Teaching and learning Archives - Page 6 of 14 - Engineering Professors Council

Home
Toolkits
Teaching and learning

Author: Dr Gill Lacey (Teesside University).

Keywords: Pedagogy; Societal impact; Personal ethics; Research ethics.

Who is this article for?: This article should be read by educators at all levels in higher education who wish to integrate ethics into the engineering and design curriculum or module design. It will also help prepare students with the integrated skill sets that employers are looking for.

Premise:

Ethics is defined in many ways but is generally agreed to be a set of moral (right or wrong) principles that govern social behaviour. While this is not the place for a discussion of ethical philosophies and theories that analyse what we mean by “moral”, or how we define social behaviour, it is pertinent to consider the nature of engineering ethics so that we understand why it should be integrated into modules. Davis gives us a rather pared down explanation: “Integrating ethics into science and engineering courses is largely a matter of providing context for what is already being taught, context that also makes the material already being taught seem ‘more relevant,’” (Davis, 2006).

Despite this, very often ethics is considered as an afterthought – sometimes it only comes up when a solution to a technical problem results in unintended consequences. Rather, we need our students to look at any technical solution through an ethical lens – as well as through an economic one. This generally involves considering what effect any technical project might have on society, especially on those who use that technology. Teaching students to consider the technology through an ethical lens makes them true engineers, not just technicians. And as Davis implies, relevance provides motivation.

Some principles for integrating ethics:

Consideration needs to be given to improving our students’ ethical learning throughout their course/programme (Hess and Fore, 2018). We argue that ethics can and should be embedded into most modules in a natural way, giving as much or as little time to it as necessary. A planned progression should be aimed for throughout the course, and the Ethics Explorer in this Toolkit provides suggestions as to how this can be accomplished. A more sophisticated understanding will be arrived at over time by exposing them to more and more complex cases where the outcome is not obvious. A graduate engineer should be able to give a considered response to an employer’s question about an ethical position during an interview.

Other principles for integrating ethics include:

1. State your assumptions and moral position at the start of a course/module

This is not the same as taking a moral stance. Some moral issues can be universally agreed, but not all, so we need an approach to morally disputed issues. We must be clear about the ethical framework in which the course is being taught. An ethically neutral engineering course is neither advisable nor possible.

For instance, it needs to be baldly stated that climate change is real, that all the modules in the course make that assumption, and low carbon solutions are the only ones that will be considered. Some students will be challenged by that. This is a case of stating the moral position of the course and asking the students how they are going to ‘be’ with that position, because it will not be argued for (Broadbent, 2019).

Many lecturers start a module with an “expectations” list, especially with new students; it could be argued this is a first exposure to engineering ethics as it relates to social and professional behaviour in the teaching space. There is no room for discussion or reflection here; this is a statement of how things are going to be in this community. Sharing accepted moral values is assumed here.

There are general standards of behaviour to which everyone is expected to conform around respect and disagreeing constructively; there is a professional standard to which we can conform. The advantage of doing this is that it provides certainty and weight to our judgement in report writing as well as practice in professional ethical conduct in the workplace.

2. Provide resources

A survey regarding the teaching of ethics showed agreement between the students that provision of resources, such as case studies and examples, were needed to allow ethics to be considered. They want guidance and access to receiving ethical approval for projects or research, and an opportunity for reflection on personal ethics and how these relate to professional attitudes or projects (Covill et al., 2010). Examples include:

- - Case studies. This Ethics Toolkit provides dozens of potential case studies for use in a classroom setting. Students are challenged to explore their existing preconceptions and modify them to accommodate the realities of the cases (Lundeberg, Levin, and Harrington, 1999). Educators can also follow these models to develop their own case studies.
  - Engineering ethics in the news. For instance, in a wastewater treatment module, the following article might be highlighted: “Almost 90% of storm overflows discharge directly into rivers. And 3 in 4 rivers we tested last year pose a serious continuous risk to human health.” (Surfers Against Sewage (SAS), 2022). Although SAS’s website gives plenty of graphic images and up to date news as well as links to the policies that surround the issue, it doesn’t give much detail on why it happens. So it becomes a useful ethical study by asking those questions. It is not the role of the teacher to come up with any answers, but it is vital to articulate and acknowledge the feelings and emotions when presented with such an issue (Prince and Felder, 2006). We all can agree that allowing untreated sewage to overflow into rivers is bad. So how does it happen? Where is the sewage supposed to go? Where is the storm water supposed to go? What happens during a storm? What do engineers have to do with the cause, or the solution, to this problem? It is important to remind students that no one intends the sewage to contaminate watercourses, it is an unintended consequence. So how could it be prevented, and how could engineers support this solution? What needs to be done technically, politically and financially to solve the problem? Be on the lookout for contemporary issues, to make it relevant. Direct quotes, videos, images and so on from issues in the news allow students to fully involve themselves with the issue.
  - Guidance and access to receiving ethical approval for projects or research. This is a procedural issue, which may vary according to the institution; many universities have a research ethics policy which mandates the process. Clearly, we should comply with our own university processes where they exist. A simple approach that is popular with students is a form containing yes/no questions (Junaid et al., 2021). The project supervisor can prepare students to answer accurately by talking to them about their proposals to help them identify the ethical considerations by asking ‘what if?’ type questions. This allows a non-specialist to decide whether a more in-depth ethical survey is needed.

3. Allow for opportunity to reflect

This can be achieved by requiring a reflection in every level of an engineering degree. It could be part of an assessment at the end of a project or module in the form of a short, written reflection. It could be approached by asking the student in an interview to consider the ethics of a situation and the interviewer can then challenge the student on their journey to become ethically literate.

Finally, for advice on assessing ethics in an engineering module, see this guidance article.

References:

Broadbent, O. (2018). ‘Delivering project based learning: Teaching resources and guidance for academics.’ Engineers without Borders and Think-up.

Covill, D., Singh D.G., Katz, T., and Morris, R. (2010). ‘Embedding ethics into the engineering and product design curricula: A Case study from the UK,’ International Conference On Engineering And Product Design Education, 2 & 3 September. Norwegian University Of Science And Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Davis, M. (2006) ‘Integrating ethics into technical courses: Micro-insertion,’ Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(4), pp.717-730.

Hess, J.L., and Fore, G. (2018) ‘A Systematic Literature Review of US Engineering Ethics Interventions,’ Science and Engineering Ethics 24, pp. 551–583.

Junaid, S., Kovacs, H., Martin, D. A., and Serreau, Y. (2021) ‘What is the role of ethics in accreditation guidelines for engineering programmes in Europe?’, Proceedings of the SEFI 49th Annual Conference: Blended Learning in Engineering Education: challenging, enlightening – and lasting? European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), pp. 274-282.

