MetaTOC stay on top of your field, easily

Journal of Engineering Education

Impact factor: 1.925 5-Year impact factor: 1.924 Print ISSN: 1069-4730 Publisher: Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)

Subject: Education & Educational Research

Most recent papers:

  • What Competencies Should Undergraduate Engineering Programs Emphasize? A Systematic Review.
    Honor J. Passow, Christian H. Passow.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2017
    Background Under Washington Accord or ABET accreditation requirements, faculty must envision, collectively articulate, and prioritize the competencies that students should gain from their educational program to prepare for life and myriad career paths. Purpose When faculty create specifications for designing a curriculum, they need to answer questions, including “Among generic engineering competencies, what is the relative importance for professional practice across disciplines and work contexts?” Scope/Method A search identified the intersection of four concepts (competence, engineering, practice, and importance) in engineering and education databases (8,232 reports, 1990–2012). This review integrates a quantitative synthesis inspired by meta‐analytic techniques (27 studies, 14,429 participants) and a qualitative thematic analysis (25 studies, 2,174 participants plus 36,100 job postings) to establish a comprehensive list of generic engineering competencies, their relative importance, and rich descriptions highlighting interrelationships. Conclusions Engineers' technical work is inseparably intertwined with team‐player collaboration. The most crucial skill is coordinating multiple competencies to accomplish a goal. Sixteen generic competencies important for engineering practice are defined. Compared with Washington Accord graduate attributes, the evidence‐based competencies re‐envision “teamwork” as coordinate efforts, split “life‐long learning” into gather information and expand skills, broaden “ethics” to take responsibility, expand “design experiments” to measure accurately and separate it from interpret data, apply “contemporary issues” and “impacts” in define constraints, modify “manage projects” to devise process, and add important competencies (take initiative, think creatively, and make decisions). Definitions are refined for communicate effectively, design solutions, apply knowledge, apply skills, and solve problems. Problem solving is the core of engineering practice.
    July 19, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20171   open full text
  • Engineering Thinking in Prekindergarten Children: A Systematic Literature Review.
    Christine N. Lippard, Monica H. Lamm, Katie L. Riley.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2017
    Background Children begin foundational learning in early childhood that sets the stage for later learning and academic success. Research regarding engineering in early childhood is limited yet growing. Purpose Because interest in engineering in early childhood is growing, this article reviews research regarding interactions, materials, and activities that promote prekindergarten children's engineering thinking, and in turn how this engineering thinking is related to developmental outcomes. Scope/Method The initial search for papers with relevant keywords returned over 2,000 papers. Upon review, 27 papers pertained to children age five or under and to engineering. The following research questions were addressed: What (a) interactions and (b) materials and activities promote prekindergarten children's engineering thinking? What developmental outcomes are related to children's engineering thinking? Conclusions The small body of research regarding engineering thinking in prekindergarten children only allows for a few limited conclusions. Specifically, results indicate that children display engineering thinking when actively engaged with materials, adults are better able to facilitate engineering thinking if they have received some guidance on both engineering principles and asking children questions, and children's engineering thinking can promote early math skills and possibly social and emotional development. However, a consistent limitation in the literature is that measures are underdeveloped and their psychometric properties are often unestablished.
    July 19, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20174   open full text
  • A Size and Scale Framework for Guiding Curriculum Design and Assessment.
    Yi Kong, Kerrie A. Douglas, Kelsey J. Rodgers, Heidi Diefes‐Dux, Krishna Madhavan.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2017
    Background The concepts of size and scale in nanotechnology are difficult for most beginning engineering students to grasp. Yet, guidance on the specific aspects of size and scale that should be taught and assessed is limited. Purpose This research sought to empirically develop a framework for size and scale conceptualization and provide a blueprint to guide curriculum development and assessment. Design/Methods Through an exploratory sequential mixed methods design, we qualitatively examined 30 teams of 119 first‐year engineering students' nanotechnology‐based projects to identify concepts beyond those in the literature to create a Size and Scale Framework (SSF). We then created a blueprint with associated learning objectives that can guide curriculum and assessment development. To demonstrate the utility of the SSF blueprint, an SSF‐based quiz was developed and studied using classical test theory with 378 first‐year engineering students. Results The findings categorized size and scale in terms of eight aspects: Definition, Qualitative Categorical, Qualitative Relational, Qualitative Proportional, Quantitative Absolute, Quantitative Categorical, Quantitative Relational, and Quantitative Proportional. The SSF can be applied as a blueprint for others to develop curriculum and assessment. The SSF‐based quiz demonstrated acceptable properties for use with first‐year engineering students. Conclusions Development of the SSF‐based quiz is an example of how the SSF can be applied to create a classroom quiz to assess students' size and scale knowledge in the context of nanotechnology.
    July 19, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20172   open full text
  • Reflective Decision‐Making in Elementary Students' Engineering Design.
    Kristen Bethke Wendell, Christopher G. Wright, Patricia Paugh.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2017
    Background A key feature of engineering design is collaborative, deliberate decision making that takes into account information about design options. K‐12 students need opportunities for this kind of decision making if they are to meet the learning standards for engineering set out in the Next Generation Science Standards. Purpose This qualitative study sought to propose and operationalize a definition of reflective decision‐making among elementary students. We investigated how urban elementary students enact reflective decision‐making in a formal engineering design curriculum. Method We used naturalistic inquiry methodology and video recorded seven Engineering is Elementary design challenges in four classrooms. Students worked in small teams, and we focused on their planning and redesign phases. Maximum variation sampling, constant comparative analysis, and microethnographic accounts demonstrated the diversity of resources students utilized in their decision making. Results In student discourse, we found evidence for six reflective decision‐making elements: articulating multiple solutions, evaluating pros and cons, intentionally selecting a solution, retelling the performance of a solution, analyzing a solution according to evidence, and purposefully choosing improvements. The discourse patterns used to enact these elements both supported and interfered with students' achievement of design goals. Conclusions Our results suggest that during engineering design tasks, young learners working in small teams can respond productively to opportunities to engage in sophisticated discourse. However, further work is needed on tools and strategies that support reflective decision‐making by all students during engineering design in elementary school.
