Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNathan E. Canney
dc.contributor.authorAngela R. Bielefeldt
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-08T22:35:54Z
dc.date.available2017-05-08T22:35:54Z
dc.date.copyrightOctober 2015
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.other51322922.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/83313
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to examine differences in student views of social responsibility by discipline, looking at student reasons for their choice of discipline and online messaging as possible explanations for differences. Civil, environmental, and mechanical engineering students at five universities were surveyed regarding their views of social responsibility, which was measured using 50 questions on a 7-point Likert scale and open-ended response questions. Results showed that environmental engineering students had more positive social responsibility attitudes than civil engineering students, whose attitudes were more positive than mechanical engineering students. The greatest differences were among first-year students, suggesting that a priori perceptions of these disciplines differentiated more than curricular content. This hypothesis was supported by differences in the student motivations for choosing each major and online messaging between these disciplines with respect to elements of social responsibility. Lower social responsibility scores among environmental engineering students at higher ranks were troubling and require further study. This contrasted with stable or higher positive social responsibility scores among mechanical engineering students at higher ranks.
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
dc.titleDifferences in Engineering Students’ Views of Social Responsibility between Disciplines
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume141
dc.journal.issue4
dc.journal.titleJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000248
dc.treeJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2015:;Volume ( 141 ):;issue: 004
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record