Lundeberg, M.A., Levin, B.B. and Harrington, H.L. (eds.), (1999). Who learns what from cases and how? The research base for teaching and learning with cases. Routledge.

Prince, M.J. and Felder, R.M. (2006) ‘Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases,’ Journal of Engineering Education 95, pp. 123-138.

Additional resources:

Pedagogical Approaches to Integrating Ethics in Engineering – A deeper look into why we need ethics, as well as the requirement of AHEP4 to integrate ethics into the engineering curriculum.
Do you want to get your local river designated as a bathing water to end sewage pollution? We’re here to help.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

Case Enhancement: Choosing to install a smart meter

Activity: Technical integration – Practical investigation of electrical energy.

Author: Mr Neil Rogers (Independent Scholar).

Overview:

This enhancement is for an activity found in the Dilemma Part two, Point 1 section of the case: “Technical integration – Undertake an electrical engineering technical activity related to smart meters and the data that they collect.”

This activity involves practical tasks requiring the learner to measure parameters to enable electrical energy to be calculated in two different scenarios and then relate this to domestic energy consumption. This activity will give technical context to this case study as well as partly address two AHEP themes:

AHEP: SM1m – A comprehensive knowledge and understanding of scientific principles and methodology necessary to underpin their education in their engineering discipline, and an understanding and know-how of the scientific principles of related disciplines, to enable appreciation of the scientific and engineering context, and to support their understanding of relevant historical, current and future developments and technologies.
AHEP: EA1m – Understanding of engineering principles and the ability to apply them to undertake critical analysis of key engineering processes.

This activity is in three parts. To fully grasp the concept of electrical energy and truly contextualise what could be a remote and abstract concept to the learner, it is expected that all three parts should be completed (even though slight modifications to the equipment list are acceptable).

Learners are required to have basic (level 2) science knowledge as well as familiarity with the Multimeters and Power Supplies of the institution.

Learners have the opportunity to:

solve given technical tasks relating to the operation of electronic circuits (AHEP: SM1m);
assess the performance of a given electronic circuit (AHEP: EA1m).

Teachers have the opportunity to:

introduce concepts related to electrical circuit theory;
develop learners’ practical abilities and confidence in the use of electronic equipment;
develop learners’ mathematical skills in a practical context.

Suggested pre-reading:

To prepare for these practical activities, teachers may want to explain, or assign students to pre-read articles relating to electrical circuit theory with respect to:

Voltage and Current Power
Energy

Learning and teaching resources:

Bench Power Supply Unit (PSU) & multimeters;
High intensity LEDs and incandescent lamps (and associated data-sheets);
Energy monitor/plug in Power Meter (240V) and stopwatch;
Access to a kettle, fan heater and dishwasher or washing machine.

Activity: Practical investigation of electrical energy:

Task A: Comparing the energy consumed by incandescent bulbs with LEDs.

1. Power in a circuit.

By connecting the bulbs and LEDs in turn to the PSU with a meter in series:

a. Compare the wattage of the two devices.

b. On interpretation of their data sheets compare their luminous intensities.

c. Equate the quantity of each device to achieve a similar luminous intensity of approximately 600 Lumens (a typical household bulb equivalent).

d. now equate the wattages required to achieve this luminous intensity for the two devices.

2. Energy = Power x Time.

The units used by the energy providers are kWh:

a. Assuming the devices are on for 6 hours/day and 365 days/year, calculate the energy consumption in kWh for the two devices.

b. Now calculate the comparative annual cost assuming 1 kWh = 27p ! (update rate).

3. Wider implications.

a. Are there any cost-benefit considerations not covered?

b. How might your findings affect consumer behaviour in ways that could either negatively or positively impact sustainability?

c. Are there any ethical factors to be considered when choosing LED lightbulbs? For instance, you might investigate minerals and materials used for manufacturing and processing and how they are extracted, or end-of-life disposal issues, or fairness of costs (both relating to production and use).

Task B: Using a plug-in power meter.

1. Connect the power meter to a dishwasher or washing machine and run a short 15/30 minute cycle and record the energy used in kWh.

2. Connect the power meter to a ½ filled kettle and turn on, noting the instantaneous power (in watts) and the time taken. Then calculate the energy used and compare to the power meter.

3. Connect the power meter to the fan heater and measure the instantaneous power. Now calculate the daily energy consumption in kWh for a fan heater on for 6 hours/day.

4. Appreciation of consumption of electrical energy over a 24 hour period (in kWh) is key. What are the dangers in reading instantaneous energy readings from a smart meter?

Task C: Calculation of typical domestic electrical energy consumption.

1. Using the list of items in Appendix A, calculate the typical electrical energy usage/day for a typical household.

2. Now compare the electrical energy costs per day and per year for these three suppliers, considering how suppliers source their energy (i.e. renewable vs fossil fuels vs nuclear etc).

	Standing charge cost / day	Cost per kWh	Cost / day	Cost / year
A)	48p	28p
B)	45p	31p
C)	51p	27p

3. Does it matter that data is collected every 30 minutes by your energy supplier? What implications might changing the collection times have?

4. With reference to Sam growing marijuana in the case, how do you think this will show up in his energy bill?

Appendix A: Household electrical devices power consumption:

Typical power consumption of electrical devices on standby (in Watts).

Wi-Fi router	10
TV & set top box	20
Radios & alarms	10
Dishwasher	5
Washing machine	5
Cooker & heat-ring controls	10
Gaming devices	10
Laptops x2	10

Typical consumption of electrical devices when active (in Watts) and assuming Gas central heating.

TV & set top box (assume 5 hours / day)	120
Dishwasher (assume 2 cycles / week)	Use calculated
Washing machine (assume 2 cycles / week)	Use calculated
Cooking (oven, microwave etc 1 hour / day)	1000
Gaming devices (1 hour / day)	100
Laptop ( 1 hour / day)	70
Kettle (3 times / day)	Use calculated
Heating water pump (2 hours / day)	150
Electric shower (8 mins / day)	8000

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors: Matthew Studley (UWE Bristol); Sarah Jayne Hitt, Ph.D. SFHEA (NMITE, Edinburgh Napier University).

Keywords: Pedagogy; Personal ethics; Risk.

Who is this article for? This article should be read by educators at all levels in higher education who wish to integrate ethics into the engineering and design curriculum, or into module design and learning activities. It describes techniques that can help to provide students with opportunities to practise the communication and critical thinking skills that employers are looking for.