    July 19, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20173   open full text
  • Qualitative Research Quality: A Collaborative Inquiry Across Multiple Methodological Perspectives.
    Joachim Walther, Nicola W. Sochacka, Lisa C. Benson, Amy E. Bumbaco, Nadia Kellam, Alice L. Pawley, Canek M. L. Phillips.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 13, 2017
    Background The field of engineering education research is adopting an increasingly diverse range of qualitative methods. These developments necessitate a coherent language and conceptual framework to critically engage with questions of qualitative research quality. Purpose/Hypothesis This article advances discussions of qualitative research quality through sharing and analyzing a methodologically diverse, practice‐based exploration of research quality in the context of five engineering education research studies. Design/Method As a group of seven engineering education researchers, we drew on the collaborative inquiry method to systematically examine questions of qualitative research quality in our everyday research practice. We used a process‐based, theoretical framework for research quality as the anchor for these explorations. Results We constructed five practice explorations spanning grounded theory, interpretative phenomenological analysis, and various forms of narrative inquiry. Examining the individual contributions as a whole yielded four key insights: quality challenges require examination from multiple theoretical lenses; questions of research quality are implicitly infused in research practice; research quality extends beyond the objects, procedures, and products of research to concern the human context and local research setting; and research quality lies at the heart of introducing novices to interpretive research. Conclusions This study demonstrates the potential and further need for the engineering education community to advance methodological theory through purposeful and reflective engagement in research practice across the diverse methodological approaches currently being adopted.
    July 13, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20170   open full text
  • Collaborating for Early‐Age Career Awareness: A Comparison of Three Instructional Formats.
    Nicole Colston, Julie Thomas, M. Tyler Ley, Toni Ivey, Juliana Utley.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 22, 2017
    Background Early‐age engineering education can enhance preparedness and generate interest in engineering careers prior to college. This article reports on collaboration between a university engineer and science teacher educators to introduce engineering career awareness in elementary classrooms. The resulting elementary school curriculum, Engineering is Everywhere, features video instruction by the engineer, a teacher activity guide, and a materials kit. Purpose/Research Questions Our research question was, “How might engineers and educators best collaborate in elementary engineering outreach efforts?” We co‐developed curricula, prepared classroom teachers, and compared fifth‐grade student learning outcomes to determine the most beneficial type of engineer instruction. Design/Method A quasi‐experimental research design assessed the effectiveness of three instructional formats: engineer‐led, engineer‐visit, and engineer‐video. Pre‐ and post‐tests captured changes in fifth‐grade students' understanding about the work of engineers and attitudes about engineering. Results Findings indicated significant gains in all students' understanding, with some differences across the three instructional formats. The engineer‐led students did not show significant changes in overall engineering attitudes. Only the engineer‐video students demonstrated significant gains in engineering job interests. Conclusions A qualitative comparison of the costs and benefits of each instructional format raised important considerations for planning engineer outreach. We recommend that engineers collaborate with science teacher educators in the design of video instruction and assist in preparing elementary classroom teachers to administer the lesson activities.
    April 22, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20166   open full text
  • A Validated and Reliable Instrument Investigating Engineering Students’ Perceptions of Competency in Generic Skills.
    Cecilia K. Y. Chan, Yue Zhao, Lillian Y. Y. Luk.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 22, 2017
    Background Although generic skills development is a concern of educational policy and accreditation bodies, little is known about how engineering students perceive generic skills in relation to their motivation for learning such skills. The development of these skills is often done only through ad hoc approaches, without a well‐structured curriculum design framework. Disagreement over the nuances and interpretations of generic skills across disciplines makes framework design even more challenging. Purpose/Hypothesis To investigate students’ perceptions of generic skills on a disciplinary basis, this article reports the development and validation of the Generic Skills Perception Questionnaire designed for investigating engineering students’ perceptions of their level of competency in these skills. Design/Method The questionnaire was administered to 1,241 first‐year engineering students from three universities in Hong Kong. Most of the questionnaire was items asking students to rate their perceived level of competency in 38 generic skills. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed to examine the psychometric properties of the instrument for providing evidence on reliability and validity. Results Exploratory factor analysis resulted in eight scales. Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that the correlated eight‐factor model and higher‐order factor model provided an acceptable fit with the data. Cronbach's alpha values indicated that the scales were reliable. Conclusions The questionnaire was reliable and valid. Findings from the questionnaire will help develop a conceptual framework facilitating the understanding of engineering students’ generic skills development.
    April 22, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20165   open full text
  • Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness as Motivators of Graduate Teaching Assistants.
    Rachel L. Kajfez, Holly M. Matusovich.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 22, 2017
    Background Graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) play critical roles in undergraduate education. Past studies have examined various programs developed for GTAs, but little work exists that examines GTAs' personal experiences and perceptions in engineering education. To develop teaching environments and training programs that foster positive motivation in GTAs for teaching and improve the quality of their teaching, we need to better understand the factors that motivate them. Purpose Situated in self‐determination theory (SDT), the purpose of our study was to examine graduate students' motivation to teach by answering the research question, “What factors contribute to GTAs' competence, autonomy, and relatedness with regard to teaching?” We scoped the study broadly to include perceptions of events, occurrences, people, institutional structures, and demographics as potential factors. Design/Method We employed exploratory interview methods influenced by critical realism to understand GTAs' experiences. Our sample contained 12 participants from five different universities. We used a combination of a priori codes and open coding to determine the factors. Results We identified five factors that affect the needs posited by SDT: training, previous experience, appointment structure, students, and teaching colleagues. Each factor uniquely contributed to a GTA's teaching motivation. Conclusions GTAs are teachers, but they are also students. We recommend that faculty and administrators consider the five factors we identified and their unique individualized effects on GTAs as students and teachers when designing teaching experiences. This focus will lead to increased motivation in teaching and, with time, increases in the quality of teaching in engineering.
