation not to cheat, attitudes about cheating, evaluation of the costs and benefits of cheating, perceived social pressures to cheat or not to cheat, and perceived effectiveness of academic dishonesty policies). The final models significantly predict 36% of the variance in “frequency of cheating on exams” and 14% of the variance in “frequency of cheating on homework”. Students don’t see cheating as a single construct and their decisions to cheat or not to cheat are influenced differently depending on the type of assessment. Secondary findings are that a student’s conviction that cheating is wrong no matter what the circumstances is a strong deterrent to cheating across types of assessment and that a student who agrees that he/she would cheat in order to alleviate stressful situations is more likely to cheat on both exams and homework.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42694/1/11162_2006_Article_9010.pd

Factors Influencing Engineering Students\u27 Decisions to Cheat by Type of Assessment

Academic dishonesty (cheating) has been prevalent on college campuses for decades, and the percentage of students reporting cheating varies by college major. This study, based on a survey of 643 undergraduate engineering majors at 11 institutions, used two parallel hierarchical multiple regression analyses to predict the frequency of cheating on exams and the frequency of cheating on homework based on eight blocks of independent variables: demographics, pre-college cheating behavior, co-curricular participation, plus five blocks organized around Ajzen\u27s Theory of Planned Behavior (moral obligation not to cheat, attitudes about cheating, evaluation of the costs and benefits of cheating, perceived social pressures to cheat or not to cheat, and perceived effectiveness of academic dishonesty policies). The final models significantly predict 36% of the variance in “frequency of cheating on exams” and 14% of the variance in “frequency of cheating on homework”. Students don\u27t see cheating as a single construct and their decisions to cheat or not to cheat are influenced differently depending on the type of assessment. Secondary findings are that a student\u27s conviction that cheating is wrong no matter what the circumstances is a strong deterrent to cheating across types of assessment and that a student who agrees that he/she would cheat in order to alleviate stressful situations is more likely to cheat on both exams and homework

Engineering Students\u27 Perceptions of and Attitudes Towards Cheating

Academic dishonesty has become a serious problem at institutions of higher learning. This is particularly true in engineering where, according to previous research, engineering undergraduates are among the most likely to cheat in college. To investigate this concern, the authors embarked on a research project whose goal was to develop a better understanding of what students and faculty perceive as cheating and to use this knowledge to help instructors and institutions increase the level of academic integrity among students. The primary instrument for this project was a seven-page survey that was administered to 643 engineering and pre-engineering undergraduates at eleven institutions, ranging from community colleges to large research universities. This manuscript provides an overview of the descriptive data from the PACES-1 Survey organized around the following questions: what is student cheating and how often does it occur; why do students cheat; and what methods can be used to reduce or stop cheating

The influence of academic dishonesty on ethical decision making in the workplace: A study of engineering students

According to studies conducted over the past four decades, engineering students self-report high frequencies of academic dishonesty (cheating) while in college. Research on college students in all fields has indicated that such behavior is more common among students who participate in academic dishonesty at the high school level and that it is correlated with other deviant or unethical behaviors, such as petty theft and lying. If, in fact, such correlations do exist, one might hypothesize that there is also a relationship between academic dishonesty in college and deviant or unethical behavior in professional practice. Placing this relationship in the context of higher frequencies of academic dishonesty among engineering students only increases the seriousness of the problem for engineering educators, corporations and society. To examine this issue we have initiated a multi-university study on the attitudes, perceptions and behaviors of college-aged engineering students toward academic dishonesty and unethical professional behavior. A majority of the students in the sample work for a considerable period of time in an engineering setting during their college years, providing us with a unique opportunity to study the connection between academic dishonesty and professional behavior within the same sample of individuals. The survey used in this study asks questions about the respondent’s decisions during opportunities to “cheat” in each of two contexts: college classrooms and workplace settings. In each case, respondents are asked to consider what opportunities to cheat presented themselves, whether they felt any pressure to cheat (or not to cheat), and ultimately what decision they made in this specific instance. The survey also asks respondents to report how frequently they have cheated in school or the workplace. Results suggest that there is a clear connection between cheating in high school and a positive decision to cheat in a specific scenario in college. In addition, frequent cheaters in high school also reported being more likely to decide to violate work place policies. Comparison of student responses to the pressures and hesitations to cheating across the contexts of academic and workplace settings shows that there are distinct similarities in the variables that are a part of the decision making processes used by respondents in these two contexts.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55263/3/2004 ASEE WES.pd

Students' perceptions of both the certainty and the deterrent effect of potential consequences of cheating

