NewGiza University (NGU), located on the outskirts of Cairo, just released a video of me discussing the Architectural Engineering curriculum that I co-designed with Professor Emanuela Tilley, starting back in 2020: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DMVKR4HvVQ0/?igsh=MWo1dDE3cTB4Y2cxeQ== (opens in Instagram):
Because of the pandemic, I did not have a chance to visit NGU before we started designing the curriculum. In fact, I didn’t get to visit until this past February, 2025, when I travelled over with two staff from UCL to provide feedback on the quality of the program’s delivery.
It was a whirlwind tour, considering that I arrived a day later than expected due to a British Airline delay.
In my two working days there, I got to observe the program the public relations folks at NGU captured the footage on this video.
Designing this curriculum, via a contract between Technological University Dublin (TU Dublin) and University College London Consultants (UCLC) which pays for hours out of my timetable each semester, has been a real joy. It has required me to stretch, been , and develop new communication skills to explain complex concepts to people from a culture and language much different from my own.
Visiting the program and meeting the people who are delivering the content and the amazingly dedicated studentswho are forging the way by implementing a brand new curriculum has definitely been a highlight of 2025.
Many tanks to Dean Aly and the programme staff for welcoming us and helping us feel at home!
We three visitors also got a chance to tour the brand new Egyptian museum, lead by NGU’s architectural history, teacher. The experience was truly eye-opening and full of intrigue.
I look forward to a chance to visit NGU and Egypt again soon!
I have to say, none of this would’ve been possible without the Marie Curie fellowship I got to spend 2018 and 2019 working at UCL. The bonds I made with the folks at UCL in the Centre for Engineering Education have made such a difference in my and personal and professional life.
Being part of UCL has been so incredibly good for me, and good also for my employer, TU Dublin.
I am so honored to have had the chance to build an architecture program in Egypt and work with the people there who seek to build a stronger community of architects in Egypt. Thank you so much John Mitchell and Emanuela Tilley, for including me in this incredible project!
I’m honoured to have hosted a very successful 2025 SEFI Ethics Spring Symposium.
From March 24–26, my colleagues and I gathered at the Royal Marine Hotel in the charming seaside town of Dún Laoghaire, Ireland, for our small and cosy annual symposium. Mother nature blessed us with glorious weather, tasty and healthy food, gorgeous natural and architectural surroundings, an enchanting historic hotel, and new and renewed friendships.
Diana Martin, Mircea Tobosaru, and I organised the programme and all the details, demonstrating that collaboration is key to flourishing!
With 35 delegates from across the globe, this wasn’t just another academic conference—it was a meeting of minds and a celebration of our shared commitment to engineering ethics education.
Soaking in the surroundings, past and present, with a tour by Roland Tormey.
The symposium’s main goal? Strengthening our collective capacity to teach ethics to future engineers. A key focus was the Routledge International Handbook of Engineering Ethics Education (RIHEEE)—a major collaborative effort by the SEFI Ethics special interest group. We reflected on what is presented in the book and considered how to extend its themes, translate into impactful teaching practices, and generate discussion more broadly in the places we live and work.
Opening the Symposium and introducing the handbook.
A Program Packed with Thought-Provoking Conversations
Over three days, we immersed ourselves in a mix of keynotes, workshops, and panels, tackling big questions from multiple angles:
Keynotes that Challenged and Inspired
Mary Nolan explored the role of care ethics in engineering, pushing us to think beyond traditional engineering thinking.
Paula Tomi examined the nature of truth, a concept that sits at the heart of both engineering and ethics.
Tom Børsen introduced us to techno-anthropology, showing how it intersects with engineering ethics education.
Keynote by Paula Tomi
Workshops that Sparked Debate and Collaboration
Care Ethics—How do we broaden engineers’ notion of responsibility?
AI Experimental Philosophy—How can philosophy guide us in using and developing artificial intelligence?
The Archimedean Oath—Should engineers take an ethical oath, much like doctors do?
Quantitative Methods & Ethics—How can we effectively describe and report ethical impact?
Peer-to-peer learning in action. Tom Børsen, to the right, was the co-lead editor of the handbook. Takehara joined us from Japan, and Miguel from Spain.
Panel Discussions: Making Ethics Education More Practical
Our panelists had a specific challenge: dive into a self-selected sections of RIHEEE and critically assess its themes. We asked: What patterns do you see across the set of chapters in your section? What’s missing? How can can educators make use of the content? How can we help them do that? Can we translate theoretical insights into tangible strategies that can be applied in classrooms and institutions worldwide yet still reflect local culture and values?
Panel with Rachel Harding, Aaron Johnson, Magnus Kahrs (and Valentina Rossi, not shown)Panel on engineering ethics accreditation Panel on Interdisciplinary Perspectives with Katherine Looby, Ronny Kjelsberg, Gaston Meskens, and Sandra Cruz Moreno.
There were so many very special aspects, including exploring care ethics in depth and applying care ethics, and the walking tour was truly spectacular.