    April 22, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20167   open full text
  • Students’ Misconceptions about Semiconductors and Use of Knowledge in Simulations.
    Katherine G. Nelson, Ann F. McKenna, Sarah K. Brem, Jonathan Hilpert, Jenefer Husman, Eva Pettinato.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 22, 2017
    Background Little research exists on students’ misconceptions about semiconductors, why they form, and what role educational resources like simulations play in misconception formation. Research on misconceptions can help enhance student learning about semiconductors. Purpose (Hypothesis) This project sought to identify students’ misconceptions about three semiconductor phenomena – diffusion, drift, and excitation – and to determine if prior knowledge, knowledge acquired from watching animated simulations, or both were related to students’ misconceptions. We hypothesized that students would hold misconceptions about those phenomena and that students’ prior knowledge and knowledge acquired from watching animated simulations would be associated with their misconceptions. Design/Method Forty‐one engineering students completed an instrument that asked questions about three semiconductor phenomena after the students had observed the animated simulations. Responses were analyzed and coded using two frameworks: misconception and knowledge use. Results Misconceptions were prevalent for all three phenomena. Misconceptions were associated with use of incorrect prior knowledge, a combination of correct or incorrect prior knowledge, and the knowledge acquired from watching the animated simulations alone or in combination with correct and incorrect prior knowledge. Misconceptions indicated a lack of understanding of chemistry and physics concepts. Conclusions Findings indicate that students hold many misconceptions about semiconductor phenomena. These misconceptions were common among our participants. The knowledge acquired from the animated simulations alone or in combination with prior knowledge could reinforce or contribute to misconception formation. Our findings can guide instructors to use or create better simulations to aid student learning.
    April 22, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20163   open full text
  • A Comparison of Practitioner and Student Writing in Civil Engineering.
    Susan Conrad.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 17, 2017
    Background Numerous studies have identified a gap between the writing skills of engineering program graduates and the demands of writing in the workplace; however, few studies have analyzed the writing of practitioners and students to better understand that gap and inform teaching materials. Purpose This study sought to compare word‐level, sentence‐level, and organizational differences in writing by practitioners and students and to identify differences that are important for engineering practice. I also sought to demonstrate the untapped potential for linguistic analyses to contribute to understanding engineering writing. Design/Method I used techniques from applied linguistics – corpus linguistics and rhetorical move analysis – supplemented with interviews of practitioners and students. The analysis investigated the interaction of language features, their functions, and writers' motivations. Results Student writing had more complicated sentence structures, less accurate word choice, more errors in grammar and punctuation, and less linear organization. These characteristics decreased effectiveness in areas that practitioners considered important: accurate and unambiguous content; fast, predicable reading; liability management; and attention to detail. Underlying the student writing problems were misconceptions about effective writing, ignorance of genre expectations, weak language skills, and a failure to appreciate that written words, not just calculations, express engineering content. Conclusions The findings better define the gap between student and practitioner writing, and are a basis for instructional materials that target important student writing weaknesses.
    April 17, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20161   open full text
  • Creating an Instrument to Measure Student Response to Instructional Practices.
    Matt DeMonbrun, Cynthia J. Finelli, Michael Prince, Maura Borrego, Prateek Shekhar, Charles Henderson, Cindy Waters.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 10, 2017
    Background Calls for the reform of education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) have inspired many instructional innovations, some research based. Yet adoption of such instruction has been slow. Research has suggested that students' response may significantly affect an instructor's willingness to adopt different types of instruction. Purpose We created the Student Response to Instructional Practices (StRIP) instrument to measure the effects of several variables on student response to instructional practices. We discuss the step‐by‐step process for creating this instrument. Design/Method The development process had six steps: item generation and construct development, validity testing, implementation, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and instrument modification and replication. We discuss pilot testing of the initial instrument, construct development, and validation using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results This process produced 47 items measuring three parts of our framework. Types of instruction separated into four factors (interactive, constructive, active, and passive); strategies for using in‐class activities into two factors (explanation and facilitation); and student responses to instruction into five factors (value, positivity, participation, distraction, and evaluation). Conclusions We describe the design process and final results for our instrument, a useful tool for understanding the relationship between type of instruction and students' response.
    April 10, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20162   open full text
  • An Assessment Instrument of Technological Literacies in Makerspaces and FabLabs.
    Paulo Blikstein, Zaza Kabayadondo, Andrew Martin, Deborah Fields.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 20, 2017
    Background As the maker movement is increasingly adopted into K‐12 schools, students are developing new competences in exploration and fabrication technologies. This study assesses learning with these technologies in K‐12 makerspaces and FabLabs. Purpose Our study describes the iterative process of developing an assessment instrument for this new technological literacy, the Exploration and Fabrication Technologies Instrument, and presents findings from implementations at five schools in three countries. Our index is generalizable and psychometrically sound, and permits comparison between student confidence and performance. Design/Method Our evaluation of distinct technology skills separates general computing, information and communication technology (ICT), and exploration and fabrication technologies (EFTs) into nonoverlapping areas of technological expertise required to perform their respective sets of tasks. The instrument also tracks student confidence in EFT skills and assesses how that confidence relates to actual task performance. Results Exploration and fabrication technologies constitute a new and distinct set of technology literacies arising from fabrication settings. The EFT instrument compares students' self‐reported confidence with their performance on complex design tasks and demonstrates that, for students, exposure to general computing and ICT tools differs from exposure to EFT tools. Conclusion The EFT instrument captures a new and distinct set of technology literacies that arise within fabrication settings and are independent of both general computing and digital content production skills.
    January 20, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20156   open full text
  • A Model of Empathy in Engineering as a Core Skill, Practice Orientation, and Professional Way of Being.
