Suppose you concretely quantified a student's degree of CURIOSITY. How might their learning, their engineering solutions, their career (and life) change if their curiosity were, say, doubled? Certainly, there would be upsides and downsides. Thinking might be less linear, less patterned, perhaps even controversial. But controlled, directed, and productive curiosity is at the root of discovery. The good news is that research shows that CURIOSITY can be increased. Curiosity is invaluable for uncovering essential and unexpected information that shapes engineering solutions to their maximum potential. Indeed, that's the aspirational goal of partner institutions in KEEN.This card is about understanding CURIOSITY in depth and within an entrepreneurial mindset. The KEEN Framework provides a starting point for two student outcomes related to curiosity. Students should:Demonstrate constant curiosity about the changing world around us.Explore a contrarian view of accepted solutions. Turning the CURIOSITY outcomes into questions is also helpful. Students achieving these outcomes will ask: • "What changes affect our future?" • "How can we __________ differently? better?" These are likely elements of an entrepreneurial mindset but they are not intended to be a complete description of curiosity. Rather, within KEEN, these form a "starter set" for curiosity-related outcomes. To reach these outcomes, design exercises so that students: • Investigate trends, • Generate their own questions, • Challenge assumptions, • Investigate areas of their own choosing, • Assume the role of a “futurist,” supporting predictions, • Act on their curiosity, • Consider multiple points of view, • Create a positive atmosphere of constructive criticism, • Offer considered, pertinent feedback to peers and authorities, • Examine data that supports unpopular solutions.If curiosity is going to become part of a mindset, part of a disposition, then the goal of educational interventions is to exercise situational curiosity to increase a student’s dispositional curiosity.To dive deeper, research literature describes characteristics of curiosity itself, including:Epistemic vs. Diversive CuriosityEpistemic curiosity investigates underlying reasons, asking "Why?" while diverse curiosity considers possibilities, asking "What if?". For example, see Berlyne or Litman, et. al. in the research folder.Situational vs. Dispositional CuriositySituational curiosity is generated from surrounding circumstances while dispositional curiosity describes an attitudinal propensity to be curious. For example, see Kashdan and Roberts in the research folder.Reductive vs. Inductive CuriosityReductive curiosity is motivated by "wanting" while inductive curiosity is characterized by "liking" new information. For example, see Litman below.See the folders below for the following:An expanded description of the curiosity-related outcomesResearch references and perspectives on curiosityOne short example of "curiosity" in curriculumA collection of websites and cards that you can use to promote "curiosity" connected to your educational goalsTools for Curiosity

For engineers to succeed in a world with rapidly changing needs and tools, they need a sense of curiosity. Faculty who instill a spirit of curiosity equip students to create extraordinary results.

"Curiosity is a function of overcoming fear. Fear of being wrong. Fear of being right. Fear of being different. If you don’t have the guts to think about bad ideas, you’ll never have the opportunity to execute brilliant ones." UnknownWe know EML is about more than one thing (there are at least three Cs). For teachers striving to help student make progress in more than one aspect of EML, how do we assess these multiple aspects? In other words, how do we decide what to measure, what tools are available, and how do we go about using various tools to generate meaningful assessment results? This card shares the assessment of curiosity using the 5-Dimensional Curiosity Scale (Kashdan, et al., 2018) and practical lessons learned which is part of a larger study of EML integrated curriculum. We learned these lessons through developing and implementing a comprehensive plan to assess EML in a first-year engineering course at The Ohio State University.BACKGROUNDOur 20-month project seeks to integrate EML in ENGR 1182, the second course in a two-semester Fundamentals of Engineering sequence. At Ohio State all incoming freshman engineering students must take a common first-year sequence through the Department of Engineering Education. The course is offered in multiple sections, and each section has a capacity of 72 students. For our assessment, we collected data from 8 sections that implemented the newly developed EML curriculum and 8 sections taught in the traditional fashion. We have the following purposes for the assessment:1. To assess students' entrepreneurial mindset and attainment of EM related learning objectives.2. To assess and compare traditional first-year engineering learning in the EML sections and the traditional sections.3. To evaluate the outcomes of integrating EML into a first year engineering course.This card is part of a sequence of cards developed to share the overall study, outcomes, and lessons learned. The main card with the overall study plan can be found here. We used the Five-Dimensional Curiosity Scale (Kashdan, et al., 2018) to measure students’ curiosity in the pre- and post-survey. The Scale comprises 25 items that can be categorized into five dimensions: joyous exploration, deprivation sensitivity, social tolerance, social curiosity, and thrill seeking. We also report on Connections, Creating Value, and Content Knowledge in the course of this study.CONCLUSIONSThis work models ways that students in large courses can engage in real-world problems at scale without compromising technical proficiency and diversity of student experiences. Based on the results presented in the summary attached below (3Cs-5DC&ContentKnowledge&Connections&CreatingValue_Summary.pdf), we have found evidence to suggest that the integration of EML concepts into a first-year engineering course significantly improved student performance with respect to technical learning objectives, increased willingness to take risks, and increased social curiosity (as measured by Kashdans’ 5 Dimensions of Curiosity instrument)– all while creating aptitude in EML-related competencies of creating connections and creating value. The increase in technical learning for the EML version of the course (ITS), was especially surprising given the short exposure time these students had to working directly with the Arduino microcontroller.