A Literary and Cultural Interlude
Roland Tormey’s literary walking tour of Dún Laoghaire was a highlight for us all. We took a step back and immersed ourselves in the cultural richness of our surroundings. For many of us, this blend of intellectual and cultural exploration reinforced the broader ethical dimensions of engineering—how our work is always connected to society, history, and place.
Sunshine and good vibes galore!
Global Voices, Local Impact
The symposium truly reflected the international nature of engineering ethics education. We had voices from across Europe, North America, Africa, and Asia, with universities ranging from UCL and the University of Michigan to EPFL. At the same time, there was strong local representation, with a third of the attendees based in Ireland—TU Dublin, DCU, ATU, and Engineers Ireland all playing an active role. A special shoutout to my TU Dublin colleagues—Sandra Cruz Moreno, Marek Rebow, Rachel Harding, Mike Murphy, and recent PhD grads Diana Adela Martin and Darren Carthy—whose contributions helped everyone feel welcome.
What’s Next?
The energy and ideas sparked at the symposium will propel us forward onto new collaborations, where we apply what we discussed—via research and teaching and leadership and service—and continue building momentum and sharing what we’re learning with our colleagues back home, and indeed worldwide.
For those who couldn’t join us in person, the Routledge International Handbook of Engineering Ethics Education is freely available in an open-access digital format. Whether you’re new to the field or a long-time educator, it’s a must-read: 🔗 RIHEEE Handbook
For posterity’s sake, I am adding the symposium schedule as it was conducted:
Monday, March 24
09:00-09:30 Welcome and Icebreaker by host Shannon Chance
09:30-10:30 Handbook panel 1 (Foundations) moderated by Roland Tormey with panellists Mircea Tobosaru, Samia Mahé, and Mihaly Héder
10:30-10:50 Coffee break
10:50-11:30 Keynote on Care Ethics by Mary Nolan
11:30-13:00 Workshop on Care Ethics by Robert Irish, Ana Tebeanu, Sofia Duran, Vivek Ramachandran, Roland Tormey, & Alison Gwynne-Evans
13:00-15:30 Picnic Lunch & Walking tour of Dun Laoghaire led by Roland Tormey
15:30-16:00 Coffee break with snacks
16:00-17:00 Handbook panel 4 (Teaching Methods) moderated by Diana Martin with panellists Valentina Rossi, Aaron Johnson, Magnus Kahrs, and Rachel Harding
17:00-17:30 Wrap-up with synthesising activity
19:00 Dinner outing with colleagues departs from the hotel lobby
Tuesday, March 25
09:00-10:00 Handbook panel 6 (Accreditation) moderated by Shannon Chance with panellists Leah Ridgway, Louise O’Gorman, Alison Gwynne-Evans, and Marek Rebow
10:00-10:40 Keynote on Truth by Paula Tomi
10:40-11:00 Coffee break
11:00-12:15 Workshop on AI experimental philosophy by Krzysztof Sołoducha
12:15-13:00 Ethics SIG session led by Diana Martin and Mircea Tobosaru
13:00-14:00 Lunch
14:00-15:00 Handbook panel 3 (Specific Disciplines) moderated by Tom Børson with panellists Jacob Baneham, Miguel Romá, Mike Murphy, and Rhythima Shinde
15:00-15:20 Coffee break with snacks
15:20-16:40 Workshop on the Archimedean Oath by Valentina Rossi
19:00 Dinner outing with colleagues departs from the hotel lobby
Wednesday, March 26
09:00-10:00 Handbook panel 2 (Interdisciplinary Perspectives) moderated by Roland Tormey with panelists Sandra Cruz Moreno, Ronny Kjelsberg, Gaston Meskens, and Katherine Looby, with input from Riadh Habash
10:00-11:15 Workshop on Quantitative Methods & Ethics by Matheus de Andrade and Idalis Villanueva Alarcón
11:15-11:30 Coffee break
11:30-12:15 Keynote by Tom Børsen on “Techno-Anthropology and Engineering Ethics Education”
12:15-13:15 Ethics SIG session led by Diana Martin and Mircea Tobosaru
13:15-15:00 Lunch and physical activity
15:00-16:00 Handbook panel 5 (Assessment) moderated by Tom Børsen with panellists Takehara Shinya, Celina Leão, Ana Voichita Tebeanu, and Mary Nolan
16:00-16:20 Coffee break with snacks
16:20-17:30 Ethics SIG synthesis session led by Diana Martin and Mircea Tobosaru
19:00 Dinner outing with colleagues departs from the hotel lobby
Over the past two years, I have edited this book in collaboration with five outstanding ethics scholars. Seeing it through to completion is one of the proudest achievements of my professional life.
The project involved 105 authors from around the globe. I led it alongside Tom Børsen, who immediately embraced the idea of a handbook.
We paid the publication fee so that you can read it for free! We wanted to give everyone with a digital device an equal chance, regardless of where they live.
Of course, you are also welcome to order a hard-back print copy of the book from the link above. A discount is currently available. Moreover, a paperback version will be available in 18 months.