    Joachim Walther, Shari E. Miller, Nicola W. Sochacka.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 20, 2017
    Background Engineers are increasingly being asked to empathically engage with a broad range of stakeholders. Current efforts to educate empathic engineers, however, are hindered by the lack of a conceptually cohesive understanding of, and language for, applying empathy to engineering. Prior studies have suggested that research informed by long‐standing traditions in other fields may provide the rigor, conceptual clarity, and expertise necessary to theoretically ground the education and practice of empathy in technical disciplines. Purpose This study examined three research questions: What are current understandings of empathy in engineering and engineering education? How do these understandings compare with conceptions of empathy in social work, a professional discipline that defines empathy as a core skill and orientation of its practitioners? What can engineering educators learn from social work to inform the education of empathic engineers? Scope/Method This article presents the findings from a sustained, four‐year, interdisciplinary dialogue between engineering education and social work education researchers. This effort included an examination of productive tensions and similarities between the two fields, a critical synthesis of the literature on empathy in each discipline, and the development of a context‐appropriate model for empathy in engineering. Conclusions We propose a model of empathy in engineering as a teachable and learnable skill, a practice orientation, and a professional way of being. Expanding conceptions of empathy in social work, this model additionally emphasizes mode switching and a commitment to values pluralism.
    January 20, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20159   open full text
  • Who Goes to Graduate School? Engineers’ Math Proficiency, College Experience, and Self‐Assessment of Skills.
    Hyun Kyoung Ro, Lisa R. Lattuca, Ben Alcott.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 20, 2017
    Background Increasing human resources in engineering is a key concern for the United States. While some research has considered pathways to doctoral study, there is no clear empirical evidence on the role of undergraduate experiences in motivating engineers to continue to graduate school, both in engineering programs and more broadly. Purpose/Hypothesis We investigated three influences on engineers’ decisions to enter graduate school: mathematics proficiency, self‐assessments of engineering skills, and co‐curricular experiences. Design/method Using data from 1,119 engineers, we developed a hierarchical multinomial logistic model to examine engineers’ graduate school enrollment patterns. Results Math proficiency, participation in undergraduate research, and self‐assessed leadership skills are significant positive predictors of attendance in an engineering graduate program, although self‐assessed teamwork skills are a negative predictor. For attendance in a nonengineering graduate school program, math proficiency, nonengineering community volunteer work, and engineering clubs were positive predictors, but none of the self‐assessed skills were significant predictors. Conclusions Our findings support past research that emphasized academic preparedness in mathematics, and further corroborate the claim that K–12 math education is a key policy lever to the engineering pipeline from undergraduate to graduate education. Our findings also indicate differences between engineering and nonengineering graduate study in relation to self‐assessed skills and co‐curricular experiences. Future research is needed on which types of preparation during college are needed for graduate school choice.
    January 20, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20154   open full text
  • Undergraduate STEM Instructors' Teacher Identities and Discourses on Student Gender Expression and Equity.
    Elizabeth E. Blair, Rebecca B. Miller, Maria Ong, Yevgeniya V. Zastavker.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 20, 2017
    Background Despite long‐standing initiatives to improve gender equity across STEM fields, women's representation in undergraduate engineering programs remains low. STEM faculty, as influential gatekeepers, can promote gender inclusivity in these fields. Yet, little is known about how faculty construct their responsibilities to advance gender equity. Purpose/Hypothesis We investigated how STEM faculty teaching first‐year engineering courses constructed teacher identities and responsibilities. Our research questions included: What discourses do faculty use to construct the meaning of student gender expression in their classroom? How do faculty discursively position themselves in relation to gender equity? What teacher identities and responsibilities do they construct through these discourses? Design/Method Utilizing a feminist, poststructural epistemology and discursive methodology, we analyzed 18 interviews with instructors in three undergraduate engineering programs. After coding data for ways instructors talked about gender in their work with students, we analyzed how faculty constructed their teacher identities in relation to each discourse and how these positions affected their promotion of gender equity. Results Faculty used three dominant discourses to construct student gender expression and teacher identities: gender blindness, gender acknowledgment, and gender intervention. Faculty most frequently utilized discourses acknowledging gender inequity, which often limited their responsibilities to promote equity and highlights the pernicious nature of systemic gender bias. Conclusions Findings suggest that institutions could expand discourse and better align faculty awareness of gender inequity with meaningful, pedagogical change strategies.
    January 20, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20157   open full text
  • Supporting the Development of Engineers' Interdisciplinary Competence.
    Lisa R. Lattuca, David B. Knight, Hyun Kyoung Ro, Brian J. Novoselich.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 09, 2017
    Background Although interdisciplinarity has been a subject of interest and debate for decades, few investigations of interdisciplinary education exist. Existing studies examine the effects of interdisciplinary experiences on students' development of generic cognitive skills but not the development of interdisciplinary competencies. Purpose/Hypothesis This study sought to explore how engineering students' characteristics, college experiences, and engineering faculty beliefs relate to students' reports of interdisciplinary competence. Design/Method The study used a nationally representative survey sample of 5,018 undergraduate students and 1,119 faculty members in 120 U.S. engineering programs at 31 institutions. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we investigated the relationships among students' curricular and co‐curricular experiences and faculty beliefs regarding interdisciplinarity in engineering education on students' reports of interdisciplinary competence. Results This study found that a curricular emphasis on interdisciplinary topics and skills, as well as co‐curricular activities, specifically, participating in nonengineering clubs and organizations, study abroad, and humanitarian engineering projects, significantly and positively relate to engineering students' reports of interdisciplinary skills. Faculty members' beliefs regarding interdisciplinarity in engineering education moderated the relationships between particular co‐curricular experiences and students' interdisciplinary skills, as well as between curricular emphasis and students' interdisciplinary skills. Conclusions This study identified a small set of experiences that are related to students' reported development of interdisciplinary competence. The study points to the critical role of the curriculum in promoting interdisciplinary thinking and habits of mind, as well as the potential of co‐curricular opportunities that bring engineering students together with nonmajors to build interdisciplinary competence.
    January 09, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20155   open full text
  • Curricular and Co‐curricular Influences on Undergraduate Engineering Student Leadership.
    David B. Knight, Brian J. Novoselich.