Explore what curiosity means with the entrepreneurial mindset, how lives and careers are changed for the better, and more. Use this curated set of cards in your classroom!

I created this card to categorize and link to KEEN'zine articles that highlight specific elements of each of the 3C's. Articles may show up in multiple folders, so keep an eye out for that as you click through and read. Please use the comment section below to ask any questions that come up when reading the articles. Also, if I missed tagging an article, please comment and let me know through the comments. Happy reading!

Faculty discuss how themes and ideas from "Curious" relate to pedagogy and how to implement activities in the classroom to stimulate the curiosity of our students.

I knew what I wanted to be: A philanthropist, a leader, an entrepreneur. In other words, an engineer.

Not sure where to start with entrepreneurially minded learning (EML)?Project-based learning (PBL), social and global biases, customer discovery, jigsaw activities, universal design, and more can all be connected to EML - and you can learn how through the cards in this starter pack.

The Situational Motivation Scale tool, which is known as SIMS, is a vetted tool which measures student interest and self regulation on specific tasks. Doug Dunston facilitated a "professor-as-the-engineering-student" experience in which University of St. Thomas faculty self-assessed motivation and regulation on an engineering task of their choosing. The experience of assessing motivation, and by extension curiosity, led several engineering faculty to use this tool to assess and increase student intrinsic motivation and self regulation on specific tasks. Assessment of the tool includes a visual representation of motivation and regulation. An umbrella IRB study allowed for faculty to better understand student curiosity and adjust in real time without compromising student anonymity.

From August to October, 2019, James Madison University faculty read and discussed Warren Berger's book, "A More Beautiful Question," as part of an effort to imagine possibilities to drive curiosity amongst our engineering students, faculty, and staff. With a project-rich curriculum, we've identified curiosity as being the gateway mindset to academic and career successes.Using the book's premise as motivation, we thought of various ways to create question-driven and impactful interventions. While curricular nudges are easy, classroom behaviors are typically compartmentalized by students (or faculty) as important only to the classroom -- we decided to look elsewhere for influential change. This card presents three of our simple and inexpensive question-based approaches:1. Environmental application: Hallway questions2. Messaging application: Instagram strategy3. Inclusiveness application: Higher ed roundtable More information on each of these three approaches is detailed below.1. Hallway QuestionsA. Goal: Create small physical space modifications to drive curiosityB. Strategy: We added photograph-based artwork across our discovery, design, and research floor. We created a series of fifty 4x4 inch glass photos to adorn our hallway walls, half were amended with questions or quotes to drive curiosity. Most photos were of Madison Engineering students in action. The photos amended with questions did not include identifiable students in order to eliminate any association, positive or negative, between them and the question; instead photos with unusual/odd images were chosen as a visual layer to drive curiosity. Questions were inspired/modified from "A More Beautiful Question", grouped into three categories (Why?, How?, What If?), and included: Why? Why does this situation exist?Why does this matter?Why should we settle for the current situation?Why does it present a problem, or create an opportunity, and for whom?Why has no one addressed this need or addressed this problem before?Why am I evading inquiry?Why should I believe you when you tell me something can't be done?Why am I in engineering school and how does my work reflect that?How? How might this look if we stepped into other shoes, or looked at it from a different perspective?How do I decide which of my ideas is the one I’ll pursue?How do I begin to test that idea to see what works and what doesn’t?How do we know what’s true or false? What evidence counts?How do I learn from failure?How can we make a better experiment?How might we pry off the lid and stir the paint?How do we figure out what’s wrong and fix it?What if? What if it were different?What if we could start with a blank page?What if we could not fail?What if we start with what we already have?What if we made one small change?What if Madison Engineering didn’t exist?What if we delighted our partners?What future do I want to create? How do I work my way backwards to get there?C. Outcomes: The photos were positioned on the hallway walls using a random pattern generator. The appended files include JPEGs of all images created, as well as some hallway views. Early comments have been positive, including "The photos express the great community of engineers we have here." and "It's good to see students like me at work. It makes me feel like I belong." We have yet to hear/observe if there is any direct impact on curiosity, though.__________________________2. Instagram StrategyA. Goal: To transform our Department's Instagram channel from another one designed for passive consumption to one that could stimulate expansive imagining.B. Strategy: We continue to use Instagram to promote students and faculty at work across a range of projects. Instead of typical photo captions, we lead our posts with questions, either indirectly or directly related to the image. The combination offers up a bit of insight into why, how, and what if behind our special engineering program at JMU. Some example question-driven captions we have used over the past three months include:Why do a curricular deep dive and redesign every decade? Because we should, so we do. Day 1 of 2, all minds on board, new S-curve ahead. #MADEbetterWhy do we gather our freshmen for 2 days of “camp” prior to the launch of the year? Because our students’ success matters. #ReMADE2019Why do we ask our students to paint a professional mask on Day 2? High impact engineering careers begin with knowing yourself. #MADEmask #smallbutawesomeWhy do we give our students the freedom to discover their engineering passions? Because each of them is unique, their educational journey should be personalized. #MADEunique #stayunique #ReMADE2019Why do our @jmuengineering upperclassmen form a tunnel to help us welcome each of our incoming students by name? Because each of them is truly important to us. Welcome Engineers of 2023! #MADEwelcome #smallisbeautifulHow might we know if our Re:MADE Camp helps our students build an engineering community before Day 1? When the Selfie Booth is commandeered by groups instead of individuals, something good is happening. #MADEcommunity #successtrajectoryWhy do our freshmen get their first project in Week 1? Because they joined us to make a difference — so every day is a project day @jmuengineering ! #MADEprojectready#wesweatpurpleHow do you get a great engineering internship? Focus on the 3 Rs: reputation, relationships, and reality. Great advice from student panelists at today’s #MADEsummers2019event on internships #peerwisdomHow do you get the 3 Rs? 1. Reputation: Do more than is expected, 2. Relationships: Ask questions rooted in curiosity, 3. Reality: Spend time on stuff that matters — Project rich learning is huge differentiator. #projectadvantaged #MADEprojectreadyWhat’s the surest path to becoming an amazing engineer? Hang out with people on the same journey. @jmu_swe meetup in our courtyard to rally new students to the cause of awesomeness. #MADEgreat #peoplelikeusdothingslikethisC. Outcomes: Go to our Instagram feed: @jmuengineering to see examples. We have built our network of followers by 25% and likes are up on average 41% over the past three months.__________________________3. Higher Education RoundtableA. Goal: Bring new voices to the conversation around a next generation engineering educationB. Strategy: Starting in September, all planned visitors to our engineering department trigger a Roundtable Discussion on the Future of Higher Education. For these sessions we match the visitors with a nearly equal number of engineering faculty and engineering students, and engage them all in a one-hour conversation on higher education with special focus on engineering. Each group has a different mix around the table, but the questions have stayed the same. All conversations are audio-recorded, and these files are archived for later access by engineering faculty. Recordings do not identify the speakers, affording a reasonable level of anonymity. Most of the session have been capped at eight people around the table (e.g. four visitors, two students, two faculty). Each group is lightly facilitated by an engineering faculty familiar with the method, but mostly guided by the questions presented on a card within a notebook handed to each participant upon arrival. Our questions include:From your experience, what do you think need to change in education?From your experience, describe the best learning opportunity you have been a part of.How do you imagine students best engage in learning in the 21st century?How do you imaging learning evolves from high to college to professional?How do you imagine JMU and Madison Engineering might position its engineering program best for learning in the 21st century?How do you imagine education might change to more effectively engage a diverse community of learners?What do you imagine the role of teachers should be in the 21st century?C. Outcomes: We had four Roundtables in October, featuring: (1) two Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and their high school daughter, (2) an alum, (3) two visiting faculty, and (4) a management team from industry. Each had 2-3 engineering faculty, so to date 10 of our faculty have been involved. Also, each had 2-3 engineering students, to date 9 have been involved. While everyone has the above questions on a card, all sessions have meandered beyond the prepared set -- no group has gone through all the above by the end of the session time. In general, the smaller groups and those with an engineering guest have proven to be more linear in conversation and the question set is an especially helpful tool for them. We have captured all four sessions and archived the audio files in a protected server for faculty review. These sessions are being used to stretch our thinking around our interest in a holistic creation of a second generation learning landscape for JMU Engineering -- curriculum, environments, students, teachers, pedagogies, etc. are all fair game. With only four sessions to date, it is already clear of the benefit of hearing from people not usually at the "curriculum committee" meetings; we are expanding the Roundtable to groups of our students in the Spring.

