Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T10:37:52.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 32 - Global and International Issues in Engineering Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

By
Aditya Johri  and
Brent K. Jesiek
Edited by
Aditya Johri  and
Barbara M. Olds
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Brent K. Jesiek
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds
Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Get access

Summary

“There is an urgent need for research on engineering in a global context. The phenomenon of global engineering is still emerging. There is a need for a theoretical foundation on learning behaviors and models as well as on organizational processes and management methods focused on instilling global competence in engineers.”

Global Engineering Excellence Initiative (GEEI) Report (Italics in original, 2006, p. 2)

Introduction

Although globalization has been a political and economic concern for centuries (O’Leary, Orlikowski, & Yates, 2002), its impact on the engineering education community has become particularly salient since the publication of the Engineer of 2020 (National Academy of Engineering [NAE], 2003) and The World Is Flat (Friedman, 2005). These and subsequent publications (Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy [CSEPP], 2006; Duderstadt, 2008, Engineers Against Poverty (EAP)/Institute of Education (IOE), 2008; GEEI, 2006; Grandin & Hirleman, 2009; NAE, 2005) have emphasized the critical need to train globally competent engineers. Academics, practitioners, and policymakers alike have realized that solving the critical problems facing the world today, including addressing the NAE Grand Challenges (NAE, http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/) and achieving a “better quality of life,” will require close collaboration among engineers from around the world. Not surprisingly, educational institutions are investing millions of dollars to train students for success in the globalized economy through initiatives such as study abroad. Students, in turn, are spending significant amounts of money to participate in these programs. Recent efforts to pass a study abroad bill provide still another indication of the importance of this issue at the national level (Study Abroad Bill, 2009). And from a research perspective, the National Science Foundation (NSF) itself spends upwards of $50 million each year funding international programs (Office of International Science and Engineering [OISE], 2008).