    Journal of Engineering Education. January 07, 2017
    Background Multiple reports call for undergraduate programs to develop engineers who have leadership abilities. Such preparation requires understanding how the undergraduate experience relates to student leadership abilities. Limited research has shown disagreement among faculty members and administrators about effective approaches for engineering leadership development. Purpose/Hypothesis The purpose of this research was to understand what precollege characteristics and experiences, university experiences, and undergraduate engineering program contexts relate to undergraduate engineers' self‐reported leadership skills. Design/Methods Using hierarchical linear modeling, this quantitative study examined the variance of students' self‐reported leadership skills as explained by their precollege characteristics and undergraduate experiences. The study drew from a nationally representative survey‐based dataset of 5,076 undergraduate engineers from 150 undergraduate engineering programs from 31 colleges and universities. Results Although multiple facets of the undergraduate experience significantly relate to students' self‐reported leadership skills, curricular emphases on core engineering thinking, professional skills, and broad and systems perspectives explain the greatest amount of variance. The lack of significant relationships at the program level suggests a lack of formal leadership development within the undergraduate curriculum at large. Conclusions Results indicate that entrusting the leadership development of undergraduate engineering students to the co‐curriculum is an inefficient method of developing leadership skills for undergraduate engineers. The curriculum more strongly relates to engineering students' leadership skills. Identifying ways for faculty members to enhance this curricular focus could further development of technologically adept engineering leaders.
    January 07, 2017   doi: 10.1002/jee.20153   open full text
  • Engineering Literacy and Engagement in Kindergarten Classrooms.
    Zenaida Aguirre‐Muñoz, Michelle L. Pantoya.
    Journal of Engineering Education. October 22, 2016
    Background Little is understood about how kindergarten students respond to literacy‐enriched engineering activities and how engineering‐centered literature (picture and story books) can be used to support engineering engagement and content understanding. Purpose This study sought to understand the effect of engineering‐centered literature and academic conversations to enhance linguistically diverse kindergarten students' engagement with engineering content. Design/Method A withdrawal single‐case study with multiple measures was conducted to document the effects of the literacy‐enriched engineering intervention program. The frequencies of three types of engagement were recorded: behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement. Participation in discussions was also recorded to monitor academic conversations. Six female kindergarten students whose first language was not English, representing three ability levels, were targeted for data collection. Results The relative value of the types of engagement and discussion participation increased. These increases generally declined when the intervention was withdrawn. All ability levels showed significant increase during intervention. Engagement peaked during hands‐on engineering design activities for all students. A second peak occurred during the engineering picture book read‐aloud with active engagement activities. Conclusion The combination of activities in the intervention is effective for English language learners and can improve engagement for all ability levels. Academic conversations enhanced all lessons by increasing discussion participation. Results show a functional relationship between enjoying the learning activities and being motivated to participate in discussion. Taken together, engineering‐centered literature and academic conversations are effective tools for broadening meaningful participation in engineering education.
    October 22, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20151   open full text
  • Undergraduate Students' Beliefs about Engineering Problem Solving.
    Nathan J. McNeill, Elliot P. Douglas, Mirka Koro‐Ljungberg, David J. Therriault, Ilana Krause.
    Journal of Engineering Education. October 22, 2016
    Background Problem solving is considered to be a central activity of engineering practice. While some studies have shown how various beliefs affect students' abilities to solve problems, studies are needed that explicitly examine the beliefs and assumptions students bring to the problem‐solving process. Purpose/Hypothesis The purpose of this qualitative research was to describe students' engineering problem‐solving processes and develop a conceptual model that illustrates students' beliefs about problem solving. Our research question was, What beliefs do students have about engineering problem solving? Design/Method We analyzed data from retrospective semistructured interviews carried out after a problem‐solving session. We interviewed nine engineering students about the processes they used to solve the problems and the assumptions and beliefs that guided their problem solving. We then used grounded theory to identify and analyze statements from the interviews and to develop a conceptual model of student beliefs. Results The resulting model has five major categories: the problem‐solving process itself, the role of classroom problems, the role of workplace problems, personal characteristics that affect problem solving, and resources that assist problem solving. Students identify a sharp distinction between classroom problems and workplace problems. Conclusions Our conceptual model provides an initial framework for understanding how students' beliefs affect their approaches to engineering problems. In contrast to stage models, our model shows that students' epistemic beliefs about problem solving are contextual. Future work is needed to understand the limits and extend the applicability of our model.
    October 22, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20150   open full text
  • Selecting Effective Examples to Train Students for Peer Review of Open‐Ended Problem Solutions.
    Matthew A. Verleger, Kelsey J. Rodgers, Heidi A. Diefes‐Dux.
    Journal of Engineering Education. October 05, 2016
    Background Students conducting peer review on open‐ended problem solutions require training. For that training, the selection of training examples is critical. Purpose This study explored how the characteristics of five example solutions used in training and their associated expert evaluations affected students' abilities to score peer team solutions on a model‐eliciting activity (MEA). Design/Method For this training, individual students reviewed a randomly selected example solution to an MEA. They were then asked to compare their review and an expert's review. Students were then assigned a peer team solution to review. An expert later rated the five training examples and 147 team solutions that had been peer reviewed. Differences between the scores assigned by the expert and a student to a training example and a peer team solution were used to compute the student's improvement as reviewer from training to peer review. ANOVA testing with Tukey's post hoc analysis identified differences in improvement based on the training example students saw during training. Results Statistically significant differences were found in the number of errors students made during peer review depending on the quality of the example they reviewed in training. Specifically, a low‐quality example and associated expert evaluation resulted in more accurate scoring during peer review. Conclusions While students typically ask to see exemplar solutions, this research suggests that there is likely greater value, for the purpose of training for peer reviewing, in having students see expert evaluations of lower‐quality examples.
    October 05, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20148   open full text
  • Creativity as a Factor in Persistence and Academic Achievement of Engineering Undergraduates.
    Sara A. Atwood, Jean E. Pretz.