The book has six sections:
SECTION 1: Foundations of engineering ethics education (7 chapters)
SECTION 2: Interdisciplinary contributions to engineering ethics education (6 chapters)
SECTION 3: Ethical issues in different engineering disciplines (5 chapters)
SECTION 4: Teaching methods in engineering ethics education (7 chapters)
SECTION 5: Assessment in engineering ethics education (6 chapters)
SECTION 6: Accreditation and engineering ethics education (5 chapters)
The editorial team is pictured below (left to right): Gunter Bombaert, Roland Tormey, Shannon Chance, Tom Børsen, Diana Adela Martin, and Thomas Taro Lennerfors. It’s been a dream team!
This handbook was a project of the Ethics Special Interest Group (SIG) of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI). SEFI members made it possible by contributing to their transcontinental networks of colleagues.
We editors started by sending out a survey, as far and wide as possible, to find out who was working in the field and might be interested in authoring a chapter. We held online workshops to identify what topics should be included and structured them into chapters. We invited a lead author for each chapter and asked the lead to invite three others to co-write the chapter. We asked that the chapter team have people from different places on it, and we aimed for transcontinental teams where feasible. We also asked the lead to consider specific people who had expressed interest in the topic. Our team ultimately included people of diverse levels and fields of experience and good geographical distribution. The people on many of the teams had not worked together before. Many lead authors served as mentors for early career researchers. We held numerous meetings online with the led authors of each section to cross-check, coordinate, and challenge our own thinking. The editorial team met weekly throughout most of the process, and the final result reflects the strong and knowledgeable engagement of many leaders in the field. Our team conducted a rigorous internal peer review, and the publisher conducted its own peer review twice during the process. Here’s what the reviewers said about our proposal:
“I believe this is a state-of-the-art milestone.”
“The lead authors are the key people in this vibrant community, and they have recruited a veritable ‘Who’s Who’ of international authors for the handbook. This is the right time and the right people. It’s the dream team.”
“This would become the resource in this field.”
The final result is a true masterpiece, and I hope you’ll read at least some of it because the content is quite fascinating!
The Ethics SIG also hosts a Spring School around Easter every year, and this year, the theme of the Spring Symposium is “Growing the Field of Engineering Ethics Education and Research as a Community.” I am the local host for this March 2025 event, and we will spend the three days celebrating, applying, and extending the handbook’s content. Learn more about the Symposium and submit your interest in attending at this link: https://forms.gle/WngZ3DMi97FLtQaZ8
Date: 24-26 March 2025 (9:00-17:30 each day)
Location: Royal Marine Hotel, Dún Laoghaire, Ireland
Whether or not you can join us in Dún Laoghaire, I hope you’ll peruse the content of this outstanding new resource and reach out to the editors and authors if you’d like more information or to get involved in what we do!
I am confident that this handbook will make a significant global contribution to engineering education. I therefore urge all engineering and architecture educators to become more explicitly involved in learning and teaching about ethics.
With a team of experts from four continents, I led the development of a newly published special issue of IEEE Transactions onEducation on the “Conceptual Learning of Mathematics-Intensive Concepts in Engineering.” The issue has nine articles covering three categories: assessment, instruction, and learning.
If you teach mathematics concepts to engineering students, you’ll definitely want to check it out!
I served as the organizational lead, and endeavored to support my team in learning journal-editing skills. Dr Farrah Fayyaz (working from Canada) served as the project’s conceptual lead. Dr Anita Campbell (South Africa), Dr Nicole Pitterson (USA), and Dr Sadia Nawaz (Australia) were also instrumental in producing such a high quality compilation.
As described in our guest editorial for this special issue, our leadership team implemented a range of innovative, collaborative models for capacity- and community-building while shepherding this project from conception to completion. My own focus was on cultivating these models, as mathematics education is not a primary focus of mine (although it is for the other four editors). The capacity-building model, and the recommendations for IEEE and other editors of special issues that are included in the guest editorial, were my primary contributions with this project, and a source of pride and joy for me.
I look forward to the future compilations that Farrah, Anita, Nicole, and Sadia will curate. Together, the editorial team hopes to read many more articles in this cutting-edge realm of research, and watch the ongoing success of the authors who participated in our capacity- and community-building activities.
The architecture teachers at KLE Tech are really enthusiastic about teaching and about learning to do educational research. A number of them attended the engineering education conferences held at their institution in January — the IUCEE conference on engineering teaching and REES, the Research in Engineering Education Symposium, which focuses on research about engineering teaching.
KLE Tech’s lovely Dipanwita Chakravarty was the most enthusiastic among them, delighted as she was to find an architect speaking on a panel at REES.
That architect was me! 🙂
Dipanwita found me soon after I presented, asking me to meet her architecture colleagues. She spirited me away from the events at REES, to meet Deepa Mane and Rohini Mligi, tour a room archiving their architecture students’ work, and then meet even more colleagues for an animated chat about research and curriculum design. And tea! Such excellent tea!
Here’s a glimpse of that afternoon’s tour and interactions:
A classroom for hand drawing.It’s chock full of models and drawings by students.KLE Tech has an extensive archive of architecture students’ work.I found this size comparison of Indian temples very interesting!Seeing the work brought me to life!Rohini and I had a great chat.And Deepa took many photos of the tour with Dipanwita and Rohini.By the end of the afternoon, I’d exchanged ideas with architecture staff, including Rohini, Dipanwita, and Deepa.