This card (and associated paper) supports the integration of curiosity, creating connections, and creating value (the 3Cs) of the entrepreneurial mindset in an electric circuits course with a lab component. We describe how a few key modifications that are reinforced continuously throughout the course can transform the course to support the 3Cs. Each of the 3Cs is targeted by a specific approach. Look at the Course Structure section for copies of the syllabus and course schedule to see how the entrepreneurially minded learning (EML) activities fit in the scope of the course.Curiosity is targeted through the formulation of exploratory questions and deeper exploration of those questions. For each lecture topic, a question has been generated by the instructor designed to stimulate student thought and to show students examples of good questions designed for deeper exploration of the topics. The first couple of minutes of class is spent discussing how the question is graded across five dimensions: grammar, clarity, relevance, topic orientation and potential for depth of exploration. Students submit their own sets of exploratory questions three times throughout the course. A single point formative assessment rubric has been created to provide students feedback on their questions. A brief research paper is assigned that requires students to formulate an exploratory question, identify at least one credible and relevant source to use to explore the topic of the question, identify new questions that arise during the research process, and report their findings. It is important for students to demonstrate they are aware of what they do not know by formulating follow-up questions during the research. Doing so demonstrates an ability for students to engage in effective self-study, which supports life-long learning. Students complete the short report with an assessment of their sources found during the research process. Look at the Curiosity-Related Activities section below for copies of the exploratory question rubric and brief research paper assignment. The conference presentation provided in the 2019 ASEE Conference Paper Link and Presentation section provides examples of questions scored on the rubric that are shared with students.Connections is targeted by circuit analogies related to more familiar topics. Connecting new topics to established student knowledge is a well-researched pedagogical approach firmly grounded in the science of learning. A dozen novel circuit analogies are provided in the paper (and even more are in the presentation) that are used in the course. An analogy reflection assignment is given that allows students to select either one of the analogies given throughout the course or to create their own analogy that connects the circuit content to a life experience or other topic. In either case, students are required to describe the underlying deep structure that is shared between the source and target of the analogy. It has been shown that students who partake in the exercise of identifying deep structure between analogs are more capable of transferring knowledge to novel situations. Look at the 2019 ASEE Conference Paper Link and Presentation section below for the presentation that provides the images used with the analogies that are presented to students. Also, look at the Connections-Related Activities sections for a copy of the analogy reflection assignment.Creating value is targeted through a circuit design-build-test project that requires a value proposition. Students are organized into interdisciplinary groups to design and build a temperature sensing circuit that utilizes a thermistor and meets certain design constraints but is open-ended in terms of the application, or need. Students are required to identify an important need or application for their temperature sensing circuit. They must justify the need through relevant market data and submit the idea for the need in a problem framing deliverable. Students also submit an individual design solution along with the problem framing document for formative feedback. The final proposal for the project has a value proposition section in which students summarize the value created by their design. Two suppliers must be identified and a cost comparison must be submitted in the final proposal. For more details on the design-build-test project, look at the Creating Value-Related Activities section for a copy of the project handout and rubric used for grading the final reports.