The greatest investment by far, however, has been by industry. In 2011 alone, U.S. firms spent more than $156 billion on workforce training, an average of $1,182/employee (American Society for Training & Development [ASTD], 2012). Almost 21% of that amount was spent on training people to work more effectively with others, and global issues are becoming a bigger slice of that pie amidst growing recognition that global work experiences give a boost to industry careers. It is within this context that engineering educators are trying to make an impact to better prepare future engineers for the global world of work.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research , pp. 655 - 672
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). (2008). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, effective for evaluations During 2008–2009 cycle. ABET, Engineering Accreditation Commission, 2007.
Aldridge, M. D. (1994). Professional practice: A topic for engineering research and instruction. Journal of Engineering Education, 83(3), 231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allert, B., Atkinson, D., Groll, E., & Hirleman, E. D. (2007). Making the case for global engineering: Building foreign language collaborations for designing, implementing, and assessing programs. Online Journal for Global Engineering Education, 2(2), 1–14. Retrieved from Google Scholar
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Body of Knowledge Committee of the Committee on Academic Prerequisites for Professional Practice. (2008). Civil engineering body of knowledge for the 21st century: Preparing the civil engineer of the future (2nd ed.). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.Google Scholar
Aneesh, A. (2006). Virtual migration: The programming of globalization. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Society for Training & Development (ASTD). (2007). 2012 state of the industry. Alexandria, VA: ASTD. Retrieved from
Axtell, C., Fleck, S., & Turner, N. (2004). Virtual teams: Collaborating across distance. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 19, 205–248.Google Scholar
Ball, A. G., Zaugg, H., Davies, R., Tateishi, I., Parkinson, A. R., Jensen, C. G., & Magleby, S. R. (2012). Identification and validation of a set of global competencies for engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(1), 156–168.Google Scholar
Barley, S. (1996). Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 404–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barley, S., & Kunda, G. (2001). Bringing work back in. Organization Science, 12(1), 76–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomgarden, A. H., & Riley, D. (2006). Learning and service in engineering and global development. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering, 1(2), 47–59.Google Scholar
Boeing Company, The, & Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI). (1997). A manifesto for global engineering education. Summary report of the Engineering Futures Conference.
Boland, R., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2007). Wakes of innovation in project networks: The case of digital 3-D representations in architecture, engineering, and construction. Organization Science, 18(4), 631–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremer, D. (2008). Engineering the world. Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, 3(2), Article 2. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucciarelli, L. (1984). Reflective practices in engineering design. Design Studies, 5(3), 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucciarelli, L. (1996). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bucciarelli, L., & Kuhn, S. (1997). Engineering education and engineering practice: Improving the fit. In Between craft and science: Technical work in U.S. settings (pp. 210–229). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Callahan, R. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carlile, P. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, C., & Carlile, P. (2009). Course research: Using the case method to build and teach management theory. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8(2), 240–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 47–60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy. (CSEPP) (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Connell, C. (2007). Georgia Tech's well-engineered engagement with the world. International Educator, XVI(6), 38–46, 66.Google Scholar
Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramton, C. D. (2002). Attribution in distributed work groups. In Hinds, P. J. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. 191–212). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cramton, C., & Hinds, P. (2005). Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning?Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowston, K., & Howison, J. (2004). The social structure of free and Open Source Software Development. First Monday, 10(2). Retrieved from Google Scholar
Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daft, R., & Weick, K. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, G. (2010). Epilogue – Beyond global competence: Implications for engineering pedagogy. In In Downey, G. L. & Beddoes, K. (Eds.), What is global engineering education for?: The making of international educators (pp. 45–76). San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar
Downey, G., & Beddoes, K. (2010). What is global engineering education for?: The making of international educators. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar
Downey, G., & Lucena, J. (2004). Knowledge and professional identity in engineering: Code-switching and metrics of progress. History and Technology, 20(4), 393–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, G., Lucena, J. C., Moskal, B., Bigley, T., Hays, C., Jesiek, B.,…Parkhurst, R. (2006). The globally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who define problems differently. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(2), 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duderstadt, J. (2008). Engineering for a changing world: A roadmap to the future of engineering practice, research, and education. Ann Arbor, MI: The Millennium Project, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, J. B., Luther, K., Bessiere, K., & Kellogg, W. A. (2008, February). Games for virtual team building. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 295-304). ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsbach, K., Barr, P., & Hargadon, A. (2005). Identifying situated cognition in organizations. Organization Science, 16(4), 422–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engineers Against Poverty (EAP)/Institute of Education (IOE). (2008). The global engineer: Incorporating global skills within UK higher education of engineers. London: EAP and Development Education Research Center.Google Scholar
Engineers Australia (EA). (2011). Stage 1 competency standard for professional engineer. Barton, ACT, Australia: Engineers Australia. Retrieved from
Espinosa, J., Kraut, R. E., Lerch, J. F., Slaughter, S. A., Herbsleb, J. D., & Mockus, A. (2002). Shared mental models and coordination in large-scale, distributed software development. In ICIS 2002 Proceedings. Paper 39. Retrieved from
European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education (ENAEE). (2008). EUR-ACE framework standards for the accreditation of engineering programmes. Brussels, Belgium: ENAEE.Google Scholar
Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. (2005). Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and virtual teams. Organization Science, 16(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Fulk, J., & Collins-Jarvis, L. (2001). Wired meetings: Technological mediation of organizational gatherings. In Putnam, L. & Jablin, F. (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication (2nd ed., pp. 624–703). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Galegher, J., Kraut, R. E., & Egido, C. (Eds.) (1990). Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological bases for cooperative work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Georgia Institute of Technology. (2011). Georgia Institute of Technology's Quality Enhancement Plan: Impact report. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Institute of Technology. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Gerhardt, L., & Smith, R. (2008). Development of a required international experience for undergraduate engineering students. In Proceedings of the 38th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY (pp. S4E-12–16).Google Scholar
Gibbons, M. (2009). Engineering by the numbers. Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).Google Scholar
Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Global Engineering Excellence Initiative (GEEI) (2006). In search of global engineering excellence: Educating the next generation of engineers for the global workplace. Hanover, Germany: Continental AG. Retrieved from
Grandin, J. (2011). Going the extra mile: University of Rhode Island engineers in the global workplace. Newport, RI: John M. Grandin.Google Scholar
Grandin, J., & Hirleman, E. D. (2009). Educating engineers as global citizens: A call for action / A report of the National Summit Meeting on the Globalization of Engineering Education. Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, 4(1), 1–28. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Herbsleb, J. D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T. A., & Grinter, R. E. (2001). An empirical study of global software development: Distance and speed. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software EngineeringToronto, ON, Canada (pp. 81–90).Google Scholar
Hinds, P. J., & Bailey, D. E. (2003). Out of sight, Out of synch: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organization Science, 14(6), 615–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinds, P. J., & Kiesler, S. (2002.) Preface. In Hinds, P. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. xi–xviii). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16(3), 290–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Institute of International Education (IIE). (2010). Open Doors 2010 fast facts. New York, NY: Institute of International Education.Google Scholar
Jamieson, L., & Lohmann, J. (2009). Creating a culture for scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education: Ensuring U.S. engineering has the right people with the right talent for a global society. Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education.Google Scholar
Jarvenpaa, S., & Leidner, D. (1999, Winter). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 791–815.
Jesiek, B. K., & Beddoes, K. (2010). From diplomacy and development to competitiveness and globalization: Historical perspectives on the internationalization of engineering education. In Downey, G. L. & Beddoes, K. (Eds.), What is global engineering education for? The making of international educators (pp. 45–76). San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar
Jesiek, B. K., Chang, Y., Shen, Y., Lin, J. J., Hirleman, E. D., & Groll, E. (2011). International Research and Education in Engineering (IREE) 2010 China: Developing globally competent engineering researchers. In Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
Jesiek, B. K., Sangam, D., Thompson, J., Chang, Y., & Evangelou, D. (2010). Global engineering attributes and attainment pathways: A study of student perceptions. In Proceedings of the 2010 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY.Google Scholar
Jesiek, B. K., Shen, Y., & Haller, Y. (2012). Cross-cultural competence: A comparative assessment of engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(1), 144–155.Google Scholar
Jesiek, B. K., & Woo, S. E. (2011). Realistic assessment for realistic instruction: Situational assessment strategies for engineering education and practice. In Proceedings of the 2011 SEFI Annual Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2008a). Boundary spanning knowledge broker: An emerging role in global engineering firms. In Proceedings of 38th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2008b). Why we see coworkers differently: Situational and institutional shaping of impression. Paper presented at Organizational Communication and Information Systems Division Session on Individuals and Distributed Work, Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2009a). Preparing engineers for a global world: Identifying and teaching sensemaking and creating new practices strategies. In Proceedings of 39th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2009b). Global software practices: Comparing open source and traditional development. Technical Report Submitted to Sun Microsystems, February 2009.
Johri, A. (2010). Open organizing: Designing sustainable work practices for the engineering workforce. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26(2), 278–286.Google Scholar
Johri, A. (2011). Sociomaterial bricolage: The creation of location-spanning work practices by global software developers. Information and Software Technology, 53(9), 955–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, A. (2012a). From a distance: Impression formation and impression accuracy among geographically distributed coworkers. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 1997–2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, A. (2012b). Learning to demo: The sociomateriality of newcomer participation in engineering research practices. Engineering Studies, 4(3), 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, A., & Olds, B. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, A., & Sharma, A. (2013). Designing development: Case study of an international education and outreach program. Morgan and Claypool Synthesis Lectures on Global Engineering. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar
Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. (2006, April). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katehi, L. (2005). The global engineer. In Educating the engineer of 2020 (pp. 151–155). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Kellogg, K., Orlikowski, W., & Yates, J. (2006). Life in the trading zone: Structuring coordination across boundaries in post-bureaucratic organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), 22–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2002). What do we know about proximity in work groups? A legacy of research on physical distance. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. 57–80). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J.,…Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting Learning by Design™ into practice. TheJournal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech organization. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Lambert, S. (2009). Sustainable design throughout the curriculum using case studies. Paper presented at the Mudd Design Workshop, Harvey Mudd, Claremont, CA. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lohmann, J., Rollins, H., & Hoey, J. (2006). Defining, developing, and assessing global competence in engineers. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(1), 119–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucena, J. (2006). Globalization and organizational change: Engineers’ experiences and their implications for engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(3), 321–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucena, J., Downey, G., Jesiek, B., & Elber, S. (2008). Competencies beyond countries: The re-organization of engineering education in the United States, Europe, and Latin America. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., & Heath, C. (2000). Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and informing systems design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majchrzak, A., Rice, R., Malhotra, A, King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 569–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone, Y., & Crowston, K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Reviews, 26(1), 87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Martin, T., Petrosino, A. J., Rivale, S., & Diller, K. (2007). The development of adaptive expertise in biotransport. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 108, 35–49.Google Scholar
Martin, T., Rayne, K., Kemp, N. J., Hart, J., & Diller, K. R. (2005). Teaching for adaptive expertise in biomedical engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(2), 257–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNair, L., Paretti, M., & Kakar, A. (2008). A case study of prior knowledge: Expectations and identity constructions in interdisciplinary, cross-cultural, virtual collaboration. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 386–399.Google Scholar
McNeill, N. (2010). Global engineering education programs: More than just international experiences (Doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
Meiksins, P., & Smith, C. (1996). Engineering labour: Technical workers in comparative perspective. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Metiu, A. (2006). Owning the code: Status closure in distributed groups. Organization Science, 17(4), 418–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, R. (2007). Beyond study abroad: Preparing students for the new global economy. In Proceedings of the ABET Annual Meeting, Incline Village, NV.Google Scholar
Mohtar, R., & Dare, A. (2012). Global design team: A global service-learning experience. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(1), 169–182.Google Scholar
Mortensen, M., & Hinds, P. (2002). Fuzzy teams: Boundary disagreement in distributed and collocated teams. In Hinds, P. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. 283–308). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from Google Scholar
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from Google Scholar
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). Grand challenges for engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy of Engineering. Retrieved from
National Research Council (NRC). (1999). The changing nature of work: Implications for occupational analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC), Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Pellegrino, J., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC). (2003). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Science Foundation (NSF). (2006). NSF's cyberinfrastructure vision for 21st century discovery. Washington: DC: NSF Cyberinfrastructure Council.
National Science Foundation (NSF). (2008). Fostering learning in a networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge. Report of the NSF Taskforce on Cyber-enabled Learning. Washington, DC: NSF.
O’Leary, M., & Cummings, J. N. (2007). The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in work teams. MIS Quarterly, 31(3), 433–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Leary, M., Orlikowski, W., & Yates, J. (2002). Distributed work over the centuries: Trust and control in the Hudson's Bay Company, 1670–1826. In Hinds, P. J. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. 27–54). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE). (2008). Advisory committee meeting summary. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from
Orr, J. E. (1996). Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Parkhurst, R., Moskal, B., Lucena, J., Downey, G., Bigley, T., & Elber, S. (2008). Engineering cultures: Comparing student learning in online and classroom based implementations. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(5), 955–964.Google Scholar
Parkinson, A. (2007). Engineering study abroad programs: Formats, challenges, best practices. Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, 2(2), 1–15. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Parkinson, A. (2009). The rationale for developing global competence. Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, 4(2), 1–15. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Patil, A. (2005). Global engineering criteria for the development of the global engineering profession. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 4(1), 49–52.Google Scholar
Ragusa, G. (2011). Engineering preparedness for global workforces: Curricular connections and experiential impacts. In Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
Raju, P., & Sankar, C. (1999). Teaching real-world issues through case studies. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(4), 501–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmiede, R., & Will-Zocholl, M. C. (2011). Engineers' work on the move: challenges in automobile engineering in a globalized world. Engineering Studies, 3(2), 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, S., Macatangay, K., Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. (2008). Educating engineers: Designing for the future of the field. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., & Olds, B. (2005). Ethics assessment rubrics. In Mitcham, C., Arnhart, L., Johnson, D., & Spiers, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of science, technology, and ethics (Vol. 2, pp. 693–695). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Shuman, L., Sindelar, M., Besterfield-Sacre, M.Wolfe, H., Pinkus, R., Miller, R.Old, B., & Mitcham, C. (2004). Can our students recognize and resolve ethical dilemmas? In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT.Google Scholar
Sigma, Xi. (2007). Embracing globalization: Assuring a globally engaged science and engineering workforce. Workshop report. Washington, DC: Sigma Xi. Retrieved from
Sole, D., & Edmondson, A. (2002). Situated knowledge and learning in dispersed teams. British Journal of Management, 13(S2), S17–S34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Study Abroad Bill (2009). S. 473 (111th): Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act of 2009. Retrieved from
Suchman, L. (2000). Embodied practices of engineering work. Mind Culture and Activity, 7(1&2), 4–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisband, S. (2002). Maintaining awareness in distributed team collaboration: Implications for leadership and performance. In Hinds, P. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work: New ways of working across distance using technology (pp. 311–333). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wulf, W. (2003). 2003 Annual meeting – President's remarks. Washington, DC: National Academy of Engineering. Retrieved from

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×