Premise:

Discussing ethical issues can be a daunting prospect, whether one-to-one or with an entire classroom. Ethics often addresses topics and decisions related to moral choices and delicate situations about which people may have firm and long-held beliefs. Additionally, these issues are often rooted in underlying values which may differ between people, cultures, or even time periods. For instance, something that was considered immoral or unethical in a rural community in 18th-century Ireland may have been viewed very differently at the same time in urban India. Because students come from different backgrounds and experiences, it is essential to be sensitive to this context (Kirk and Flammia, 2016). However, ethics also requires that we address tough topics in order to make decisions about what we should do in difficult situations, such as those encountered by engineers in their personal, professional, and civic lives.

Why we need to be sensitive in discussions about ethics:

Discussions about tough topics can be ‘triggering’. Psychologists define a psychological ‘trigger’ as a stimulus that causes a painful memory to resurface. A trigger can be any reminder of the traumatic event: a sound, sight, smell, physical sensation, words, or images. When a person is triggered, they’re being provoked by a stimulus that awakens or worsens the symptoms of a traumatic event or mental health condition (Gerdes, 2019). A person’s strong reaction to being triggered may come as a surprise to others because the response seems out of proportion to the stimulus, because the triggered individual is mentally reliving the original trauma. Some neurodivergencies can adapt these responses. For example, people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may experience stronger emotional reactions and may present this in ways which are unfamiliar or surprising to those who have not experienced the same challenges (Fuld, 2018).

Apart from triggering memories, the topics of right and wrong may be emotive. Young people are often passionate in their beliefs and may be moved to strong responses. There is nothing wrong with that, unless one person’s strong response makes another’s participation and expression less likely.

Ethics is only salient if the topics are tough:

Ethics concerns questions of moral value, of right and wrong, and relates to our deep-held beliefs and emotions. If any experience in an engineer’s education is likely to cause unpleasant memories to surface, or to stimulate strong discussion, it’s likely to be Ethics, and some of our students may have an emotional response to the topics of discussion and their impacts. This might be enough to make many educators shy away from integrating ethics.

However, research has shown that most engineers are moved by their personal sense of moral value, rather than by abstract external standards, and this can create very powerful and impactful learning experiences (Génova and González, 2016). To teach Ethics, we need to be willing to engage emotionally. Students also appreciate when educators can be vulnerable in the same way that we ask them to be, which means being willing to be honest about our own reactions to tough topics.

Approaches to tackling tough topics:

a. Prepare by reviewing resources

Several resources exist to guide educators who are engaging with tough topics in the classroom. Teaching and learning specialists recognise the challenges inherent in engaging with this kind of activity, yet also want to support educators who see the value in creating a space for students to wrestle with the difficult questions that they will encounter in the future. Many centres of teaching and learning at universities provide strategies and guidance through websites or pamphlets that are easily found by searching online. We include a list of some of our preferred resources below.

b. Prepare by finding local support

Even though we will avoid obvious triggers, there’s always the possibility that our students may become upset. We should be prepared by promoting the contact details for local support services within the institution. It can never be a bad thing for our students to know about these.

c. Give warnings and ask for consent

You might want to warn your students that discussing ethical matters is not without emotional consequence. At your discretion, seek their explicit consent to continue. There has been some criticism of this approach in the media, as some authors suggest that this infantilises the audience. Indeed, the pros and cons of trigger warnings might make an interesting topic for discussion: life can be cruel, is there value in developing a thick skin? What do we lose in this process? Being honest about your own hesitations and internal conflicts might encourage students to open up about how they wrestle with their own dilemmas. To be fully supportive, consider an advanced warning with the option to opt-out so that people aren’t stampeded into something they might prefer to avoid.

d. Recognise discomfort, and respond

Be aware of the possibility that individuals in your group could become upset. Be prepared to quietly offer time out or to change the activity in response to where the students want to take the discussion. Again, being transparent with the students that some people may be uncomfortable or upset by topics can reveal another relevant ethical topic – how to be respectful of others whose response differs from your own. And being willing to change the activity demonstrates the flexibility and adaptability required of 21st century engineers!

e. Avoid unnecessary risk

Some topics are best avoided due to the strength of emotion which they might trigger in students whose life story may be unknown to us. These topics include sexual abuse, self-harm, violence, eating disorders, homophobia, transphobia, racism, child abuse and paedophilia, and rape.

Be kind, and be brave:

Above all, let your students know that you care for their well-being. If we are to teach Ethics, let us be ethical. You might need to overcome some awkward moments with your students, but you will all learn and grow in the process!

References:

Fuld S. (2018) ‘Autism spectrum disorder: The Impact of stressful and traumatic life events and implications for clinical practice.’ Clinical Social Work Journal 46(3), pp. 210-219.

Génova, G., and González, M.R. (2016) ‘Teaching ethics to engineers: A Socratic experience,’ Science and Engineering Ethics 22, pp. 567–580.

Gerdes, K. (2019) ‘Trauma, trigger warnings, and the rhetoric of sensitivity,’ Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 49(1), pp. 3-24.

Kirk S. A. and Flammia, M. (2016) ‘Teaching the ethics of intercultural communication,’ in Teaching and Training for Global Engineering: Perspectives on Culture and Professional Communication Practices, pp.91-124.

Additional resources:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Case enhancement: Developing a school chatbot for student support services

Activity: Stakeholder mapping to elicit value assumptions and motivations.

Author: Karin Rudolph (Collective Intelligence).

Overview:

This enhancement is for an activity found in point 5 of the Summary section of the case study.

What is stakeholder mapping?

Stakeholder mapping is the visual process of laying out the people, also called stakeholders, who are involved with or affected by an issue and can influence a project, product or idea.

What is a stakeholder?

Stakeholders are people, groups or individuals who have the power to affect or be affected by a process, project or product.

Mapping out stakeholders will help you to:

Identify the stakeholders you need to collaborate with to ensure the success of the project.
Understand the different perspectives and points of view people have and how these experiences can have an impact on your project or product.
Map out a wide range of people, groups or individuals that can affect and be affected by the project.

Stakeholder mapping:

The stakeholder mapping activity is a group exercise that provides students with the opportunity to discuss ethical and societal issues related to the School Chatbot case study. We recommend doing this activity in small groups of 6-8 students per table.

Resources:

Materials:

To carry out this activity, you will need the following resources:

1. Sticky notes (or digital notes if online).

2. A big piece of paper or digital board (Jamboard, Miro if online) divided into four categories:

- Manage closely.
- Keep satisfied.
- Keep informed.
- Monitor.

3. Markers and pencils.

The activity:

Begin the activity by asking the students to write a list of stakeholders involved in or affected by the school chatbot.
Once the list of stakeholders is ready, ask the students to allocate each stakeholder according to one of the four categories.

Board One

List of stakeholders:

Below is a list of the stakeholders involved in the Chatbot project. Put each stakeholder on a sticky note and add them to the stakeholders map, according to their level of influence and interest in the projects.

Top tip: use a different colour for each set of stakeholders.