This module introduces students to customer discovery principles and gathering requirements of an engineering project. Here, the entrepreneurial mindset is developed by learning about the importance of having curiosity about the problem you're trying to solve as well as discovering the needs and making connections to the greater context of your customers situation. In this module these skills are developed through introductory online lecture content, a follow-up quiz, and in-class value identification and customer active learning activities.The customer discovery skills are then practiced through completion of a requirements document assignment focused on developing customer archetypes, customer needs, and initial tasks for a project. This module is typically used during the first quarter of a course, at the very beginning of a senior capstone project with an outside project sponsor. There is 1 week of pre-work online lecture, 1 in-class period, and one homework assignment. All of these are spread over about 3 weeks. This module could be adapted for larger scale project based courses at any level. It is primarily designed for on-ground but could easily be adapted for online delivery.

This CardDeck links to a variety of innovation challenges developed by Saint Louis University. The goal of the innovation challenges is to promote the entrepreneurial mindset through multiple exposures to innovation process in a competitive, multidisciplinary, team-based, creative environment. Just as everyone is encouraged to exercise everyday to keep the body fit, innovation challenges are designed to keep the mind fit. It’s a mind workout. The Innovation Challenges help participants to exercise their creative side, work in multidisciplinary teams, and experience the team dynamics. They learn to tackle a novel situation under intense competitive time pressure, while networking with others outside their disciplines, and most importantly, fine-tuning their entrepreneurial skills.In this CardDeck, each of the challenges are linked in folders below. At the bottom of this card you will find a link to the entire pdf and ibook that features all the challenges in one place.Note: The pdf does not contain rich media like videos and scrolling images. All assets have been uploaded to the individual cards and can be downloaded/viewed.

These case studies are intended to be integrated into existing technical baccalaureate engineering programs to enhance student understanding of how technical concepts coupled with curiosity, making connections, and focusing on creating values can lead to new products and businesses.

This course uses the Question Formulation Technique in an introductory Circuits analysis course. At St Thomas this technique was implemented in a course of 30 first and second year students. A fundamental assumption of the QFT is that students learn and retain knowledge better when, fueled by curiosity, they ask their own questions, and use them to drive their learning.A total of four QFT research projects were assigned to students working in groups of four to six. Each project was launched with an in-class discussion, and the majority of the research work was done by students outside of class. Students were given between one and two weeks to research the answers to the questions asked in each research project. The topics covered in the research projects include basic circuit laws, linearity and superposition, sinusoidal steady-state AC circuit response, and operational amplifiers.The main deliverable for the project was a paper summarizing the research questions and answering those questions with documented references. The students also needed to reflect on the questions they raised, the answers they found, and the overall QFT-based research process. QFT technique could be applied to any course.

In an educational setting it is vital that we as educators are able to assess our learning outcomes and effectively measure student progress towards those objectives. With that being said, what can educators do when they trying to instill a characteristic that they don’t know how to asses? The entrepreneurial engineering community is tackling this issue head on, as the increasing popularity of injecting an entrepreneurial mindset into the engineering curriculum has brought some of these “hard-to-assess” traits into the spotlight. While the KEEN framework has provided a valuable communication tool around which to organize discussion and facilitate action incorporating the entrepreneurial mindset into engineering curricula, it has also raised significant questions around assessment of the framework elements. The constructs captured by the framework are beyond the scope of what engineering faculty are accustomed to teaching and assessing. The abstracted and conceptually overlapping nature of the framework elements further worsens this discomfort. Having a fully vetted example of how the framework might be digested into defined, assessable pieces would be of tremendous value to the network. The purpose of this work is, therefore, to address the need for applied assessment of the KEEN Entrepreneurial Mindset and to explore how the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) VALUE Rubrics might fill these gaps. The first goal for this work was to review the applicability of VALUE rubrics. The guiding research question for this phase was: Are the VALUE Rubrics applicable in regards to assessing the Entrepreneurial Mindset that KEEN promotes? Secondly, after this initial review, the rubric components deemed most applicable were extracted and the goal shifted to answering the question: How might the components of the VALUE Rubrics be reorganized around the elements of the KEEN Framework? Finally, after a thorough review of the resulting rubrics, the question again shifted to: How might these reorganized rubrics be modified and/or appended to better evaluate the KEEN Framework?A set of three rubrics has been developed based on a modification of the sixteen VALUE rubrics, reframed to fit the KEEN Framework. As previously stated, there are gaps in each of the three rubrics, some with more than others. Work is still needed to distribute, revise, and polish the text of the rubric rows, as well as to evaluate gaps in the rubric coverage. Additionally, while direct application of these exemplars is not the intended use case, there are some faculty who may opt to do so. Significant work remains in terms of validation of the rubrics. While they have been developed from highly reliable and validated source material, some revalidation is necessary to ensure good reliability and applicability of the rubrics as redesigned. This work was initially presented at ASEE 2019, as part of the ENT division.

