Jette Egelund Holgaard

Motivational factors, gender and engineering education

Based on survey data covering the full population of students enrolled in Danish engineering education in autumn 2010, we explore the motivational factors behind educational choice, with a particular aim of comparing male and female students1 reasons for choosing a career in engineering. We find that women are significantly more influenced by mentors than men, while men tend to be more motivated by intrinsic and financial factors, and by the social importance of the engineering profession. Parental influence is low across all programmes and by differentiating between specific clusters of engineering programmes, we further show that these overall gender differences are subtle and that motivational factors are unequally important across the different educational programmes. The findings from this study clearly indicate that intrinsic and social motivations are the most important motivational factors; however, gender and programme differentiation needs to be taken into account, and points towards diverse future strategies for attracting students to engineering education.

The important role of civil society groups in eco‐innovation: a triple helix perspective

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss, theoretically and practically, the role of civil society groups in eco‐innovation.Design/methodology/approach – Starting from a discussion on the emergence of “triple helix twins”, “quadruple helix” and “N‐tuple helices”, this paper discusses the role of civil society groups in eco‐innovation by addressing the following research questions: Why is it necessary to stress that civil society groups are as important as university, industry and government in eco‐innovation? What inspiration can “triple helix twins” and “quadruple helix” provide when arguing for a fourth actor of civil society groups in eco‐innovation? How are civil society groups affecting eco‐innovation practice and what does it tell us about the relation between civil society groups and the triple helix actors? In addressing the “How” question the authors draw on examples of eco‐innovation activities in Denmark and China.Findings – Theoretically, the authors find that eco‐innovation has pecul...

Three dimensions of characterizing courses for sustainability in engineering education: Models, approaches and orientations

Worldwide universities are changing their curriculum in response to the Barcelona Declaration. The adaptations include the integration of sustainability courses in engineering education. The various courses have been constructed with different kind of earning objectives and different interpretations of the stainability concept. The paper introduces three dimensions of characterizing sustainability courses in engineering education; models, approaches and orientations. The paper reviews 30 articles and presents examples of sustain ability courses that have been characterized based on the three dimensions. The conclusion is that the three dimensions of characterization can provide concrete perspectives on constructing and designing of sustainability course in engineering education.

When Students Take the Lead

Self-directed learning (SDL) is an essential element of the problem-based learning (PBL) philosophy, and PBL has been the cornerstone of education at Aalborg University since its foundation in 1974. The introduction of PBL has had an impact on the expectations and the relationships of both staff and students. As a consequence, the distribution of power relating to the organizational as well as the sociocultural context also has to change. Due to the range of diversity among students and staff, we are constantly reminded that common-sense understandings of academic staff-student interactions can be questioned continuously, in particular in a multicultural learning environment like the one we have at Aalborg.

Fostering Hybridity: Teaching About Context in Engineering Education

The main discourses of reform in engineering education in recent years have tended to be “market-driven” and have involved adding on courses and instruction in such areas as business economics, marketing, management, and entrepreneurship, as well as various types of “on-the-job” training in companies. In response, there has been a reassertion among many educators of more traditional “science-driven” approaches to engineering education by dividing engineering fields into “subdisciplines”, developing courses and even entire programs in new areas of specialization, such as sustainability science, product design, and sustainable energy planning. As a result, among different universities, as well as within many of the same ones, there is an ongoing tension or competition between market-driven approaches and science-driven approaches, often at the expense of a more balanced or comprehensive approach to education. In order to resolve this underlying tension in engineering education, this chapter proposes and exemplifies a third approach that seeks to foster a “hybrid imagination” combining a scientific-technical problem-solving competence with an understanding of the problems that need to be solved. Fostering hybridity or a hybrid imagination involves a mixing of scientific education and training in technical skills with an appreciation of the broader cultural implications of science and technology in general and one’s own role as an engineer, in particular. The chapter contrasts the different ways in which matters of “context” are brought into engineering education in the different approaches. It begins with a general discussion of hybrid identities in engineering and then goes on to provide a number of examples from the authors’ experiences in teaching contextual knowledge for engineering students at Aalborg University in Denmark. The chapter has been written as a part of PROCEED, the Program of Research on Opportunities and Challenges in Engineering Education in Denmark.