School Chatbot – List of Stakeholders:

- CEO
- Developer
- Student placement
- Academy principal
- Academy board
- Academy students
- Academy teachers
- Teaching assistants
- Parents
- Funding body (Local Authority)
- School administrators
- School counsellors
- Career advisors
- Pastoral leads/wellbeing officers
- Special needs (SEND) workers
- GPs local practice
- Media/local press
- External staff contractors
- Competitors (companies offering similar services).

Placement:

Place the sticky notes with the stakeholders you choose from the list and add them to the stakeholders’ map.
Map out your stakeholders on the grid to classify them by both their influence and interest in the project.
The position of the stakeholder on the grid shows you the actions that you could take with their engagement.

Guidance:

Each quadrant represents the following:

Category: Manage closely. These stakeholders have high power and are highly interested. Their level of interest is an opportunity to maximise the benefit of the project.
Category: Keep satisfied. These stakeholders have high power, but they are not very involved in the project.
Category: Keep informed. These stakeholders have low power but high interest. They are supporters of the project and can be helpful. Keep them involved.
Category: Monitor. These stakeholders have low power and low interest in the project. They only require monitoring.

Board One

Motivations, assumptions, ethical and societal risks:

Materials:

1. A big piece of paper or digital board (Jamboard, Miro if online) divided into four categories:

- Stakeholders.
- Motivations.
- Assumptions.
- Ethical/societal risks.

2. Sticky notes (or digital notes if online).

3. Markers and pencils.

The activity:

Using the sticky notes from the previous stakeholders activity, ask students to discuss some of the scenarios and situations that can arise as a result of using the School Chatbot.
Ask students to write these scenarios down and add them to Board 2, according to each category: stakeholders, motivations, assumptions, and ethical and societal risks.
Discuss some issues this project can bring and ask students to write them on sticky notes according to each category.

Board Two

The Board Two activity can be done in two different ways:

Option 1:

You can use some guiding questions to direct the discussion. For example:

What role does stakeholder X play in this project?
What is their main motivation?
Can you think of any obstacle or conflict this stakeholder could face?
What is their assumption about the use of the chatbot? (Positive or negative.)
What are the potential ethical/ societal risks of using a chatbot in this context?

Option 2:

We have already written some assumptions, motivations and ethical/societal risks and you can add these as notes on a table and ask students to place according to each category: stakeholders, motivations, assumptions, and ethical and societal risks.

Motivations:

To develop a new revenue stream.
To help in developing the product.
The chatbot could present potential risks to students.
To obtain commercial gain.
To help students get access to online support 24/7.

Assumptions:

The product will help the company and the students. Any criticism shouldn’t be considered.
We can use data from students without any constraints.
The chatbot will improve the performance of students.
The institution will take precautions to prevent harm to students.
Criticism won’t be well received and it can result in losing my job.

Potential ethical and societal risks:

Lack of due diligence. Not enough understanding of the steps required to process data in an ethical manner.
Privacy risks. Data subjects (students) didn’t consent to their data being used in this context.
Risk of manipulation. Lack of engagement with the potential users can result in a lack of understanding of their needs and expectations.
Risk of surveillance. Students could be under constant monitoring, resulting in lack of freedom.
Risk of profiling. Use of sensitive historical and current data can reinforce biases and existing inequalities.
Conflict of interest.
Lack of psychological safety. Employees don’t feel empowered to express their views.
Lack of transparency/explainability. Potential lack of processes in place to explain how the algorithm works and makes decisions.
Using a human name can give the false impression of friendship, which can be used to manipulate users.
Over reliance on digital tools. This can undermine support provided by health care professionals and career advisors.
Using a gendered name (Alice) can reinforce negative stereotypes (for example, females as assistants).
Change of expectations. Constant access to information and resources can change the expectations teachers have about the student’s behaviours.
Lack of human agency/control. Students could modify their behaviours due to constant monitoring, resulting in a lack of agency and control over their environment.
Lack of involvement in the consultation that might result in poor advice/content.
Job instability and potential job losses.
Risk of disempowerment. Parents can be left out without access to information about their children’s wellbeing and performance.
Lack of diversity/consideration of a variety of students – for example students with special needs, neurodivergent students – that can result in standardised or harmful advice.

Move and match:

In the board below, you will find sticky notes with a list of stakeholders, motivations, assumptions, and ethical and societal risks.
Move and organise the sticky notes to match each category.
Discuss your options with the rest of the team and add new ethical and societal risks as you go.

Reflection:

Ask students to choose 2- 4 sticky notes and explain why they think these are important ethical/societal risks.

Potential future activity:

A more advanced activity could involve a group discussion where students are asked to think about some mitigation strategies to minimise these risks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The decisions engineers make on a daily basis can have significant consequences for underrepresented and disadvantaged groups in society. Prof Dawn Bonfield, Visiting Professor of Inclusive Engineering at Aston University, Royal Society Entrepreneur in Residence at King’s College London and a member of the EPC’s Engineering Ethics Advisory Group explains…

In the recent ethics report published by the RAEng (1) you might have noticed the explicit references, in an ethics context, to the societal and social justice implications of our engineering solutions that can lead to biased or discriminatory outcomes for different groups of people. This prioritisation of inclusive outcomes is a welcome expansion of the conventional focus of engineering ethics, which is often rooted in issues such as safety, corruption, and competence.

Reference was made in the first page of the report to the use of crash test dummies that have been designed to represent male drivers, leaving women (and pregnant women in particular) at greater risk in car accidents; the potential for algorithms and internet search engines to influence our thoughts on the world; issues arising from facial recognition technology failing to accurately identify those from Black, Asian and Ethnic Minority communities; and the use of artificial intelligence systems that will make safety-critical, legal, and other life changing decisions, which are often based on historical and biased datasets. You can further explore some of the issues with facial recognition technology in one of the ethics case studies produced by the EPC for their RAEng-supported Engineering Ethics Toolkit.

These are all examples of how, as engineers, we can inadvertently create solutions that are biased against minoritized groups of people if we are not careful. This generally occurs as a direct result of the fact that these groups of people are poorly represented in the engineering sector, and so their inputs are missing in the specification, design, and testing of new technologies (2).

But even before we get to a truly diverse engineering workforce, all engineers must be mindful of the ways in which the decisions they take can be discriminatory or can promulgate bias. In situations like the ones mentioned above it is relatively easy to spot the opportunity for discrimination, but in other cases it can be much more difficult. For example, there are ethical implications associated with the sort of ducting that gets chosen for a new building, where one material causes more pollution to socially and economically disadvantaged populations than another. It is in cases like this that a little more thought is required to spot whether the outcomes of these decisions are inclusive and ethical, or not.