In that initial discussion in their faculty boardroom, we talked about different types of research they are doing and their interests surrounding architectural accreditation.
They asked me to help them build momentum and capacity to do education research, as they were enjoying seeing work presented at REES but were not quite sure how this type of research would look in the context of architecture rather than engineering.
We decided we needed a group identity. We envisioned collaborating with the engineering education research center on their campus (which has its own building, as it’s the leader in this realm in India). We also envisioned becoming active members of India’s IUCEE (the corollary of ASEE or SEFI for India).
As a step forward, we asked Dr/Prof Vijayalakshmi M., one of the main organizers of IUCEE and this event, if we could start a special interest group for architecture (and design?) within IUCEE. She was supportive. She gave us the Indian head shake and said: sure, just get started, and let’s see how it grows!
Meeting with Dr/Prof Vijayalakshmi M. about setting up a special interest group in IUCEE.
It was a very satisfying exchange, and I returned to REES for the day, happy and energized. I toured KLE Tech’s building for technical engineering later that day alongside the always-smiling, always-energetic Dipanwita Chakravarty and my colleagues from near and far.
I received a welcome email from Dipanwita with a paper of hers that I am finally getting around to reviewing (there’s be so much to do since I returned home!).Dipanwita was an active participant throughout REES. Here, we were touring KLE Tech’s engineering research building during the Symposium.
The next morning, the architecture staff spirited me away again!
They’d assembled an even larger group to discuss what education research is, how education research differs from technical research on architecture and engineering (like the work they are already doing on thermal comfort and architectural heritage conservation), and how they can get started doing this new type of research.
Here are the lovely photos they took of that impromptu seminar along with a photo of our whole group after that meeting.
You can see they made me feel like a rock star! The meeting was so much fun.
We’ve had a gap in communication since the conference ended, because I was on the lecture circuit (lol!) and then getting caught up back home and inducting a new cohort of BIM BSc students.
But my KLE architecture colleagues and I plan to hold online meetings in the near future to discuss examples of educational research in architectural education. I’ve agreed to help them envision, plan, and get started conducting education research.
One of the architects in the group emailed me later, asking me to share my own examples.
Reflecting on this request, I fear my own examples in this realm pale in comparison to my engineering education research. Architecture teachers tend to publish conference papers showing how they taught their class, and of these, my favorite among my papers reporting what might (optimistically) be called research-informed teaching or the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) would probably be Writing Architecture: The Role of Process Journals in Architectural Education and Beginning with Site in Architectural Education.
However, engineering education research is more rigorous than SOTL.
Although ‘engineering education’ conferences will allow the publication of reports on ‘how I taught my class’, the ‘engineering education research’ journals want empirical research studies. You have to collect and analyze data in a rigorous way. An example of this type of work is the book chapter Designing the Identities of Engineers, for which I collected surveys and compared results statistically between ‘engineering’ and ‘engineering technology’ students. The biggest difference I found, and my team reported, was that the ‘engineering’ students envisioned themselves as designers, whereas the ‘engineering technology’ students did not.
My primary research group, the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), embraces architects as if they are engineers, which is a reason I identify so strongly with SEFI. Yet, SEFI doesn’t have a special interest group in architecture or architectural engineering, even though the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) does have an Architectural Engineering division. ASEE’s Journal of Engineering Education rarely publishes research on architecture education.
In contrast, SEFI’s European Journal of Engineering Education, for which I am Deputy Editor, has been reviewing an increasing number of articles on architecture and construction-related topics in education. I suspect that’s partially because I have the interest, capacity, and collegial networks to help support such articles’ review, refinement, and publication. But I also have amazing mentors in my Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Kristina Edström, and co-Deputy Editor, Dr. Jonte Bernhard. They are encouraging me to build capacity in this realm. And they understand that building the cadre of reviewers with expertise in this area takes time, patience, and much enthusiasm!
Our merry band of editors has ample patience and enthusiasm!
A past EJEE editors’ dinner in Dublin, with Dr. Kristina Edström and Dr. Jonte Bernhard (right), me and Diana Martin (soon to be appointed Associate Editor after impressing Kristina and Jonte!).
[Edit after posting: SEFI just launched a new journal that does publish SOTL papers, see: https://sefi-jeea.org/index.php/sefijeea/announcement/view/1! It says, “The SEFI Journal of Engineering Education Advancement offers a route to share ideas, emerging research, practice experience and innovations in the engineering education field.”]
In reflecting on what publications I have of my own that truly relate to architecture, I have identified Using Architecture Design Studio Pedagogies to Enhance Engineering Education as a favorite of mine. Unfortunately, it isn’t easy to find on search engines and the platform to download it is far from user-friendly. It doesn’t get the attention it deserves, but you can download it by clicking the title and see how you like it!
