不止热门角色,我们为你扩展了更多细分角色分类,覆盖职场提升、商业增长、内容创作、学习规划等多元场景。精准匹配不同目标,让每一次生成都更有方向、更高命中率。
立即探索更多角色分类,找到属于你的增长加速器。
工程伦理课程描述(中英双语)
中文部分
课程名称:工程伦理(Engineering Ethics) 课程类型:通识/专业必修(建议用于工程类专业的核心或支撑课程) 建议开课学期与学时学分:建议2学分,32学时;或与设计实践课程协同开设(供院系根据培养方案调整) 授课对象与先修要求:工程及相关专业本科高年级或研究生;具备基础工程设计与项目管理知识;建议与专业设计/系统工程课程并行
课程概述与论证 本课程旨在培养学生识别、分析与应对工程实践中伦理与专业责任问题的能力,重点涵盖安全与风险、公众福祉、可持续性、公平与包容、利益冲突、保密与告知、标准与法规、跨文化与全球语境、数据与新兴技术伦理等。课程明确对接国际工程教育质量标准对伦理能力的要求,尤其是ABET EAC学生成果关于“识别工程情境中的伦理与职业责任并在全球、经济、环境与社会语境中作出有据判断”的规定[1]。课程内容与工程专业团体的伦理准则相一致(如IEEE与NSPE的伦理守则),以实际案例与基于证据的决策方法为主线,强调责任可追溯、决策透明与以公众安全为先[2]–[4]。课程采用案例研讨、角色扮演、结构化决策框架与项目嵌入式伦理评估等教学策略,回应工程界权威机构对工程伦理教育的建议[5][6]。
学习目标(可测量) 完成课程后,学生应能:
课程内容与周次安排(建议12周)
教学策略
评估方式与权重(建议,可据院系政策调整)
课程资源(核心与权威参考)
学术诚信与专业规范 要求严格遵守学术诚信与职业伦理;所有作业需注明来源并使用规定的引用格式(建议IEEE)。课程讨论与项目中应维护公众安全至上的职业准则与尊重多元的沟通规范[1]–[3],[5]。
English Section
Course Title: Engineering Ethics Level and Placement: Core/supporting course for engineering programs; suitable for senior undergraduates or graduate students Suggested Credits/Contact Hours: 2 credits, 32 contact hours; may be co-delivered with a design/project course Prerequisites: Foundational engineering design and project management; concurrent enrollment in a disciplinary design course recommended
Course Description and Rationale This course develops students’ capacity to identify, analyze, and address ethical and professional responsibility issues in engineering practice. Core topics include safety and risk, public welfare, sustainability, equity and inclusion, conflicts of interest, confidentiality and informed disclosure, standards and regulation, global and cross-cultural contexts, and data/new technology ethics. The course aligns with international program outcomes for ethics in engineering education, notably ABET EAC’s outcome on recognizing ethical and professional responsibilities and making informed judgments in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts[1]. It is grounded in professional codes (e.g., IEEE and NSPE) and uses case-based, evidence-informed decision-making with an emphasis on traceable responsibility, transparency, and primacy of public safety[2]–[4]. Pedagogies include case seminars, role-play, structured decision frameworks, and embedded ethical assessment in design projects, consistent with recommendations from authoritative bodies[5][6].
Learning Outcomes (measurable) Upon successful completion, students will be able to:
Indicative Weekly Outline (12 weeks)
Teaching and Learning Strategies
Assessment Plan and Suggested Weights
Key Resources
Academic Integrity and Professional Norms All work must follow the program’s academic integrity policy and the designated citation style (IEEE recommended). Classroom and project activities should reflect the profession’s commitment to public safety and respectful, inclusive communication[1]–[3],[5].
参考文献/References(IEEE格式) [1] ABET, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2024–2025,” Engineering Accreditation Commission, Baltimore, MD, USA. Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2024-2025/ (Student Outcome 4: ethical and professional responsibilities).
[2] IEEE, “IEEE Code of Ethics,” approved by the IEEE Board of Directors, June 2020. Available: https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/p7-8.html
[3] National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), “Code of Ethics for Engineers,” revised 2019. Available: https://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[4] National Academy of Engineering, “Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science (OEC),” 2024. Available: https://www.onlineethics.org
[5] Engineering Council and Royal Academy of Engineering, “Statement of Ethical Principles,” London, UK, 2017. Available: https://www.engc.org.uk/ethics
[6] C. E. Harris Jr., M. S. Pritchard, M. J. Rabins, R. W. James, and E. E. Englehardt, Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 6th ed. Boston, MA, USA: Cengage Learning, 2018.