Recently, the Covid-19 pandemic has shown us very clearly what the ethical implications are of our built environment decisions and designs, where people living in densely populated and overcrowded urban areas with minimal access to outdoor space have had significantly worse health outcomes than those with access to outdoor and green spaces. Inclusive design of the built environment is now a growing and recognised area of our engineering work, and as well as the more obvious examples of ensuring equitable access to those with disability issues, it also recognises that public spaces should be equitable and accessible to all communities. Everybody needs to see themselves represented in these environments and feel able to use them safely and fully. These are issues of ethics and inclusion, as well as social justice and equality, and the requirement we have as engineers to consider all of these perspectives as the creators of our future world must be a part of our systems engineering mindset. Several of the EPC’s ethics case studies focus on responsibility, equity, and stakeholder engagement, such as the Ageing Pipeline and its Impact on Local Communities case.

The importance of systems, design, iterative thinking, and the focus on ensuring that the whole life cycle of a product, including maintenance, repair, deconstruction, and end of life decommissioning, requires true stakeholder engagement, means that these inclusive outcomes can be considered at the very start of projects, rather than as an afterthought, where any changes are much more difficult and costly to integrate. The strengthening of the Social Value Act (3), which requires people who commission public services to explicitly evaluate how they can secure wider social, economic and environmental benefits, also puts emphasis on ensuring the outcomes of any procurement are inclusive and ethical. Similarly, the Sustainable Development Goals ethos of Leave No One Behind (4) requires that outcomes are considered from all perspectives, and that solutions taking all of the goals into account are balanced and not considered in silos. The EPC’s ethics case study on Business Growth Models allows engineering students to explore many of these issues.

Designing with the gender perspective in mind, especially in parts of the world where women have very different societal roles based on culture, stereotypes, local norms, and religion, is key to ensuring that the differences and disadvantages that women face are not exacerbated. Understanding these differences is the first step in addressing them, and in many cases, technology can act as a real enabler in situations where women have limited access to traditional education, information, and independence. For example, the widespread use of microfinance in many parts of Africa – a technology not aimed specifically at women – is nevertheless giving women much better access to loans and financial independence than the traditional banking structures did, which women are not always able to access easily. Other examples include understanding the need for sanitation facilities in public spaces such as schools, government offices, transportation hubs and health clinics, without which women’s access to these facilities becomes restricted and their participation curtailed (5).

Another ethical issue comes into play here too. Do we design just to remove bias and discrimination, or do we design to reverse historical bias and discrimination? For example, women have traditionally worked in certain sectors such as care giving roles, and not in sectors like engineering and technology. Algorithmic decision-making tools can use this historical data to preferentially show stereotypical job opportunities based on past trends and evidence, which could foreseeably prevent women from being targeted for engineering related roles. Adapting these tools to make these job opportunities open to all in an equitable way is one thing, but what if we decided to preferentially show engineering roles to women and caring roles to men – a kind of social engineering, if you will? What are the ethics of this, and would that be going too far to remove biases? I will leave you to think about this one yourselves! If you would like to write a case study about it, we are currently looking for contributors to the toolkit!

The decisions we make daily as engineers have consequences to individuals and communities that have not always been understood or considered in the past, but by understanding the need for inclusive outcomes for all stakeholders, we also ensure that our solutions are ethical, and that we leave no on behind. The ethics case studies in the EPC’s recently launched Engineering Ethics Toolkit reveal the ethical concepts that comprise our everyday activities and what lies behind those decisions – resources like this should be used to ensure ethical decision making is integrated throughout an engineers’ education and continuing professional development.

This blog is also available here.

References

RAEng Ethics Report https://raeng.org.uk/policy-and-resources/education-policy/the-engineering-profession/global-responsibility-and-progressive-engineering-leadership/ethics
inceng.org website
Social Value Act https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-value-act-information-and-resources/social-value-act-information-and-resources
Sustainable Development Goals ethos of Leave No One Behind https://unsdg.un.org/2030-agenda/universal-values/leave-no-one-behind
Towards Vision Website ‘Gender Perspective in Engineering’ http://www.towardsvision.org/the-gender-perspective-in-engineering.html

Dawn Bonfield MBE CEng FIMMM FICE HonFIStructE FWES is Visiting Professor of Inclusive Engineering at Aston University and Royal Society Entrepreneur in Residence at King’s College London.

This blog is also available here.

Funded by the Royal Academy of Engineering the EPC’s Engineering Ethics toolkit was recently launched – containing a range of case studies and supporting articles to help engineering educators integrate ethics content into their teaching. EPC Board member and Professorial Teaching Fellow, Mike Bramhall, at The Engineering and Design Institute (TEDI-London) has incorporated three of the case studies from this recently produced toolkit into TEDI’s BEng (Hons) in Global Design Engineering. Mike and two of his students, Stuart Tucker and Caelan Vollenhoven, gave a presentation at this year’s EPC Annual Congress about their positive experience teaching and learning with the case studies. In this blog, Mike reflects on how and why he incorporated these resources.

The BEng (Hons) Global Design Engineering programme was launched in our brand new institution – TEDI-London – in September 2022. The programme is a blended mix of online learning integrated with project-based learning. Through this project-based learning approach and working in partnership with industry, our students will create and contribute to solutions to some of the biggest challenges facing the 21^st century and be equipped with the skills employers need from future engineers. Within these real-world projects, students work in teams and consider the ethical, environmental, social, and cultural impacts of engineering design. These issues are important for an engineer to understand whilst working with society. This importance is highlighted in the UK Standard for Professional Engineering Competence and Commitment (UK-SPEC: 4^th edition) with accreditation bodies identifying ethics as one of the core learning outcomes and competencies in engineering programmes. The Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes in engineering standards (AHEP: 4^th edition) reflects the importance of societal impact in engineering. To meet AHEP 4 our programme learning outcomes have been mapped against all required outcomes. The Engineer and Society outcomes include:

Sustainability
Ethics
Risk
Security
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion

To help students understand some of these issues whilst working on their design projects we chose three case studies from the Engineering Ethics Toolkit:

‘Choosing to install a smart meter’

‘Smart homes for older people with disabilities’

‘Solar panels in a desert oil field’

We converted key parts of these case studies to be compatible with our virtual learning environment and incorporated them into one online learning node. To support students in their development of ethical thinking, each case study focuses on different parts of ethics for engineers:

Everyday ethics
Ethical reasoning
Ethical analysis

Students are guided through the case studies in small chunks and asked to reflect upon each ethical issue. In this way students are not overwhelmed with too much information all at once. Eventually students are asked to incorporate their reflection into an end of year Professional and Personal Portfolio, explaining and evidencing how they have met each of the AHEP learning outcomes. The image below shows an example of a reflection task.