Another relevant work of which I am very proud is Comparing the meaning of ‘thesis’ and ‘final year project’ in architecture and engineering education. Yet this paper is more conceptual than empirically based and, thus, isn’t the best place to start the discussion with my colleagues at KLE Tech. I am delighted to report that it’s garnered nearly 1300 views since it was published, just 5.5 months ago.
A good place to start our discussion might actually be Comparing Grounded Theory and Phenomenology, an article I think is one of my best but has a very long and obscure title that I haven’t bored you with here!
My KLE Tech colleagues have a keen interest in architecture accreditation. These days, I am more engaged with engineering accreditation than with architecture accreditation (having uploaded a conference paper earlier today on engineering ethics accreditation, in fact). But in the past, I’ve been quite involved with the USA’s National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB), and my colleagues at KLE Tech are using NAAB’s guidelines to help them structure their programs. One day, they may seek affiliate designation from NAAB.
Near the end of REES, I found myself again spirited away to the now-familiar meeting room of KLE Tech’s architecture building to discuss accreditation options with Sharan Goudar and another colleague.
Discussing accreditation with Sharan Goudar (right) and colleague.
A text from Sharan encouraged me to finally craft this blog post, in fact. He responded to my recent blog Why India? Inspired by IUCEE and KLE Tech with a request for me to remember the architects:
A friendly text from Sharan Goudar.
Like Sharan, I, too, cherished the moments were shared in Hubli and I look forward to opportunities for more such moments, and a bit of hard (but fun and rewarding) research work, to boot!
My work with VIT Chennai and Dr. Nithya Venkatesan of the Internationalization Office may enable another trip to India, and I will make every effort to include a flight across to KLE Tech’s architecture department while I’m there.
These KLE architecture teachers are lovely, lovely people, and I look forward to getting to know them better and collaborating with them in both research and teaching.
I have an exceptional PhD supervisee at TU Dublin, Sandra I. Cruz Moreno. She is an internally motivated, self-driven learner who needs little to no prompting from me. Supervising her for the past two years has been pure joy.
I am extremely pleased to report that Sandra achieved a major milestone yesterday because she very successfully “defended her Ph.D. proposal” (the term we use in the USA). Here, it’s called a confirmation examination to confirm that a student is on track and suitable to continue onward.
Sandra needed to submit an extensive report. The report is a bit more elaborate than a proposal back home, as it must include the work plan in addition to the first three chapters of the dissertation. She also included preliminary analyses of existing interview data.
TU Dublin is funding Sandra’s PhD so that she can analyze extensive interview data I collected from women studying engineering over the years since 2015. It’s such an enormous amount of data that I’ve never been able to wrap my arms around it fully. Sandra, a sociologist who has worked as a research consultant on rural development for the United Nations and similar organizations, is well-prepared to handle this large dataset. She has embraced the challenge and has made great strides forward.
Sandra Cruz at SEFI 2023, where she presented her research (left) and engaged thoroughly in events like the pre-conference Doctoral Symposium (center and right).
Sandra’s study is titled “Exploring Women’s Experiences on Collaborative Learning in Engineering Education: A Phenomenological Analysis.” She submitted written reports of the coursework she has done to date, as well as a five-chapter document presenting her research. Both of Sandra’s supervisors, as well as our college’s head of research and the external examiner from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), all read and critically analyzed Sandra’s submission.
The result of this review and of yesterday’s two-hour oral examination concluded that her “Proposed research and progress [are] suitable for [Sandra] to remain on the higher register” and proceed into the final stage of her doctoral research. That’s fancy talk for “It’s a go!” and “Full speed ahead!”
Sandra Cruz with her external examiner, Dr Roland Tormey and lead supervisor, Prof/Dr Shannon Chance, on the day of examination.
Regarding the research Sandra has produced to date, the external examiner’s evaluation states:
The report is very well structured and extremely well written. It demonstrates a high degree of scholarship in dealing with quite a few challenging concepts while, at the same time, managing to make them accessible. There is a very good balance between methodology and methods in chapter three in particular.
The data available is suitable for completing of the PhD and the initial analysis carried out shows quite a lot of promise.
-External Examiner Roland Tormey, PhD
Our advisory supervisor, Prof/Dr Brian Bowe, couldn’t attend the examination (he’s the university registrar, after all, and the end of Semester 1 is an extremely busy time of year). Nevertheless, his guidance to Sandra and me has been essential throughout the process. The advice he provides is targeted and highly applicable. Sandra and I have benefited from having him on the team.
I was delighted, but not at all surprised, to hear about the successful outcome. Congratulations, the result reflects your hard work and dedication.
–Prof/Dr Brian Bowe, Head of Academic Affairs at TU Dublin
I have included the cover and table of contents of Sandra’s report so you can see the level of detail required. The report is 96 pages long. While Sandra was rehearsing for the examination, I was off in India delivering a paper she authored on policy to address gender gaps in engineering — policy at the European and Irish levels. The policy paper generated great interest and will form part of the PhD study, although it wasn’t a major component of the confirmation report. In fact, there were a number of topics she researched that didn’t need to be explained in detail at this point, such as critical feminism, which will inform her work going forward.