This card is your guide to creating or updating your own cards. What to expect Get strategies and examples for each card field.We'll use the Description box (the one we're in right now) to include tips for fields that don't have Rich Text formatting boxes. >>Tip: Save often! And wait for the Save button to return to yellow before continuing. >>Template: Want to draft a card offline in Word? Download the template here. ==== Let's begin In a new browser tab: Create a new card.Or Edit an existing card. Card Templates: General or Classroom In the card Edit screen, first choose which template you wish to use. Are you sharing content not related to classroom instruction?Choose the General template.Are you sharing content for a class or course?Choose the Classroom template. This template adds fields such as Time and Materials. You'll see these below. You can update existing cards to the Classroom template! Card Title "The Journey to the Top: Board Game to Instill Entrepreneurial Mindset." "Building Solutions for Real Customers." "Flying Forces: Adding Lift to Statics." The title is one of your first opportunities to get people interested in your card. Be descriptive! Avoid using internal course names/designations.Avoid single-term titles such as "Statics." Featured Image The image is another way to draw people into your card. Aim for a picture directly tied to your content. Use rectangular photos that are wider than they are tall.Engineering Unleashed provides a selection of stock photos. >>See how this card does it. Authors & Editors When you first create a card, add yourself as the author. Then add as many other authors as you wish. Editors can help you build or check over the card. All authors and editors on a card can: Edit the card.Submit the card for a review.Use the Author Notes for private chat. The difference between an author and an editor is that editors will not be listed publicly on the card. Summary Describe your content in a brief statement. This will help others grasp the main point(s) quickly. Examples: "Board game teaching entrepreneurial mindset to first year students.""Programming teams apply EM tools to develop educational software for clients.""Explore campus pain points via guided interviews, then delve deeper with a 'Pain Chain Reaction' activity to uncover cascading challenges and holistic solutions." Course (Classroom template) "Course" appears when you select the Classroom template at the top of your card. Include tips and information specific to the activity, such as how to implement it and what it covers. Type directly in the box or paste from a text editor like Notepad.Use the Rich Text Editor to insert paragraph breaks, headers, and other formatting.Taking time to format makes your content easy to read. >>See how this card does it. Materials (Classroom template) "Materials" appears when you select the Classroom template at the top of your card. List items that would help others implement your activity or replicate your concepts. Type directly in the box or paste from a text editor like Notepad.Use the Rich Text Editor to insert paragraph breaks, headers, and other formatting.Taking time to format makes your content easy to read. >>See how this card does it. Prerequisites (Classroom template) "Prerequisites" appears when you select the Classroom template at the top of your card. List courses that should be completed or knowledge/skillsets people should have before doing your activity. Time (Classroom template) "Time" appears when you select the Classroom template at the top of your card. This field is for the total time your activity takes. Use the Description box to add context. Description (The box you're in right now.)How would someone else teach your activity, conduct your survey, or do your project? Provide a complete picture from start to finish. Type directly in the box or paste from a text editor like Notepad.Use the Rich Text Editor to insert paragraph breaks, headers, bolding, and bullet points.Taking time to format makes your content easy to read. YouTube VideoInclude a relevant YouTube video to play right on your card! You'll see an example as you scroll down this card. Entrepreneurial Mindset Which of the three Cs - Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value - best fit your card? Ensure the Cs you select apply to your activity.After you select a C, add supporting details in the expandable field below it. >>See how this card does it. Complementary SkillsetsSelect appropriate skillset aspects from Design, Opportunity, and Impact categories. Card Category What context does your card fit into the most? Choose up to two (2) categories for your card. This helps frame it for others as they search. Campus & Outreach. Your card may contain resources for faculty such as book clubs, implementation strategies on campus, or outreach to K-12 or industry.Classroom & Courses. Your card shares resources, activities, entire courses, and other examples of entrepreneurial mindset (EM) within the classroom context.Co-Curricular & Extra Curricular. Your card may contain shorter activities in a club setting, write-ups of student organizations, hackathon/design sprints, or EM speaker series.Engineering Unleashed Resources. These cards are general resources that connect to the community and mission.Examples include branding guides, card templates, and how-to guides for using Engineering Unleashed.Professional Learning. Do you have tips, techniques, or examples of how faculty can grow professionally with EM?Cards in this category are focused on sharing faculty development approaches, professional development resources, or other items connected to faculty professional growth and development.Workshops & Events. These cards are connected to events like the KEEN National Conference as well as techniques for how to showcase EM with a workshop or at an event. Tags and Keywords Tags supplement your card's other fields, plus can help people find your card in search.Enter words and phrases that describe your content and approach, such as: active learningstudent engagementstatics What to know about tags: Tags have 'type-ahead." If the tag you're entering already exists in the system, it will appear for you to select.Tags are case-sensitive. For example, if "Getting Started" as typed already exists in the system, typing "getting started" in your card's Tag box will update to "Getting Started."You can delete your tags. Changed your mind about a tag, or misspelled one? Click the X next to the existing tag on your card to delete it.Tags and Disciplines work together. When you choose your Disciplines, you don't need to include the same keywords in your Tags. This is because both Disciplines and Tags are searchable items. Engineering Disciplines Select up to 3 disciplines that best align with your content.Or pick one of the following: All Engineering Disciplines.Comprehensive: All engineering disciplines + all non-engineering disciplines. Folders Upload or link to supporting materials in the folders. You can create as many folders as you like. Materials can include presentations, lesson plans, links to websites, student artifacts (names redacted), and short movie clips.Organize resources in separate folders depending on type.After you upload a resource, where necessary, change its title to a more descriptive one. Note: Have other cards to link to? Go on to the Related Cards section. Related Cards Does your card align with or reference other cards already published? Add them to the Related Cards section. Engineering Unleashed will find the card for you! Start typing the card title.Paste in the card's full URL, such as: https://engineeringunleashed.com/card/2882You can also paste in the card ID. This is the number at the end of the card URL, such as "2882".The ID is also located beneath the card's image when viewing a card. Just like with the Folders, you can organize sets of cards in separate Related Cards folders.Note: Related Cards must be published, not draft cards. Are you building a card that will link to other related cards you are also building? You will need to publish those related cards before you add them to your main card. Related Groups Does your card align with a group on Engineering Unleashed? You can link it to that group in the Related Groups section below. Start typing the name of a group and the system will bring up all possible selections. Change Log Click the Change Log to see when your card was created, published, and updated, and by whom. ** Author Notes and Card Review After you save your card for the first time, two new sections will appear at the top: Author Notes, and Review. Author Notes are for all authors and editors on your card to collaborate privately. These notes are not visible to the public.Review is where you can submit your card for an informal peer review.You can do this for draft or published cards. Reviews include this rubric.You do not have to have a review to publish your card.