We asked the students to go through the online node individually prior to a class session in which staff then facilitated small-group discussions on each of the case studies. For example, for the Smart Meter case study we suggested that one group could look at being ‘for smart meters’ and another group ‘against smart meters’, using ethical issues and judgement in their decision making. Other issues arose during these discussions such as sustainability, data security, risk, and equality, diversity & inclusion. Some of the student comments are shown below:

On a high level, installing a smart meter is being portrayed as the decent thing to do in terms of the environment however it is just an instrument to monitor usage.

One way to be good to the environment is to be careful with your energy usage, e.g. switching off lights, only having heating and hot water when required so installing effective timers/thermostats in parts of your home where you need it.

Security & privacy: Who can see your consumption data and what can they do with it? The meters are all connected to the central wireless network, called the Data Communication Company (DCC). Concerns are that this network could be ‘hacked’ into. They may see a pattern of no-usage and provide opportunity for theft.

As first year undergraduate engineers we now have an insight and awareness of ethics and the responsibility of engineers in society.

Breaking down the case studies into a more interactive format and in manageable chunks made it easier for students, to stop us being overwhelmed – making it perfect for discussion in small groups.

We could put our thoughts on ethics into our end of year Portfolios – mapping against the AHEP requirements

These comments show how broadly and deeply students were able to engage with the ethical concepts presented in the case studies and apply them to their future work. As our course progresses, we intend to use more of the case studies, and map them appropriately against particular projects that students are working on at each level of the programme.

This blog is also available here.

Welcome to the EPC’s Enterprise Collaboration Toolkit – formerly known as the Crucible Project. Here you will find EPC’s landmark project supporting university and industry collaboration in engineering by showcasing and sharing the keys to success.

Some toolkit content is available to members only. For best results, make sure you’re logged in.

The Enterprise Collaboration Toolkit was inspired by the EPC’s landmark 2020 Annual Congress, Industry & Academia: Supercharging the Crucible, which highlighted five areas of mutual interest.

This toolkit includes case studies from a wide range of HE institutions and industry partners, focusing on these 5 themes which can all can be accessed via the links below:

These case studies are aimed at:

Academics at all levels – whether early career staff looking for opportunities to establish a network or senior leaders who want to extend the role of industry partnerships in their strategy or who want to improve graduate employment outcomes.
Managers in industry looking to establish links with academics to boost research, development, innovation and talent pipeline.
Policy-makers and sector agencies with an interest in industry and academia working more closely for the benefit of the economy, society and regions.

Advisors and contributors

In 2021 the EPC called for case study contributions to build this toolkit to help our members forge stronger industry links by sharing experiences and developing resources. We were delighted to receive nearly 50 applications to contribute case studies, exploring one or more of the Crucible Projects five main themes. These submissions were reviewed in detail by the EPC’s Research, Innovation and Knowledge Transfer Committee (RIKT) and 25 were shortlisted to present at our very successful Crucible Project online launch event on the 16th February 2022. With over 100 attendees joining us throughout the full-day event we saw presentations of a fantastic range of the case studies now available in this toolkit. We would like to extend our greatest thanks to the RIKT committee for all their enthusiasm and hard work on this project, in addition to all those who presented at the event and/or contributed case studies to make this an extensive, and what we hope will be a very useful, resource.

More to come

This is just the beginning of the Crucible Project toolkit – this will be a living and growing resource to provide best practice examples of academic-industry partnerships to help you find research funding, place graduates in employment, create work-based learning and many other collaborations. To ensure the continuous growth of this resource, members will soon be able to contribute their own, or further case studies.

Theme: Universities’ and business’ shared role in regional development; Collaborating with industry for teaching and learning; Knowledge exchange; Research; Graduate employability and recruitment.

Author: Prof Matt Boyle OBE (Newcastle University).

Keywords: Electrification; Collaboration Skills; Newcastle.

Abstract: Driving the Electric Revolution is led by Newcastle and is a collaborative R&D project to build supply chains in Power Electronics Machines and Drives. The University led the bid and as we amass supply chain capability we will generate £ Billions in GVA.

Newcastle University has been embedded in the academic and industrial development of the North East of England since 1834. Recently, one of its core competencies, Machines and Drives research, has been used to attract investment to the region from Industry and Government helping to increase the economic prospects for the North East region.

Newcastle University is the national lead organisation for Driving the Electric Revolution Industrialisation Centres an Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund Wave 3 competition. The centres serve two purposes,

A focal point for development of manufacturing processes in Power Electronics, Machines and Drives (PEMD) through investment in cutting edge manufacturing equipment.
The training of researchers, students, employees of industrial partners on these important new processes.

The Driving the Electric Revolution (DER) Industrialisation Centres (DERIC) project aims to accelerate UK industrialisation of innovative and differentiated PEMD manufacturing and supply chain solutions. They are doing this by creating a national network to coordinate and leverage the capabilities of 35 Research and Technology Organisations (RTO) and academic establishments, based within four main centres. Supported by 166 industrial partners it represents the largest coordinated industrialisation programme the UK PEMD sector has ever seen.

Newcastle University has, in living memory, always been at the forefront of Electric Machines and Drives innovation globally. It was inevitable that Newcastle would lead the DER project given its pedigree, reputation and the fact that it was supported by several companies in several sectors, Automotive, Aerospace and domestic products who undertake product research in the North East and who seek to manufacture in the UK if possible.

Newcastle did recognise however that it couldn’t deliver the government programme alone. There were four institutions which formed a consortium to bid into the competition, Newcastle University, University of Strathclyde, Warwick Manufacturing Group and the Compound Semiconductor Applications Catapult in Newport South Wales. Over time they have been joined by University of Nottingham, University of Birmingham, Swansea University and University of Warwick. Letters of support were received from 166 Industry partners, 27 FE and HE organisations expressed support as did 13 RTOs. Although the national bid was led by Newcastle, it took a more North East regional view in development of its delivery model.

Therefore, in addition to this national work, Newcastle extended their DERIC application beyond Newcastle to Sunderland where they worked with Sunderland council to establish a DERIC research facility in the area. Sunderland city council worked with Newcastle to acquire, fit out and commission the lab which received equipment from the project and is due to open in 2022.

Nationally the primary outcome is the establishment of the Driving the Electric Revolution Industrialisation Centres and the network.

The four DERIC act as focal points for the promotion of UK PEMD capabilities. They design develop and co-sponsor activities at international events. They send industrial representatives to meet with clients and research partners from UK, Europe and Asia, as well as developing a new UK event to attract leading PEMD organisations from around the globe.

In Newcastle the university’s sponsorship of both the national project as well as the DERIC in the North East is helping attract, retain and develop local innovation and investment. The equipment granted by the DER Challenge to the centre includes a Drives assembly line as well as an advanced Machines line. The DERIC is focused primarily in the development of manufacturing processes using the granted equipment. The equipment was selected specifically with these new processes in mind. The success of the DERIC program already means that the country and the region have attracted substantial inward investment.

