Practicing engineers are hired, retained, and rewarded for solving problems, so engineering students should learn how to solve workplace problems. Workplace engineering problems are substantively different from the kinds of problems that engineering students most often solve in the classroom; therefore, learning to solve classroom problems does not necessarily prepare engineering students to solve workplace problems. These qualitative studies of workplace engineering problems identify the attributes of workplace problems. Workplace problems are ill-structured and complex because they possess conflicting goals, multiple solution methods, non-engineering success standards, non-engineering constraints, unanticipated problems, distributed knowledge, collaborative activity systems, the importance of experience, and multiple forms of problem representation. Some implications for designing engineering curricula and experiences that better prepare students for solving workplace problems are considered.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUNDFederal initiatives promoting STEM education to bridge the achievement gap and maintain the nation's creative leadership inspired this study investigating engineering content in elementary education standards. The literature review concluded that common national P-12 engineering education standards are beneficial, particularly when amplified by the common core standards movement. PURPOSE (HYPOTHESIS)Compilation and analysis of engineering present in states' academic standards was performed to determine if a consensus on the big ideas of engineering already exists and to organize and present those big ideas so that they can be infused into state or national standards. DESIGN/METHODExtensive examination and broad coding of mathematics, science, technology and vocational/career standards in all 50 states identified instances of engineering content in existing standards. Explicit coding categorized engineering-relevant standards by subject area. Manual and electronic content analysis identified key engineering skills and knowledge in existing standards. Inter-rater reliability verified consistency among five individuals through descriptive statistical measures. RESULTSEngineering skills and knowledge were found in 41 states' standards. Most items rated as engineering through strict coding were found in either science or technology and vocational standards. Engineering was found in only one state's math standard. Some states explicitly mentioned engineering standards without any specifics. A consensus of big ideas found in standards is provided in the discussion. CONCLUSIONSWhile engineering standards do exist, uniform or systematically introduced engineering standards are less prevalent. Now is the time to move forward in the formation of national standards based on the state standards identified in this study.