Working with and learning with and from Sandra is an honor and a privilege. I am grateful to TU Dublin for providing the grant to fund Sandra’s research activity. I am grateful to Brian, Roland, and Marek for the support they have lent Sandra and me. And most of all, I am grateful to Sandra for her diligence, perseverance, openness, and sincerity. I have learned so much from her and from working with her!
India is now the most populated country in the world. There’s a pressing need for more and better-educated civil engineers there. A civil engineer working in India today can expect to work 9 AM to 9 PM six days per week and 9 AM to 2 PM on Sundays (according to Dr. Balasubramaniam, Managing Director of Hitech Concrete Solutions Ltd) because their skills are in such high demand.
However, this current weekend is a holiday, so I hope most of them are taking some time off!
Based on my two-week glimpse into life in India, I believe Indian people work extremely hard. Most people working in businesses or projects at the national and international levels work in English. Higher education in India is also in English because India has around 100 languages.
Civil engineers’ work is incredibly important! In a developing nation, the infrastructure and buildings overseen by civil engineers (and architects!) shelter and support a growing population of people – a population working hard to live ethically and build a brighter future.
Building under construction on VIT campusDr. Shanmungham’s concrete testing labVIT world rankings (QS system) for 2023
In the first couple weeks of January 2024, I got an inside perspective by attending events and touring workshops and laboratories at the Chennai branch campus of Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT).
VIT’s Dr. Nithya Venkatesan, Assistant Director of International Relations, and Associate Professor Dr. Shanmuga Sundaram (who goes by Shanmugham) served as my primary hosts. They helped coordinate my entire two-week trip, and without them I never would have managed to make my first venture into this fascinating land.
Visiting the VIT Chennai Internationalization Office and meeting Dr. Nithya Venkatesan.Sightseeing with Associate Professor Dr. Shanmuga Sundaram, my primary host.Meeting with VIT’s vice president for academics, Dr. Sekar Viswanatha (second from left), Dr. Nithya Venkatesan (far left) and Prof. Dr. Johnson Alengaram.
Dr. Renukadevi Selvaraj, Professor and Head of the Dept. of Education at the National Institute of Technical Teachers Training Institute (NITTTR), run by the Ministry of Education for the Government of India, connected me with VIT after I met her in Blacksburg, Virginia (my hometown) at an ethics symposium last summer.
At VIT, I attended a two-day conclave on civil engineering organized by Shanmugham that included presentations by academic and industry partners. Shanmugham’s areas of specialization include sustainable building materials, special concrete, alternative binding processes.
I delivered the opening keynote address for the conclave. Most of the audience of around 45 participants were civil and structural engineering students, but their teachers, some PhD researchers, and some industry partners also attended.
Other presenters at the conclave talked about structural failures within existing buildings (causes, effects, and ways of avoiding or addressing defects), earthquake resistance and previous structural failures in India due to earthquake activity, and the importance of being part of professional organizations (such as the UK-based Institution of Civil Engineers, ICE). India does not yet have a licensure program for professional/licensed/chartered engineers of the type you see in the US, UK and Ireland, but Professor Johnson Alengaram from the University of Malaya encouraged the audience to join ICE and maintain their learning and their credentials with care.
Shanmugham noted that he’s in the second generation of civil engineers the people of his father’s age with a first generation of civil engineering professional in the country. The students he is educating now, he sees as the third generation of civil engineering in India.
Arvindh Raj Rajendran, who earned a Master of Structural Technology degree, delivered the conclave’s final talk with an extremely well-articulated presentation about an apartment complex that his family’s company, Hitech Civil Engineering Services, Ltd., has worked to diagnosed and remediated. The original construction, by a different company, had severe deficits that had made national news in India. Hitech has made interventions to keep the structure inhabitable and conducted detailed analyses to help the government and the courts decide if the building can be salvaged or must be replaced. He explained the analysis and rectification process in detail. Arvindh showed other faulty structures that Hitect has been able to salvage, as well as the equipment they use (all pictured below).
A slide from Arvindh Raj’s Hitech presentation.A slide from Arvindh Raj’s Hitech presentation.Monitoring devices used at Hitech.
Before the conclave started, I had the distinct honor of visiting four of the engineering laboratories on the VIT Chennai campus, being shown around by Shanmugham. We visited the soil testing lab where he and his colleague, Associate Professor Dr. Karthiyaini train PhD students and conduct research.
We visited Shanmugham’s materials testing laboratory. He has just gained national certification to test materials (such as concrete samples from active construction sites). He can test the performance of all kinds of concrete steel and concrete-related products. He is also researching possibilities for creating concrete mixed with less embodied carbon than today’s standard material.
He’s working towards a net-zero-type concrete method using byproducts of other industries in India — because concrete is a central construction material in the country. China and India are using a huge portion of the entire amount of concrete fabricated each year currently worldwide.
Dr. Shanmungham’s colleague added Tom and Jerry to my visit to the Shanmugham’s concrete testing lab!Official certifications for Dr. Shanmungham testing lab.A machine to demonstrate to students how to protect reservoirs from infiltration of contaminated water, built by Shanmungham.PhD research students in the geology lab.PhD students in the water quality lab.