Investments by three companies came to the North East because of the capability developed in the region. They have all agreed partnerships with the university in the process of establishing, acquiring and investing in the North East. The three companies are:

British Volt mission is to accelerate the electrification of society. They make battery cells. Their Gigaplant in Northumberland will be the second Gigaplant in the UK. They are investing £1Bn into the region creating around 5,000 jobs both at the plant and in the supply chain.
Envision also make batteries. Unlike British volt the Envision cell is a Gel pack. Envision has the first Gigaplant in the UK at Sunderland. They are investing a further £450M to expand the plant in Sunderland and potentially another £1.8Bn by 2030.
Turntide Technologies invested £110M into the region acquiring three businesses. These have all in some fashion been supported by and supportive of the PEMD capability at Newcastle over the past six decades.

The university has worked tirelessly to help create an ecosystem in the region for decarbonisation and electrification.

The last stage of this specific activity is the creation of the trained employees for this new North East future. The university, collaborating across the country with DER partners, is embarking on an ambitious plan to help educate, train and upskill the engineers, scientists and operators to support these developments. It is doing this by collaborating, for the North East requirement, with the other universities and further education colleges in the region. Industry is getting involved by delivering a demand signal for its requirements. The education, training and up skilling of thousands of people over the next few years will require substantial investments by both the educators in the region as well as industry.

As the pace of electrification of common internally combusted applications accelerates the need for innovation in the three main components of electrification, power source, drive and machine will grow substantially. The country needs more electrification expertise. The North East region has many of the basic building blocks for a successful future in electrification. Newcastle University and its Academic and Industrial partners have shown the way ahead by collaborating, leading to substantial inward investment which will inevitably lead to greater economic prosperity for the region. Further information is available from the Driving the Electric Revolution Industrialisation Centres website. In addition, there are annual reports and many events hosted, sponsored or attended by the centres.

Theme: Research

Authors: Dr Grazia Todeschini (King’s College London) and Kah Leong-Koo (National Grid UK)

Keywords: Electrical Engineering, Power Systems, Renewable Energy, Computer Model

Abstract: This case study deals with a collaboration between KCL and National Grid on a EPSRC project. The project deals with assessing the impact of renewable energy sources on the electricity grid. This assessment will be carried out by using a transmission grid model provided by National Grid and device models developed by KCL.

Topic of the case study

This case study deals with the development of advanced models to study the impact of renewable energy sources, and more in general, inverter-based devices, on the UK transmission grid. More specifically, this project focuses on the impacts in terms of voltage and current distortion. This topic is referred to as ‘power quality’ in the specialist literature.

Aims

This research was motivated by various reports presented in the technical literature in the last decade, where a general increase of harmonic levels has been observed. A similar trend has been reported in several countries, simultaneously to the installation of increasing levels of renewable energy sources and other inverter-based devices. These reports have created some concerns about harmonic management in the future, when more renewable energy sources will be in services. Ultimately, the project aims at forecasting harmonic levels in 2050, and at determining impact on the equipment, and possible mitigating solutions.

Collaborating parties

This case study involved the collaboration between the Department of engineering at King’s College London and National Grid UK.

Project set up

Power quality is a specialist area within power systems that deals with deviation of voltage and current waveforms from the nominal values, in terms of both amplitude and frequency. The academic PI worked for a few years in the power industry, with the aim of specialising in power quality and understanding the issues faced by the power industry, as well as the tools that are used to carry out power system studies. The industrial PI is an expert in the area of power quality and has been involved with many standardisation groups as well as professional organisation to help developing common tools to harmonise the approach to power quality. Therefore, the two PIs have a similar expertise and background that allowed them to discuss and define common areas of research. When looking to develop such a specialist project, it is very important that all parties involved have a common ground, so that it is possible to interact and work in the same direction.

Outcomes

The project is still not finished, however, some of the original objectives have been achieved:

A 2050 scenario has been developed, by using: transmission system model data provided by National Grid, device models developed through research and testing, and identification of future locations of renewable energy sources. Although the case is still under development, preliminary results indicate that harmonic levels are expected to increase, but they can be managed using existing design practice.

A distribution system model with harmonic injection has been developed and it is currently under discussion with the industrial partner. This model is needed by the industrial partner to be able to represent the presence of renewable energy sources on the power grid at lower voltage levels.

This was the first collaboration between the academic and the industrial PI, and was very positive and constructive for both parties. Therefore, the two collaborators now planning to continue this collaboration via other projects in the future.

Lessons learned, reflections, recommendations

In terms of technical developments, the collaboration has been very productive, as it allowed the exchange of information between industry and academia. Specifically, the industrial partner provided data and models that are used by power system engineer working at National Grid to carry out renewable integration studies. This information cannot be found in the literature as it is protected by NDAs. On the other side, the university provided expertise in developing models that can be used to represent specialist equipment, and that are needed to study the integration of renewable energy sources. Development of such models is time consuming, and the support of the university allowed faster development and testing.

COVID impacted the collaboration because, as part of the original project plan, placements in industry were to be carried out. However, ultimately they didn’t take place. The industrial placements would have helped the model development to proceed faster as it would have allowed closer communication. The use of remote meetings mitigated the impact of COVID and still allowed the project to be carried out successfully. For any project of this type, it is very important to be able to work closely with the industrial partner and being able to meet regularly. Being in the same office allows to discuss more frequently, rather than waiting for formal meetings to be set.

For a technical project aiming at analysis a very-well defined problem, one recommendation is to find the technical experts within the company that can provide expertise. This may take some time in the initial stages, but at the end it will pay off as it will allow to carry out meaningful technical discussions.

Further resources

We published two papers and others are in preparation:

Z. Deng, G. Todeschini and K.L. Koo: ‘Modelling Renewable Energy Sources for Harmonic Assessments in DIgSILENT PowerFactory: Comparison of Different Approaches’, 11^th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications.
Z. Deng, G. Todeschini and K.L. Koo: ‘Comparison between Ideal and Frequency-dependent Norton Equivalent Model of Inverter-Based Resources for Harmonic Studies’, 2021 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Asia.

Theme: Knowledge exchange, Collaborating with industry for teaching and learning

Authors: Deanne Taenzer (ExpertFile) and Kendra Gerlach, MBA, APR (Virginia Commonwealth University)

Keywords: Industry, Academic Expertise, Collaboration, Knowledge Exchange, Commercial Engagement, Content, Search, Discovery, Innovation, Invention

Abstract: The theme of the session is about how industry currently searches for academic expertise for applied research and other interventions. A speaker from the school of engineering and one from their partnership platform will talk about the importance of online searches and having effective academic profiles for web searches, discovery and engagement. The speakers will be: Kendra Gerlach (Director of Marketing and Communications at the Virginia Commonwealth University’s College of Engineering) and Justin Shaw (UK Development Director for ExpertFile). The university will identify specific industry engagements through their outreach via their own strategic focus and using the content development, structured data for discovery and broad reach distribution channels provided as part of their partnership with ExpertFile.