This card details my efforts at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) to bring together faculty from various disciplines to create EML course activities centered on the NAE Grand Challenges or UN Sustainable Development Goals. The process to bring faculty toward collaboration detailed in this card may be useful to faculty or administrators trying to build cross-college transdisciplinary collaborations. This project extends what I learned from the 2020 Leadership Unleashed and 2021 Unleashing Academic Change Faculty Workshops. Funds for this project were provided by a 2021 KEEN Engineering Unleashed Fellowship. Establishing Transdisciplinary Grand Challenges Collaborations on Campus Background: In 2008 the National Academy of Engineering published a report detailing 14 Grand Challenges (GCs) for Engineering in the 21st Century. Duke, Olin, and the University of Southern California stepped up to create the Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) designed to prepare students to address these GCs. They invited other Universities to join and more than a hundred have since established GCSPs. Thanks to funding from the Teagle Foundation and collaboration with four other universities, RIT’s Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) started in 2017 and is unique from many GCSPs in that it explicitly stresses integrating Liberal Arts (LA) and Science Technology Engineering and Math (STEM). Project Motivation: After two years of disruption due to COVID19, our GCSP needed an infusion of energy. I found that many faculty, especially outside of the College of Engineering (and even inside) did not know what the GCSP was or if we had one at RIT. My project goal was to develop a faculty learning community that would then help inform faculty and students about global Grand Challenges, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals and help them integrate LA and STEM concepts. I established the following goals for my fellowship: Encourage faculty at RIT to connect concepts from Liberal Arts (LA) with the application of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) concepts and the goals of addressing Grand Challenges in their courses.Broaden exposure to the RIT Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) for both STEM and LA students by promoting curiosity about the interplay of technology, environment, individual people, and society.Broaden the discussion in both STEM and LA courses around:The value and risks of technology and technological thinkingThe underlying human values that objects, processes, systems, and decisions promote.How incorporating different perspectives in efforts to address Grand Challenges or Sustainable Development Goals will enhance the value of our students’ current and future solutions. Planned Implementation: My plan was to hold a half-day faculty workshop around the GCs during Winter break followed by a Spring semester faculty learning circle meeting monthly. By Summer I had hoped to have identified four pairs of faculty from LA and STEM disciplines committed to developing transdisciplinary modules for a future Grand Challenges Seminar. Pivots: My project only went loosely as planned… Schedule Pivot: By Winter Break, we were in a full-blown Omicron surge in Western NY. The university discouraged gathering prior to the start of the semester and serving food was forbidden. Instead of a half-day workshop, I joined with the larger RIT KEEN initiative of EML Active Learning Seminars, offering a one-hour Zoom seminar called “Integrating Transdisciplinary Perspectives on the Grand Challenges” in early February. I also participated on a panel organized by the colleges of Liberal Arts and Engineering to share faculty experiences working across disciplines, which generated interest from colleagues in Liberal Arts. Because the 1-hour seminar and 7 minute panel brief were not sufficient to recruit interested faculty and identify pairs, I held a longer “Transdisciplinary Grand Challenges Faculty Brainstorming Workshop” (with lunch this time) in May. Consequently, my timeline was delayed by four months. The workshop was well attended by faculty across colleges known to be active in transdisciplinary spaces. It included experienced faculty who helped shape my future ideas for the project. Implementation Pivot: The faculty in the workshop discouraged me from planning a 1-credit Grand Challenges seminar unless I was planning to require it for all GC scholars, citing their own experiences with low student enrollment and attendance for 1 credit courses that didn’t fit in a specific program. While I may later create a required Grand Challenges Seminar, we decided to create modules that could be included in existing General Education and STEM courses. I very much appreciate the advice of these mentors who saved me from doing a lot of work with little chance of success. After a few more summer Zoom meetings, we ended up with faculty teamed up for three projects and the planning of a symposium in December. Final Outputs Pivot: As of September 2022 we are still in the process of developing the modules with a plan to create EU cards for each. We may not have a need to create videos for these modules because they are not intended for a “flipped classroom” Grand Challenges Seminar and will instead be integrated in multiple classes in slightly different ways. We will provide EU Cards for the modules and a final video detailing the work done by faculty and students with footage of the symposium. The learning circle is continuing in Fall 2022 and, now that we have a motivated faculty team, we hope to recruit additional faculty pairs and utilize internal university grants to incentivize them to create Grand Challenges modules beyond December. Implementation Details and Resources KEEN Integrating Transdisciplinary Perspectives on the Grand Challenges Seminar, 1 hour Zoom seminar with example activity held in February 2022, 7 attendees. Meeting Agenda: Intro to KEEN and EML (this was provided by campus KEEN Leadership)Participant introductionsThe Grand Challenges Scholars ProgramCourse Example: “Grand Challenges: Clean Water” (This course is a General Education 3 credit Ethics Perspective, co-taught by an engineer and an ethicist. The class was inspired by the “Great Problems” courses at Worchester Polytechnic Institute).Active Learning Class Module Example: “The Play Pump Transdisciplinary EML Module” Card coming soon!Debrief on The Play Pump ActivityCall to Create more Transdisciplinary Grand Challenges Modules Resources: The ad and seminar slides are included below. The Play Pump