Graduate Education for Leadership in Sustainable Development Innovation , Practice and Research

This paper reflects on the motivation, method and effectiveness of teaching leadership and organisational change to graduate engineers. Delivering progress towards sustainable development requires engineers who are aware of pressing global issues (such as resource depletion, climate change, social inequity and an interdependent economy) since it is they who deliver the goods and services that underpin society within these constraints. In recognition of this fact the Cambridge University MPhil in Engineering for Sustainable Development has focussed on educating engineers to become effective change agents in their professional field with the confidence to challenge orthodoxy in adopting traditional engineering solutions. This paper reflects on ten years of delivering this course to review how teaching change management and leadership aspects of the programme have evolved and progressed over that time. As the students on this professional practice have often extensive experience as practising engineers and scientists, they have learned the limitations of their technical background when solving complex problems. Students often join the course recognising their need to broaden their knowledge of relevant cross-disciplinary skills. The course offers an opportunity for these early to mid-career engineers to explore an ethical and value-based approach to bringing about effective change in their particular sectors and organisations. This is achieved through action learning assignments in combination with reflections on the theory of change to enable students to equip themselves with tools that help them to be effective in making their professional and personal life choices. This paper draws on feedback gathered from students during their participation on the course and augments this with alumni reflections gathered some years after their graduation. These professionals are able to look back on their experience of the taught components and reflect on how they have been able to apply this key learning in their subsequent careers.

Separate representations of dynamics in rhythmic and discrete movements: evidence from motor learning.

Rhythmic and discrete arm movements occur ubiquitously in everyday life, and there is a debate as to whether these two classes of movements arise from the same or different underlying neural mechanisms. Here we examine interference in a motor-learning paradigm to test whether rhythmic and discrete movements employ at least partially separate neural representations. Subjects were required to make circular movements of their right hand while they were exposed to a velocity-dependent force field that perturbed the circularity of the movement path. The direction of the force-field perturbation reversed at the end of each block of 20 revolutions. When subjects made only rhythmic or only discrete circular movements, interference was observed when switching between the two opposing force fields. However, when subjects alternated between blocks of rhythmic and discrete movements, such that each was uniquely associated with one of the perturbation directions, interference was significantly reduced. Only in this case did subjects learn to corepresent the two opposing perturbations, suggesting that different neural resources were employed for the two movement types. Our results provide further evidence that rhythmic and discrete movements employ at least partially separate control mechanisms in the motor system.