Abstract
Abstract – At the University of Toronto, Engineering Science students are typically introduced to the engineering codes and standards that they are expected to incorporate into framing and responding to engineering design challenges in their first year of study. In our experience, however, students do not always appreciate that these codes and standards may not reflect the interests of key (and potentially under-represented) stakeholders, and thus may not be appropriate for their engineering context. To encourage our students to adopt a more critical perspective when working with codes and standards, we exposed them to case examples of contentious regulations, and highlighted the objectives, people, and processes behind the development of these works. Our examples focus on common products to which first-year students can relate, such as handrails and stairs. By exposing our students to the people and processes by which codes and standards are developed, and to the controversies associated with contentious policy decisions, we expect that students will adopt a rigorous approach to using engineering codes and standards in their design activities.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