Active Learning Module example is included as a separate card (link coming soon). The Playpump module is currently used in the Grand Challenges: Clean Water course, which is co-taught with an ethicist and is described in EU Card https://engineeringunleashed.com/card/2897. Advice: If you are planning a similar short seminar, 1 hour was tight for this full agenda. People joined late and had to leave early for class, the normal Zoom issues with sound, sharing, and rooms caused delays, and introductions took longer than expected. Schedule for 90 minutes or skip introductions. If hosting on Zoom use two presenters, one to present the content and the other to manage Zoom sharing and break out rooms. Transdisciplinary Perspectives on the Grand Challenges Faculty Brainstorm, 3-hour workshop with lunch held in May 2022, 12 participants. Two less formal Zoom meetings followed this workshop in June and July and served to develop ideas and form faculty pairs. Agenda: IntroductionsGrand Challenges Scholars ProgramKEEN Entrepreneurial Minded LearningTransdisciplinary GC SeminarGallery Walk: GC TopicsLunchBrainstorming Session Resources: Slides are included below. Ah-ha moments and Outcomes: I had expected it to be easy to form pairs from STEM and LA faculty with common interests around Grand Challenges. However, it quickly became clear that while STEM faculty interests tended to align with challenges (water, energy, security, etc), LA faculty focused on theories, processes, methods, etc that can easily lay over many/all challenges, like weaving a plaid pattern. Also, the idea of a Grand Challenges Seminar was scrapped in favor of integrating modules in existing courses such as Critical Thinking and Science Technology and Values. Ongoing Collaborations: We formed four sub-teams to work on modules and events. We will continue to meet and recruit other faculty in Fall 2022 and hope to establish additional incentive programs to encourage faculty to participate. Cards will be developed as the modules are completed. Integrating Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Grand Challenges Learning Circle: We will meet monthly in Fall 2022. Resources: The text of the call to join the learning circle is included below. Modules and Activities (under development):Horseshoe Solar Case Study: Three faculty will work to develop this case study module which will look at NY State renewable energy policy, technological viability of siting solar projects, Corporate Social Responsibility, economics of energy projects and relation to the tax base, community resistance, development on burial sites and viable farmland, and more! They plan to have the students interact across courses. Dr. Lisa Greenwood, Assistant Professor in the Department of Environmental Health and Safety Management in the College of Engineering Technology proposed the case and is using it in her Corporate Social Responsibility course focusing on the development firms perspective. Dr. Rob Stevens, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering in the Kate Gleason College of Engineering will explore adding the case in his Renewable Energy course. Dr. M. Ann Howard, Professor in the Department of Science, Technology and Society in the College of Liberal arts will integrate this case in her Environmental Studies course. True Campus Accessibility vs ADA: This module will explore how policy and infrastructure design address or fail to address true accessibility needs on campus, using RIT as the subject of the exploration. Dr. Jessica Hardin, Assistant Professor of Anthropology in the College of Liberal Arts has been exploring this subject with her graduate students. The students will participate in developing the module. Dr. Dan Phillips, Associate Professor of Electrical and Microelectronic Engineering in the Kate Gleason College of Engineering is the Director of Access Technologies on campus and runs the Liveability Lab, research and development facility. Dr. Matt Marshall, Associate Dean and Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering in the Kate Gleason College of Engineering plans to integrate this module in courses that he leads for the Honors Program at RIT. Museum Studies Grand Challenges Round Up: This module will explore how museums portray the Grand Challenges and education the public about them. Dr. Juilee Decker, Associate Professor of Museum Studies in the College of Liberal Arts is including research on the module – how museums present Grand Challenges – in the Intro to Museum Studies course this fall. Sarah Brownell (bio above) will utilize the module with students in the Grand Challenges Scholars Program and in the Foundations of Community Engagement and Transformation course she teaches with Dr. Howard (bio above). Concept Maps around the Grand Challenges: Students in the Engineering Exploration course (more than 140 students per year) will select one of the GCs or SDGs. Over the course of the semester, they will construct a concept map that shows their understanding of not just the challenge itself, but the role that different engineering disciplines have in the particular problem. Dr. Matt Marshall (bio above) is developing this EM activity based on his participation in the ICE 1.0 workshop. Grand Thinking X Disciplines Symposium: The Grand Challenges Scholars Program plans to co-host an end of the semester symposium with the RIT FRAM Applied Critical Thinking Initiative that will include a student poster sessions on Grand Challenges projects and sharing of faculty work on the modules. We will create a 3-5 minute video surrounding this event and the experiences of the presenters. Dr. Jennifer Schneider is the Eugene H. Fram Chair of Applied Critical Thinking and a Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering Technology, Environmental Management & Safety in the College of Engineering Technology. Sarah Brownell, Senior Lecturer and Director of the Grand Challenges Scholars Program in the Kate Gleason College of Engineering will recruit and prepare students from the GCSP and the Grand Challenges: Clean Water course to participate in the student session and faculty to share their work developing the modules in the faculty session. Future Collaborations: Other collaborations are being considered for modules on Resilient Cities and Augmented Humans, and we plan to create Grand Challenges flavored sections of the general education courses “Science Technology and Values” in the Science Technology and Society Department and “Critical Thinking” in Philosophy. This work is on hold due to sabbaticals, active research projects, and Doctoral work.