    Journal of Engineering Education. September 20, 2016
    Background To date, there has been little research to establish how creativity relates to engineering student persistence and academic achievement. Purpose This study used creativity to predict engineering student persistence and achievement relative to demographics, academic aptitude, and personality. It further evaluated those predictors for consistency throughout the undergraduate engineering program. Design/Method Participants were entering first‐year engineering students in 2011 and 2012. Academic aptitude was measured by high school rank and SAT scores. Personality was characterized using the Big Five inventory, which measures the traits of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness. Creativity was assessed using student artifacts on three tasks and a modified creativity questionnaire. Outcome measures were students' persistence and GPA over four years. Multinomic logistic regression and multivariate regression were used to model the relationship between predictor variables and persistence and achievement. Results SAT math, high school rank, and Conscientiousness were predictors of persistence and achievement. Creativity measures did not predict GPA, and creative self‐efficacy was negatively related to engineering student persistence in the major. Conclusions Our results suggest that creativity is not appropriately taught or rewarded in some engineering curricula, and those engineering students who view themselves as highly creative are less likely to graduate in engineering.
    September 20, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20130   open full text
  • Knowledge, Skills, and Attributes of Graduate Student and Postdoctoral Mentors in Undergraduate Research Settings.
    Benjamin Ahn, Monica F. Cox.
    Journal of Engineering Education. September 01, 2016
    Background Many undergraduate research (UR) students are mentored by graduate students or postdoctoral researchers, yet few studies have examined the mentoring knowledge, skills, and attributes (KSAs) of mentors in UR settings or assessed their beliefs about their mentoring KSAs. Purpose The purpose of this study was to identify important mentoring KSAs for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers who serve as mentors in engineering and science UR settings and to use these KSAs to develop a survey that mentors can use to assess their beliefs about their mentoring KSAs. Design/Method In Phase I of the study, semistructured interviews were conducted with one postdoctoral researcher and 16 graduate students who were recognized by their students as outstanding mentors. In Phase II, survey items were created from the results of Phase I for assessing the beliefs of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers about their mentoring KSAs. Results The study identified important mentoring KSAs and produced a 30‐item survey that assesses the beliefs of mentors about their mentoring KSAs; the items are grouped into four factors: building a positive working relationship, recognizing individual student needs and personalizing the mentoring approach, monitoring students' daily tasks, and building a personal relationship with students. Conclusions The study findings can help graduate students and postdoctoral researchers to become better mentors in UR settings by identifying important mentoring KSAs and by enabling them to assess their beliefs about their mentoring KSAs.
    September 01, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20129   open full text
  • Gender in Engineering Education Research: A Content Analysis of Research in JEE, 1998–2012.
    Alice L. Pawley, Corey Schimpf, Lindsey Nelson.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 20, 2016
    Background The participation of women in engineering education has increased only slightly since the 1980s, despite the publication of many research studies on gender in engineering education. We think that these studies have not affected practice because researchers have focused too narrowly on how gender relates to engineering education. Purpose This article investigates whether there is indeed a narrow focus by analyzing how articles published in JEE investigate gender. We asked, What are the dominant themes and patterns in the structure of gender research published in JEE? We wanted to see how engineering education research articles incorporated gender theory and research methods from the social sciences and education to explore the relationships between gender and engineering education. Design/Method We conducted a content analysis of gender‐related research published in JEE between 1998 and 2012. We developed scientometric and other classification categories and applied them quantitatively. Results Articles related to gender are predominantly quantitative studies that focus on undergraduate students in formal university settings, and incorporate participant identities in the groups of women and men (together) or women, men, and racial minorities (together). Researchers used varied theories of gender, but most of those theories were not used again in later research in the articles analyzed. Conclusions A greater diversity of theories and designs should lead to a better understanding of gender in engineering education. We suggest areas for future research.
    July 20, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20128   open full text
  • Validity and Reliability Evidence of the Engineering Professional Responsibility Assessment Tool.
    Nathan E. Canney, Angela R. Bielefeldt.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 20, 2016
    Background The development of social responsibility is important for educating holistic engineers, able to work across social and cultural boundaries to solve complex social issues. A way is needed to measure effective interventions for increasing social responsibility. Purpose/Hypothesis This article describes the Engineering Professional Responsibility Assessment (EPRA) instrument and provides evidence of its usability, validity, and reliability. The EPRA measures students' social responsibility attitudes and operationalizes the professional social responsibility development model, which describes the development of personal and professional social responsibility in engineers. The EPRA is intended to be used by educators to assess curricular interventions aimed at changing students' views of social responsibility. Design/Method The EPRA was developed in an iterative manner, using five different survey administrations with adjustments made to the instrument between each. Data from the final survey with 1,000 student responses were used to develop evidence of validity through expert feedback, structural equation modeling, multidimensional item response theory, and convergent evidence of validity and evidence of reliability using ordinal alpha. Results Evidence of validity and reliability indicates the appropriateness of the EPRA to measure social responsibility attitudes in engineering students. Conclusions The evidence of reliability and validity shows that the EPRA may be a useful tool to assess engineering student views of social responsibility, changes in those views over time, and the effectiveness of educational interventions intended to affect these attitudes.
    July 20, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20124   open full text
  • A Model of Co‐Curricular Support for Undergraduate Engineering Students.
    Walter C. Lee, Holly M. Matusovich.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 09, 2016
    Background Engineering student support centers (ESSCs) are common providers of assistance for undergraduate students, especially those from underrepresented groups. However, ESSCs are relatively recent, and there are gaps in our knowledge about how they are intentionally designed to function alongside engineering curricula. Purpose/Hypothesis The purpose of this article is to develop a conceptual model that graphically represents the practices of and intentions behind ESSCs. Design/Method A multi‐case study design was used to examine the efforts of six ESSCs housed at four institutions. Using qualitative methods, we collected data from student‐support practitioners (those who provide support) and students (those who receive support). The data were analyzed through the development of a logic model. Results The primary result of this study is an empirically based conceptual model, the model of co‐curricular support (MCCS), for constructing and evaluating support systems and individual student interventions. The MCCS builds on Tinto's model of institutional departure and demonstrates the breadth of assistance required to comprehensively support undergraduate students at the college level. Conclusions The MCCS indicates how a student's interactions with the academic, social, and professional systems in a college and the larger university system can influence a student's success in an undergraduate degree program. The model combines student‐retention theory with student‐support practice in a way that can facilitate future collaborations between educational researchers and student‐support practitioners.