课程名称:课程设计与评估
课程定位与宗旨 本课程系统性地引介基于证据的课程设计与评估范式,强调以“目标—教学—评估”同向对齐(constructive alignment)和“逆向设计”为核心框架,指导学习者制定可测量的学习成果、设计有效的教学活动与评估方案,并通过数据与证据持续改进课程质量(Biggs & Tang, 2011;Wiggins & McTighe, 2005)。课程内容整合学习目标分类学、有效性与信度、形成性评估与反馈、通用学习设计(UDL)与真实情境评估等关键概念,旨在培养学习者在多元教育情境中开展高质量课程开发与评估的能力(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001;Messick, 1995;Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014)。
适用对象与先修要求
学习目标(完成课程后,学员将能够)
核心内容与模块安排
教学与学习策略
课程评估与评分方式(针对学员)
学术伦理与公平性 课程遵循教育与心理测量标准,要求对学习者差异提供合理便利,保护数据隐私,避免评估偏倚,并就AI与学术诚信设定明确规范(AERA et al., 2014;Meyer et al., 2014)。
课程成效评估与持续改进(针对本课程)
主要学习资源(建议)
参考文献
课程简述总结 本课程以同向对齐与逆向设计为主轴,融合效度与信度、形成性评估与高质量反馈、UDL与真实性评估等关键理念,通过工作坊式设计实践与证据驱动的反思,支持学习者产出可实施、可评估、可改进的课程与评估方案,促进教学决策的科学化与教育质量的持续提升。
Course Title: Data Visualization
Catalog Description This graduate-level course provides a rigorous, research-informed foundation for designing, implementing, and evaluating data visualizations for analysis and communication. Grounded in empirical evidence on graphical perception and visual encoding effectiveness, the course develops proficiency in mapping data, tasks, and audiences to appropriate representations and interaction techniques (Cleveland & McGill, 1984; Mackinlay, 1986; Ware, 2021). Students learn a principled design process spanning problem characterization, data and task abstraction, visual encoding and interaction design, prototype implementation, and empirical evaluation (Munzner, 2014; Lam et al., 2012). Emphasis is placed on perceptual and cognitive underpinnings, uncertainty communication, narrative structures, and ethical and accessible practice (Segel & Heer, 2010; Spiegelhalter et al., 2011; D’Ignazio & Klein, 2020; W3C, 2023). Studio critique and hands-on labs complement readings drawn from canonical and contemporary scholarship. The culminating project requires students to produce an interactive visualization accompanied by a methodological justification and evaluative evidence.
Prerequisites
Learning Outcomes Upon successful completion, students will be able to:
Content Outline
Learning Activities and Pedagogy
Assessment Strategy
Primary Resources
Software and Technical Requirements
References Bertin, J. (2011). Semiology of graphics: Diagrams, networks, maps (W. J. Berg, Trans.). Esri Press. (Original work published 1967)
Brewer, C. A. (2015). Designing better maps: A guide for GIS users (2nd ed.). Esri Press.
Cairo, A. (2016). The truthful art: Data, charts, and maps for communication. New Riders.
Cleveland, W. S., & McGill, R. (1984). Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79(387), 531–554.
D’Ignazio, C., & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data feminism. MIT Press.
Heer, J., & Bostock, M. (2010). Crowdsourcing graphical perception: Using Mechanical Turk to assess visualization design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 203–212). ACM.
Lam, H., Bertini, E., Isenberg, P., Plaisant, C., & Carpendale, S. (2012). Empirical studies in information visualization: Seven scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(9), 1520–1536.
Mackinlay, J. (1986). Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 5(2), 110–141.
Munzner, T. (2014). Visualization analysis and design. CRC Press.
Segel, E., & Heer, J. (2010). Narrative visualization: Telling stories with data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 16(6), 1139–1148.
Shneiderman, B. (1996). The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In Proceedings 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages (pp. 336–343). IEEE.
Spiegelhalter, D., Pearson, M., & Short, I. (2011). Visualizing uncertainty about the future. Science, 333(6048), 1393–1400.
Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press.
W3C. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/
Ware, C. (2021). Information visualization: Perception for design (4th ed.). Morgan Kaufmann.
用一条高转化提示词,快速产出“可审可发”的学术化课程描述,让教务更高效、教师更省心、招生更专业。
请确认您是否已完成支付