I also visited a water quality research lab and met the academic leader and her PhD students. They are working on a wide array of topics, including addressing toxic landfill effluents that leak into the soil, reviving microplastics from water, desalination process, and ocean clean-up techniques. I learned so much and wish I’d taken notes!
The geology lab was equally interesting as the students were taking samples from a soil boring to study contaminants. They introduced me to each doctoral research project, and I asked loads of questions, which, again, unfortunately, my brain failed to file into long-term memory. It does this filing in the night while I sleep and in the day when I retell what I’ve learned. But I learned so very much in that single day of touring that my brain couldn’t hold it all.
One thing I will never forget is how many talented women are studying engineering at VIT. To my delight, the research labs are gender balanced.
On the day of the tours, I also met VIT’s vice president for academics, Dr. Sekar Viswanathan. He holds this role on all four VIT campuses. I was very impressed with how attentively he communicated with Dr. Johnson, another international guest speaking at the conclave, and me.
VIT is a private institution that provides itself in excellence and holds academic world rankings. The Chennai campus is currently educating about 10,000 engineering students and is expanding its facilities to double its enrollment. This is very important in a country where many hundred thousand engineers graduate from higher education institutions each year but are not well-prepared for industry. Receiving an education at a highly-ranked institution like this helps ensure the graduate will be ready to perform well in the industry. The country desperately needs more civil engineers who can do this. Hopefully, one day, India’s civil engineers won’t need to work seven days a week!
Shanmugham was an exceptional host during my trip. He and his wife (Rama, an electrical/computer engineer who runs a startup business with a colleague) and their six-year-old daughter (Shanmuga, who speaks English in addition to her mother tongue), took me shopping for Indian outfits — so I’ll fit in better on my next trip to India!
They also invited me to their home, located in a huge complex of apartments. There are 20 buildings, each about 17 stories tall. I met their neighbors, and I learned something about how they live. We got to share a bit of our own cultures with each other, which was a true highlight of my time in Chennai.
Shanmungham with Shanmunga and Rama, at their home.The shrine in their home.Shopping for Indian outfits with Shanmunga.Shanmunga and Rama’s neighbors also welcomed me into their home. The daughter will marry next week, and I have been invited. Unfortunately, I’ll be at work in Ireland during the multi-day wedding events.
At the very start of my trip, I also got the chance to visit some stone temples near Chennai. Shanmugham showed me around the massive site and, in true Indian fashion, took pictures of me at each important structure. These temples, carved from solid granite boulders protruding from the sand at this coastal location, have stood for 1300 years. The craftsmanship was superb and awe-inspiring.
The day we visited the temples (the day I landed in India, January 2) was a holiday. The site was being visited by many busloads of tourists from all over India dressed to the nines. I included pictures of one group of visitors in the gallery below.
“The Group of Monuments at Mahabalipuram is a collection of 7th- and 8th-century CE religious monuments in the coastal resort town of Mahabalipuram, Tamil Nadu, India and is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is on the Coromandel Coast of the Bay of Bengal, about 60 kilometres south of Chennai.”
The Indian people definitely made me feel welcome and safe and thankful for this opportunity to meet and learn from them. Everywhere I went, people stopped and asked to take a picture with me. Little children looked at me in amazement. Shanmugham noted that many visitors to the temple had come from afar, from rural parts of India, and only some of the children had seen anyone like me before.
Incidentally, the food was incredible! During my two-week visit, I enjoyed the taste of every single thing I ate. At VIT, I had the privilege of residing at the international guesthouse. The drivers and guesthouse staff were absolutely incredible and made my stay a joy. At first, they offered me more Western foods, but when they saw that I enjoyed the Indian dishes more, that changed! The entire staff went the extra mile to ensure my safety and comfort.
In this post, I described just five of my days in India. I hope to post another blog this week about my experiences at REES 2024 in Hubli, India, and visiting NITTTR outside Chennai.
From ancient stone temples to teaching labs and structural failure — I got insider perspectives of civil engineering in India from the staff of VIT and I look forward to my next visit to India.
Monuments at Mahabalipuram, a UNESCO World Heritage Site near Chennai, India.
It’s been a great start-of-semester and welcome-back here in Dublin. I’ve been settling back in at TU Dublin, since the first of the year. I’ve been learning to juggle a host of new job responsibilities along with my favorite existing projects. There’s so much work to be done!
Images from Dublin (my walking path between TU Dublin buildings), my Tech Graphics class (day 2), and postings in the hallway that remind me of projects led back in the States.
In addition to teaching first-year engineering modules/courses, I have also been helping launch the new MSc in BIM, working on curriculum development (which buys out half my work time), finalizing research projects for publication, and drafting my final report for the 2018-12019 fellowship I had to UCL.
I’ve also attended a host of special events:
The launch of TU Dublin’s new strategic plan
A two-day conference on “Rethinking the Crit” in architecture and design education.
Tech support workshops for staff on Brightspace and Agresso
Personal wellbeing workshops for staff on insurance and personal finance.