    July 09, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20123   open full text
  • Gender Differences in Learning Outcomes from the College Experiences of Engineering Students.
    Hyun Kyoung Ro, David B. Knight.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 05, 2016
    Background Although prior studies have shown how female students' college experiences influence persistence, graduation, and career choice, we consider how specific college experiences may produce different learning outcomes for men and women in engineering programs. Purpose This article explores how curricular emphases, instructional approaches, and co‐curricular participation affect learning outcomes differently by gender. Design/Method This study used a nationally representative weighted survey sample of 4,901 students in 120 Untied States engineering programs. We used a multilevel regression approach to test for the interaction effects between gender and college students' experiences on learning outcomes deemed critical for career success. Results We identified the curricular emphases, instructional approaches, and co‐curricular participation that affected learning outcomes differently by gender. Greater curricular emphasis on professional skills and a greater frequency of student‐centered teaching led to greater self‐reported design skills for women. Being more active in nonengineering clubs increased female students' self‐reports of fundamental, design, and communication skills. Conclusions The findings of this study support investigation of ideas that might help female students develop learning outcomes more effectively. Future research should consider applying our analytical approach to identify how college experiences affect different groups of students differently.
    July 05, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20125   open full text
  • Differences in Classroom Engagement of Asian American Engineering Students.
    Marsha Ing, Christine Victorino.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 05, 2016
    Background Asian American experiences have been largely ignored in the engineering education research literature. Asian Americans are often considered as a homogenous group, despite including over 40 different ethnic subgroups who speak over 300 languages. The immigrant trajectories, cultural experiences, and college completion rates of Asian Americans also vary. Purpose This study compares classroom engagement of Asian American subgroups whose members are undergraduate engineering majors, and next examines the relationship between classroom engagement and grade point averages across subgroups. Design/Method Survey responses from Asian Americans in undergraduate engineering programs at nine campuses in a public research university system were analyzed using quantitative methods to test for measurement invariance in terms of classroom engagement. The classroom engagement was correlated with grade point average, after controlling for prior achievement and student demographics. Results There was evidence of measurement invariance of classroom engagement across Asian American subgroups. Classroom engagement was higher for the East Indian/Pakistani subgroup than the Chinese, Filipino, and Thai subgroups. There was also evidence that classroom engagement was significantly related to grade point average. However, the low effect sizes suggest that these items may not adequately capture classroom engagement. Conclusions Disaggregating data by subgroups provides important information regarding student classroom engagement and academic outcomes. Our findings can inform policies and approaches to ensure that all racial/ethnic groups benefit from classroom activities.
    July 05, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20126   open full text
  • Identity, Critical Agency, and Engineering: An Affective Model for Predicting Engineering as a Career Choice.
    Allison Godwin, Geoff Potvin, Zahra Hazari, Robynne Lock.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 18, 2016
    Background Prior to college, many students have no experience with engineering, but some ultimately choose an engineering career. Women choose engineering at lower rates than men. This article uses critical engineering agency (CEA) to understand first‐year students' attitudes and self‐beliefs to predict the choice of an engineering career. Purpose/Hypothesis We investigated how first‐year students' math and physics identities and students' beliefs about the ability of science to improve the world predict choice of engineering as a career and whether these beliefs differ by gender. Design/Method The data were from the Sustainability and Gender in Engineering survey distributed during fall 2011 (N = 6,772). Structural equation modeling was used to understand first‐year students' affective beliefs for predicting engineering career choice. Results Math and physics identities are important for predicting engineering choice at the beginning of college. Recognition from others and interest in a subject are positive predictors of physics and math identities. Students' performance/competence beliefs alone are negative predictors of engineering career choice but are mediated by interest and recognition from others. Student identities and agency beliefs are significant predictors of engineering career choice, explaining 20% of the variance. We also found gender differences in students' math and physics identities and agency beliefs. Conclusions This article emphasizes the importance of students' recognition beliefs and the importance of agency beliefs for women in predicting engineering career choice.
    April 18, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20118   open full text
  • Improving Students' Conceptual Reasoning by Prompting Cognitive Operations.
    Peggy N. Van Meter, Carla M. Firetto, Stephen R. Turns, Thomas A. Litzinger, Chelsea E. Cameron, Charlyn W. Shaw.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 18, 2016
    Background We tested the effects of an intervention on the learning of introductory thermodynamics principles. This intervention, OEM‐Thermo, is designed to prompt the cognitive operations of meaningful learning: organization, elaboration, and monitoring. We also sought evidence to show that execution of these operations was associated with learning gains and that cognitive operations are influenced by different intervention exercises. Purpose/Hypothesis Study 1: Students who complete OEM‐Thermo will gain more conceptual knowledge than students who complete traditional problems. Study 2: First, elaboration and monitoring contribute to learning with OEM‐Thermo. Second, students engage in elaboration and monitoring at a higher rate when answering elaboration questions than when completing matrix exercises. Design/Method Study 1: A two‐group, pre‐ and post‐test experimental design tested OEM‐Thermo effectiveness. Study 2: A one‐group, pre‐ and post‐test design where participants thought aloud while completing OEM‐Thermo tested deep and surface reasoning as well as the frequency of elaboration and monitoring events. Results Study 1: A significant interaction between test time (pre‐ and post‐test) and condition shows that OEM‐Thermo promoted development of conceptual reasoning more effectively than did traditional homework problems. Study 2: Significant partial correlations were found between post‐test scores on one of two deep reasoning categories and the frequency of elaboration and monitoring events in the think‐aloud protocols. Differences were also found in the rate of elaboration across intervention exercises. Conclusions An intervention that includes tasks designed to stimulate the cognitive operations of meaningful learning improves students' conceptual reasoning.
