Building diversity by embracing intellectual diversity

A fundamental premise of the NAE Grand Challenge on personalized learning is that students understand and approach problems differently. While engineering problem solving strategies are useful and have their place, in many cases, they may no longer be sufficient to support the attributes of the Engineer of 2020 which supports creativity, innovation, and leadership development. Unfortunately, one cannot embrace the concept of personalized learning or develop the creativity and innovation skills that employers are seeking without also embracing the notion of intellectual diversity. While first year engineering students are intellectually diverse, graduating seniors tend to congregate towards the upper left or analytic quadrant. Individuals that are naturally more creative or innovative (upper and lower right quadrants) are much less likely to persist in the engineering curriculum. In short, the predominant analytical process found in the traditional engineering curriculum is likely to discourage budding innovators from continuing in an engineering program. In addition, while it is true that women can and often do persist in engineering, it is also true that the average typology for women is skewed downward and to the right. Consequently, without a social context or some creative outlet, women are less likely to persist in an engineering curriculum. The goal of the workshop is to introduce faculty to a conceptual framework for viewing intellectual diversity and to discuss alternatives for embracing intellectual diversity without compromising core academic standards.