Abet 2000 Criteria 3 G And The Meaning Of Communication

This paper reports part of the findings from a larger research study on the ways in which the field of engineering education “talks” about communication. The goals of the research study are 1) to analyze the uses and meanings of “communication” exhibited by peer reviewed papers in engineering education publications from the year 2000; 2) to analyze how the authors interpret ABET 2000 Criteria 3g: “to be effective communicators;” and 3) to identify specific areas for further investigation regarding communication and engineering education. We examined the Journal of Engineering Education for articles published in 2000 that dealt with the concept “communication” and the Best Paper Award nominees from the 1999 Frontiers in Education Conference. After distinguishing between authors’ use of the word communication to refer the act of exchanging meaning versus the tools for such exchange acts, we consider each paper using a taxonomy of communication characteristics, including mode (visual, oral, or written), formality, and mediation. Our primary finding is that most papers consider only two forms: informal oral communication or written formal communication. Therefore, there are major research opportunities for engineering educators to consider other forms of communication, their existence in the classroom, and their effects on learning. In this paper we describe the study and report the findings for oral and visual communication.