Juan Lucena’s research while affiliated with Colorado School of Mines and other places

Background Identifying as an engineer is essential for belonging and student success, yet the social context and professional norms make it more difficult for some students to establish an identity as an engineer. Purpose/Hypothesis This study investigated whether first‐generation college students' funds of knowledge supported their engineering role identity. Design/Methods Data came from a survey administered across the United States western, southern, and mountain regions in the fall semester of 2018. Only the sample of students who indicated they were the first in their families to attend college was used in the analysis ( n = 378). Structural equation modeling was used to understand how first‐generation college students' funds of knowledge supported their engineering role identity; measurement invariance was examined to ensure that the model was valid for women and men alike. Results First‐generation college students' funds of knowledge individually supported the components of the engineering role identity development process. Tinkering knowledge from home and perspective‐taking helped inform interest and performance/competence beliefs. First‐generation college students' bids for external recognition were supported through their mediational skills, their connecting experiences, and their local network of college friends. The bundle of advice, resources, and emotional support from family members was the only fund of knowledge that directly supported students' perceptions of themselves as engineers. Conclusions The relationships we established between first‐generation college students' funds of knowledge and emerging engineering role identities call for engineering educators to integrate students' funds of knowledge into engineering learning and to broaden disciplinary norms of what counts as engineering‐relevant knowledge.

This chapter provides a relevant case study for students to read, assess, and understand one engineer’s story, career path, and success in community engagement. Exercises are provided throughout to encourage students to assess their own experiences and think about future challenges they might encounter in community engagement.

This chapter provides the anatomy of a senior design project and course as traditionally taught in engineering education. It shows how adopting assumptions, practices, and models from “design for industry” to do “design for community,” leads engineering educators to disempower the communities they want to serve.

This chapter focuses the community engagement conversation on elements of community ownership and how engineering teams and students can bring this awareness to any project or initiative.The chapter begins with listening to community, then progresses to explain a rich model for defining and measuring community ownership. Additionally, this chapter explores elements of contextual listening, providing readers with a toolkit for integrating contextual listing in their work and projects.

This chapter follows the evolution of student perspectives in sustainable community development (SCD). It tracks two specific students in their journey through a course titled Engineering and Sustainable Community Development (ESCD). In this chapter, readers will learn the value of critical thinking in SCD and how to evaluate past and future SCD projects in relation to three sustainability components: economic sustainability, environmental sustainably and socio-cultural sustainably.

This chapter provides a relevant case study for students to read, assess, and critique using the SCD concepts provided in previous chapters. The case study outlines one professor’s experience working with a community in India and how community was engaged throughout the project phases. Exercises are provided throughout to encourage students to assess and critique elements of SCD, in particular elements of community ownership.

This chapter provides a brief review of what is missing in conversations that focus only on engineers and community and includes suggested readings for continued learning. Focusing on the role of two missing actors, donors and implementers, the beginning of this chapter broadens the landscape of sustainable community develop and pushes students to think beyond the engineer and community dyad. This chapter defines different types of donor agencies, implementation organizations, and summarizes the interconnected relationships between donors, implementers, and community. The end of the chapter reviews the primary lessons provided through the book and includes additional reading sources for continued learning and personal growth.

This chapter begins with a reflection on the language and terms used within the project of development. It reminds students to be thoughtful and critical of terms and to always think about the influence our words can have on others. Next, the chapter traces episodes of the history of engineers’ involvement in development, from 18th century colonial development to today. As you travel through the chapter, take the time to pause and answer the critical questions and exercises posed along the way. These are intended to elicit reflection on how much the history of engineers’ involvement with development projects might continue to shape the ways in which you engage community development or humanitarian engineering today.

This chapter introduces an in-depth understanding of community and how traditional engineering problem solving (EPS) methods limit rich community engagement. Throughout this chapter community is defined, approaches to effective community engagement are presented, and challenges to community engagement are explored, including engineering problem solving, engineering mindsets, curricular design, and engineers’ belief in development.