Extensive research indicates that cheating among undergraduate students is a serious problem, and we have initiated a long-term investigation to identify and validate concrete approaches for reducing the frequency of cheating. We have previously presented results from that study and have (among other things) described factors that influence the frequency and definitions of cheating among engineering undergraduates and presented student opinions on what actions might prevent cheating. However, we have not reported our findings regarding the relationship between the level of assessment and various consequences of cheating on a student's decision to cheat. In this paper, results from 695 student surveys will be presented to describe our findings. In the survey, students are presented with three scenarios representing distinct opportunities for cheating (cheating on a final examination, copying solutions from another student's homework, and adding false references to a term paper). Each of these scenarios represents a different level of assessment. For each separate scenario, there are questions about three possible consequences to cheating - shame, loss of colleague's respect (i.e., embarrassment), and being caught (i.e., the threat of formal sanctions). For each of the three possible consequences, the student is asked for level of agreement with two statements: 1) a statement about being personally affected by the consequence and 2) a statement that the consequence would prevent the student from cheating. Responses to these scenario-specific questions will be compared and related to other questions from the 139-item survey, especially (1) the student's self-reported frequency of engagement in that specific behavior during college, (2) the student's categorization of the behavior as cheating, unethical, or neither, and (3) the student's self-reported frequency of high school cheating. Our results show that student responses are clustered according to level of assessment rather than consequence. This may indicate that the type of consequence has less to do with a student's decision to cheat than does the level of assessment. Several hypotheses to describe these findings will be explored, and practical approaches to reduce the level of cheating based on this work will be proposed.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55261/3/2003 ASEE PACES1.pd

The relationship between academic dishonesty and ethical behavior in engineering practice

According to studies conducted over the past four decades, engineering students self-report high levels of academic dishonesty (cheating) while in college. Research on college students in all fields has indicated that such behavior is more common among students who participate in academic dishonesty at the high school level and that it is correlated with other deviant or unethical behaviors, such as petty theft and lying. If, in fact, such correlations do exist, one might hypothesize that there is also a relationship between academic dishonesty in college and deviant or unethical behavior in professional practice. Placing this relationship in the context of higher levels of academic dishonesty among engineering students only increases the seriousness of the problem for engineering educators, corporations and society. To examine this issue we have initiated a multi-university study on the attitudes, perceptions and behaviors of college-aged engineering students toward academic dishonesty and unethical professional behavior. A majority of the students in the sample work for a considerable period of time in an engineering setting during their college years, providing us with a unique opportunity to study the connection between academic dishonesty and professional behavior within the same sample of individuals. The survey used in this study asks questions about the respondent's decisions during opportunities to "cheat" in each of two contexts: college classrooms and work-place settings. In each case, respondents are asked to consider what opportunities to cheat presented themselves, whether they felt any pressure to cheat (or not to cheat), and ultimately what decision they made in this specific instance. The survey also asks respondents to report how frequently they have cheated in school or the work-place. Quantitative results are presented regarding the contexts within which students make decisions regarding temptations to cheat or violate work-place policies and whether or not they succumb to these temptations. Additionally, open-ended responses regarding the pressures and deterrents to deciding to cheat or violate work-place policies are discussed. These responses were grouped into themes by the authors and rank ordered according to number of responses for each theme. Comparison is made between both the nature and rank order of the themes found for both the classroom cheating case and work-place behavior case. Finally, common themes are examined in light of theories of planned behavior and moral development.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55262/3/2003 ESR WES.pd

An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and professional behavior

A number of recent studies have found correlations between academic dishonesty in higher education and unethical behavior in the work settings. However, these studies have not explored the causal relationship between the underlying factors that lead to this dishonesty. This realization, and apparently high levels of cheating among engineering students, has lead us to a research hypothesis that decision making patterns about academic cheating among engineering students are positively correlated with those individuals' decision making patterns about work place ethics and responsibility. To test our hypothesis, we have developed an exploratory survey that asks questions about the respondent's decisions during opportunities to "cheat" in each of two contexts: college classrooms and work-place settings (with a special focus on engineering work settings). The survey was designed to provide qualitative data that could be used to later develop a more robust quantitative survey. This paper will present only the preliminary quantitative results from this survey.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55260/3/2003 FIE WES.pd

Does academic dishonesty relate to unethical behavior in professional practice? An exploratory study.

According to studies conducted over the past four decades, engineering students self-report high frequencies of academic dishonesty (cheating) while in college. Research on college students in all fields has indicated that such behavior is more common among students who participate in academic dishonesty at the high school level and that it is correlated with other deviant or unethical behaviors, such as petty theft and lying. If, in fact, such correlations do exist, one might hypothesize that there is also a relationship between academic dishonesty in college and deviant or unethical behavior in professional practice. Placing this relationship in the context of higher frequencies of academic dishonesty among engineering students only increases the seriousness of the problem for engineering educators, corporations and society. To examine this issue we have initiated a multi-university study on the attitudes, perceptions and behaviors of college-aged engineering students toward academic dishonesty and unethical professional behavior. A majority of the students in the sample work for a considerable period of time in an engineering setting during their college years, providing us with a unique opportunity to study the connection between academic dishonesty and professional behavior within the same sample of individuals. The survey used in this study asks questions about the respondent’s decisions during opportunities to “cheat” in each of two contexts: college classrooms and workplace settings. In each case, respondents are asked to consider what opportunities to cheat presented themselves, whether they felt any pressure to cheat (or not to cheat), and ultimately what decision they made in this specific instance. The survey also asks respondents to report how frequently they have cheated in school or the workplace. Results suggest that there is a clear connection between cheating in high school and a positive decision to cheat in a specific scenario in college. In addition, frequent cheaters in high school also reported being more likely to decide to violate work place policies. Comparison of student responses to the pressures and hesitations to cheating across the contexts of academic and workplace settings shows that there are distinct similarities in the variables that are a part of the decision making processes used by respondents in these two contexts.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55268/3/2004 SEE WES.pd