A planning sessions with our ever-expanding RoboSlam team preparing for Dublin Maker 2020 (June 2020) and our upcoming Engineering Your Future week (May 2020)
TU Dublin’s new Strategic Plan
The launch of TU Dublin’s strategic plan was held at the Lighthouse Cinema, under Smithfield Plaza.
The unveiling of the strategic plan was quite well organized and inspiring. The speakers and panelists all did a great job explaining the shared aspirations of our academic community. I hope the details are as well done as the vision they presented.
Soon, I’ll read the plan and see how it matches up against the evaluation rubric I published back during my doc studies, which you can download here.
The take-home message of the strategic planning launch was that TU Dublin values diversity and inclusivity. The student voice was clear, strong and impressive. The leaders were well-spoken.
TU Dublin’s workshop on “Rethinking the Crit”
I attended a hands-on conference alongside architecture students from all over Ireland as well as teachers and critics from Ireland and abroad.
The workshop was organized by my College’s office for Learning Development, under the direction of Patrick Flynn, our Head of Learning Development. In many places, his role would be called Vice Dean for Academics, but DIT (the parent of TU Dublin) tended to do things its own unique way.
As I’m part of a team developing a brand new Architectural Engineering curriculum, this conference on how to improve the studio jury system was of great value to me. That Arch Eng course will graduate people ready for architecture licensing.
One of the presenters, Dr. Kathryn Anthony, literally wrote the book that got this conversation rolling: Design Juries on Trial. It was published in 1991 but there’s still a lot more uptake needed of her ideas across the globe. She collected data at Hampton University, where I used to teach, and at HU we used many of the techniques she proposed—with great success.
I hope to use techniques we discussed to help improve architecture education near and far.
The “Rethinking the Crit” symposium included presentations and small-group work sessions with teams of students, lecturers, and outside experts.
The topic is ethics in engineering education and practice.
The special focus issue will be published by Taylor and Francis in the Australasian Journal of Engineering Education. You can find out more about this and all journals in the field of engineering education on a webpage recently launched by REEN–many thanks to my boss here at UCL, Prof. John Mitchell, for collecting that valuable info so REEN could host it as a service to the EER community.
Full-length papers are due March 1, 2020 to begin the review process–but you can feel free to contact me anytime to request help or advice (irelandbychance at gmail dot com). Papers for this journal are 5,000 to 7,000 words, including the abstract and references.
I’m one of the two Guest Editors for this project; the Associate Editors are all members of the REEN board. The editorial team includes people from Australia, Africa, and South America, as well as Europe and the USA! The journal’s Editor in Chief is the coordinator for REEN’s upcoming symposium (REES 2021) in Perth, Australia December 5-8, 2021.
And, I’ve just started on as Chair of REEN for the next two years. Delighted to have worked with such a productive group of people representing every continent over the past two years, and looking forward to two more great years! We’ve just welcomed two new members to the board–Cindy Finelli (from Michigan, USA) and Aida Olivia Pereira de Carvalho Guerra (from Aalborg, Denmark)–to round out our crew.
When I started studying “higher education” as a PhD subject at William and Mary in 2006, I wondered why architecture students seem so engaged–passionate and persistent–and why engineering didn’t use the same methods that seem so “sticky” and engaging.
“Problem-Based Learning pedagogies that require high levels of inquiry and hands-on engagement can enhance student learning in engineering. Such pedagogies lie at the core of studio-based design education, having been used to teach architects since the Renaissance. Today, design assignments and studio-based learning formats are finding their way into engineering programs, often as part of larger movements to implement Student-Centered, Problem-Based Learning (PBL) pedagogies. This spectrum of pedagogies is mutually supportive, as illustrated in the University of Michigan’s SmartSurfaces course where students majoring in engineering, art and design, and architecture collaborate on wickedly complex and ill-defined design problems. In SmartSurfaces and other similar PBL environments, students encounter complex, trans-disciplinary, open-ended design prompts that have timely social relevance.
“Analyzing data generated in studio-based PBL courses like SmartSurfaces can help educators evaluate and track students’ intellectual growth. This paper presents a rubric for measuring students’ development of increasingly refined epistemological understanding (regarding knowledge and how it is created, accessed, and used). The paper illustrates use of the tool in evaluating student blogs created in SmartSurfaces, which in turn provides evidence to help validate the rubric and suggest avenues for future refinement. The overall result of the exploratory study reported here is to provide evidence of positive change among students who learn in PBL environments and to provide educators with a preliminary tool for assessing design-related epistemological development. Findings of this study indicate design-based education can have powerful effects and collaborating across disciplines can help engineering students advance in valuable ways.”
Recommended Citation
Chance, S., Marshall, J. and Duffy, G. (2016) Using Architecture Design Studio Pedagogies to Enhance Engineering Education. International Journal of Engineering Education Vol. 32, No. 1(B), pp. 364–383, 2016. doi:10.21427/D7V62S
DOI
10.21427/D7V62S
Keywords
Problem-Based Learning, Student-Centered Learning, Design-Based Learning, epistemology, architecture education, design studio pedagogy, engineering education, cognitive development
Monday: Technical graphics
Teaching architecture students about sun angles at Hampton University, circa 2007.