The following case study addresses, when it comes to knowledge exchange, that there is a fundamental issue in the abilities of industry to identify and source relevant academic experts and applied research centres in the first place.

The aim of the strategy covered in this case study is to determine if improved discovery via online channels and making use of relevant content has more positive outcomes for industry access and engagement with academia. We will discuss how industry searches for academic expertise for applied research, consulting and other interventions– and how the efforts of the Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) College of Engineering improved the attraction, interest and engagement from industry and beyond.

VCU College of Engineering needs a strategy for academic expertise discovery

As a young and growing institution, VCU College of Engineering was aware that its faculty had much to offer for knowledge exchange but were almost impossible to find by potential external partners. Before adopting a strategy and partnering with the global online expert platform, ExpertFile, the College had no solution for an online academic directory that offered more than just contact and basic biographical details. A few academics already had websites for their own labs, some had up-to-date information, some included curriculum vitae. The presentation was variable and unattuned to external perspectives. Many weren’t even cited on the College’s website domain, and most were invisible to an online search.

The College recognised that there was a need to make their academics more easily findable with professional-looking content that would surface on top search engines, while also having the expertise promoted beyond the College’s website itself.

The old strategy failed to deliver

Before the College implemented a strategy focused on improved discovery and on delivering relevant and engaging content, it used traditional and digital marketing tactics that didn’t have really an anchor of information for the academic experts. Faculty relied on their own personal connections to industry and other researchers. As the College grew, it became evident that to form research partnerships and pursue large grants, faculty must be more easily found and their expertise easily accessed for academics and non-academics alike.

Putting the strategy into action

When the College pursued the strategy to increase expert visibility, many senior academics were resistant and did not want to change – as they did not fully understand the value to them and their work. The College proceeded with the adoption of professional online profiling knowing that if the strategy did not succeed, at the very least they would have current strengthened content for their showcasing academics online.

The College chose a technology platform to mobilise their strategy and modernise their market visibility – to be competitive in the engineering space. They chose to work with ExpertFile as it supported their own web presence and offered updated multimedia content formats such as videos, images and books. Beyond technology, ExpertFile’s content distribution channels (with partner promotional channels and expert-seekers) also increased content visibility beyond their own website.

With the resistance of faculty a concern, and the need for faculty to provide content for the profiles, the team adopted an initial message related to the student recruitment priority in order to get them on board (academics understood the need to be seen by potential students).

Faculty members were given their own dedicated page on the egr.vcu.edu domain. This was essential to success. Each profile has a unique, personalised url on the website so that search engines can easily find them, resulting in higher search ranking. With 93% of online sessions starting with a search engine[1], 91% of pages getting no organic search traffic from Google [2] and 75% of internet users never scroll past the first page [3] this was critical for ‘discovery’.

The unique urls also facilitated the Marketing and Communications Department to employ cross-linking, a key part to the success of the strategy. The marketing team promotes links to profiles in all content related to an academic. Every news story, award or newsletter mention includes a link. Social media uses links to drive viewers back to the website and the profile. The team have also encouraged the parent University to include links to faculty profiles whenever that person is mentioned.

VCU Engineering created a directory of profiles for the entire College members plus subdirectories for each sub-uni and department for ease of discovery. For example, a searchable subdirectory of only Computer Science faculty or Mechanical Engineering faculty which routes to that department’s homepage.

Profiles aren’t limited to biographical information and publications; they include areas of expertise, industry experience, research patents, videos, books, media and event appearances – all valued by industry and others. This content is as important as the initial discovery as it offers searchers a greater understanding of the academic expertise and its value to them.

Engaging industry benefits reputation
Industry partnerships and opportunities are an important focus of the College and academics knew that improved discovery would have widespread benefits; improving the reputation of the College and its faculty and attracting other groups – prospective graduate students, foundations, academic colleagues, associations and media.

Faculty members with strong reputations in their fields often advance in their own academic associations. For instance, one of the College’s Computer Science experts has been named president-elect of a global organisation. A nuclear engineering professor is now Director General of the World Nuclear Association. Without discovery, academics and colleges rely on their limited connections and miss these larger opportunities.

News media seeking experts struggle to find credible sources. A VCU associate professor that specialises in aerosols is now regularly featured in media and on television because he is now easily findable as an expert in this field. Media coverage has a direct lead generation impact for industry engagement and secures trust in the credibility of the source.

Many of the College’s academics have now established industry partnerships, and the marketing team knows that these efforts have contributed to those successes. From the formation of pharmaceutical clusters locally to the fastest licensing agreement done by the University, the commitment of this strategy to support those successes has paid off.

Measuring impact and results

The College uses tools like Google Analytics Studio to measure results and track progress. Since it has employed trackable pages and cross-links to the content, it has been able to record the steady progress of these efforts. Faculty have benefited from much-elevated search rankings including top-ranked faculty profiles which are viewed between 2,000 and 3,000 times a year, with more than 2,000 different visitors viewing each profile. In a given year, the College now tracks over 90,000 unique visitors that have viewed their academic profiles.

More than 70% of the views come from organic search, which means when a faculty member’s name is searched, their profile pages are among the top results, and in some cases are the number one search result.

The strategy continues to add value

Kendra Gerlach, Director of Marketing and Communications at VCU College of Engineering, and co-author of this case study reflected:

”Researchers often assess their involvement and benefit from supporting ventures on a three year cycle. If the second year is better than the first, and if the College is seeing success, they continue a third year.“

Kendra is happy to report that the College is now in year five of using ExpertFile and this expert profiling and searchability strategy.

Key Takeaways:

Creating profile pages that live on the College’s own website domain is critical. Give academics a unique url that can impact search rankings.
Deliberately linking to profiles from other sources: marketing materials, other organizations, social media, helps to elevate search rankings making faculty easily discovered by industry and others.
Moving beyond academic credentials and publications to a broader array of expert content appeals to industry, making academics more approachable.
Overcome technology limitations with platforms that integrate with current systems. If current profiles are inadequate, enhance them or use knowledge exchange focused content that can be easily discovered and acted upon.

Access summary presentation slides of this case study as a pdf document here.

Endnotes

[1] imForza, 2013, Vinny La Barbera – 8 SEO stats that are hard to ignore

[2] Ahrefs, 2020, Tim Soulo – Search traffic study

[3] Marketshare.hitslink.com, October 2010

Let us know what you think of our website