The KEEN Framework is an adoptable, adaptable guide to entrepreneurially minded learning. With it, faculty can create educational materials and teaching concepts that equip engineering students with an entrepreneurial mindset. This conceptual framework connects engineering skillset with entrepreneurial mindset, providing the building blocks for entrepreneurially minded learning. Why is this important? We believe this is how to educate the engineering we need. This is the engineer we need: One with an Entrepreneurial Mindset that is coupled with Engineering Thought and Action, Expressed Through Collaboration and Communication, and founded on Character. Engineers with an entrepreneurial mindset transform the world. Educators have a role in developing this mindset in the rising generation of engineers. This card contains the framework and resources connected to its use. Click the Cite button at the top of this card to reference the KEEN Framework in your work.

This CardDeck provides a link to each of the 18 e-learning modules created by the University of New Haven that help develop an entrepreneurial mindset in students. The modules are designed to be integrated into existing engineering and computer science courses. Our efforts, as part of KEEN, are aimed at fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students. An entrepreneurial mindset applies to all aspects of life, beginning with curiosity about our changing world, integrating information from various resources to gain insight, and identifying unexpected opportunities to create value. We believe that an engineer equipped with an entrepreneurial mindset will be able to create extraordinary value within any type of organization. Development of 18 e-learning modules supporting entrepreneurially minded learning is part of this effort. The University of New Haven, a KEEN partner institution for over 7 years, aims to instill an entrepreneurial mindset in its engineering students by integrating the 18 e-learning modules into existing engineering and computer science courses. The e-learning modules are interactive, structured in a way that will allow integration into regular courses or utilization as supplementary resources, and each are accompanied with a teaching guide. The modules are generic enough to allow their deployment in various courses and majors.The length of each module is 3-9 hours of online student work. Online student work includes the amount of time a student is expected to spend reviewing material in a module as well as the average time needed to complete module assignments, activities or exercises.The development and implementation of the e-Learning Modules has taken placed over the past several years. Several papers and conference presentations document that effort and we invite you to read them - including 2 related papers at the most recent ASEE 2020 conference. Please scroll down to the resources section for direct links to the papers. E-Learning Modules Overview Videos You can see about a two-minute video in the following links to learn more about each module. Adapting a Business to a Changing Climate Applying Systems Thinking to Complex Problems Building Relationships with Corporations and Communities Building, Sustaining and Leading Effective Teams and Establishing Performance Goals Defining and Protecting Intellectual Property Determining Market Risks Developing a Business Plan that Addresses Stakeholder Interests, Market Potential and Economics Developing Customer Awareness and Quickly Testing Concepts Through Customer Engagement Cost of Production and Market Conditions Financing a Business Generating New Ideas Based on Societal Needs and Business Opportunities Innovating to Solve Problems under Organizational Constraints Innovative Client-Centered Solutions Through Design Thinking Learning from Failure Resolving Ethical Issues Role of Product in Value Creation The Elevator Pitch: Advocating for Your Good Ideas Thinking Creatively to Drive Innovation