    April 18, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20120   open full text
  • Measuring Undergraduate Students' Engineering Self‐Efficacy: A Validation Study.
    Natasha A. Mamaril, Ellen L. Usher, Caihong R. Li, D. Ross Economy, Marian S. Kennedy.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 08, 2016
    Background Self‐efficacy has been shown to be positively related to undergraduate engineering students' achievement. Designing self‐efficacy measures to assess the multifaceted skills required of engineers could improve the predictive relationship between efficacy beliefs and performance. Purpose This study evaluates the factor structure, validity, and reliability of general and skill‐specific engineering self‐efficacy measures created for use with undergraduate engineering students. Design/Method Self‐efficacy items used for the measures were created and adapted from those used previously. Survey responses were collected from engineering students attending two southeastern universities. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to determine factor structure. Multiple regression analyses examined the relationship between engineering self‐efficacy and academic achievement and intent to persist in engineering, both uniquely and when considering other motivation variables. Results Factor analysis results suggested two self‐efficacy scales. The General Engineering Self‐Efficacy Scale is unidimensional; the Engineering Skills Self‐Efficacy Scale is multidimensional with three factors representing experimental skills, tinkering skills, and design. General engineering self‐efficacy predicted academic achievement, even when prior achievement was controlled. Students' intrinsic value in engineering predicted their intentions to persist in the engineering profession. Conclusions We found evidence for the reliability, validity, and predictive utility of the engineering self‐efficacy scales. These scales can be used to assess undergraduate students' beliefs in their capabilities to perform tasks in their coursework and future roles as engineers and to investigate the association between self‐efficacy and academic outcomes of interest.
    April 08, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20121   open full text
  • Perceived Supports and Barriers for Career Development for Second‐Year STEM Students.
    José‐Vicente Peña‐Calvo, Mercedes Inda‐Caro, Carmen Rodríguez‐Menéndez, Carmen‐María Fernández‐García.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 07, 2016
    Background This study was designed to determine the effect of perceived supports and barriers on self‐efficacy beliefs and other social‐cognitive variables related to second‐year science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students' career development. Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) states that career interest is influenced by four cognitive‐person variables: self‐efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, interests, and goals. Other variables, such as social supports and barriers, also play an important role. Purpose This study explores the influence of gender and STEM major on perceived supports and barriers. It also analyzes the effects of perceived supports and barriers on the SCCT cognitive‐person variables. Method Participants were 811 sophomore students in STEM programs at the University of Oviedo, Asturias, Spain. Kruskal‐Wallis and Mann‐Whitney U tests analyzed the difference in the perceived supports and barriers by gender and students' major. Multiple‐group structural equation modeling was implemented to predict the relationship between perceived supports and barriers and SCCT cognitive‐person variables. Results The engineering students perceived more teaching staff barriers and fewer teaching staff supports than other students. Male software and hardware engineering students perceived more barriers than other male engineering students. The fit of the model revealed an important effect of perceived teaching staff supports on the four cognitive‐person variables. Conclusions To determine the influences on the cognitive‐person variables, it is necessary to analyze the perceived supports and barriers. Peers and family are the most important perceived supports, while teaching staff and financial difficulties are the greatest perceived barriers.
    April 07, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20115   open full text
  • Latina/o Adolescents' Funds of Knowledge Related to Engineering.
    Amy Wilson‐Lopez, Joel Alejandro Mejia, Indhira María Hasbún, G. Sue Kasun.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 07, 2016
    Background According to a growing body of research, many Latinas/os experience dissonance between their everyday cultural practices and the cultural practices prevalent in engineering. This dissonance contributes to many Latinas/os' sense that engineering is “not for me.” Purpose This study sought to explore the meaning in the relationship between engineering cultural practices and the funds of knowledge found in Latina/o adolescents' familial, community, and recreational settings. Design/Method This ethnographic study followed seven groups of Latina/o adolescents as they identified problems in their communities and solved them through engineering design processes. Using a modified form of constant comparative analysis, we analyzed three data sources: individual interviews, observations of group meetings, and concurrent or retrospective protocols. We developed a coding scheme that categorized the participants' funds of knowledge as they related to engineering. Results The participants' everyday skills and bodies of knowledge aligned with engineering practices. Specifically, their familial, community, and recreational funds of knowledge mapped onto the application of engineering design processes, systems thinking, ethical and empathetic reasoning, knowledge of production and processing, use of communication and construction tools, scientific and mathematical knowledge, and teamwork. Conclusions Engineering instruction for Latina/o adolescents can be reconceptualized as a third space of learning and knowing where adolescents' everyday familial, community, and recreational practices are actively solicited and connected with the cultural practices of engineering.
    April 07, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20117   open full text
  • Querying the Questions: Student Responses and Reasoning in an Active Learning Class.
    Milo D. Koretsky, Bill J. Brooks, Rachel M. White, Alec S. Bowen.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 06, 2016
    Background We investigated student responses to multiple‐choice concept questions during active learning activities where students write justifications for their answer choices. Purpose We selected two questions that asked students to apply the same concept in the same way but that have different surface features. We characterized students' responses to reveal how question attributes influence student thinking. Design/Method In Study 1, we compared responses from students who wrote justifications with those who did not. In Study 2, we modified one of the questions so the cues of the two questions better align. Data included the students' answers and their written justifications. We applied open coding to the written justifications to develop hierarchical categories common to both questions. Results For the Expanding Piston question, students who wrote justifications chose the correct answer more often; in the Balloon Rising question, less often. Analyses of justifications indicate that in the latter question, students activated more sophisticated reasoning processes, but did not choose the correct answer. We attribute half the difference between percentage correct in Study 1 to question cues and the remaining difference to an unfamiliar context. Conclusions We encourage instructors to solicit written justifications to multiple‐choice concept questions and to look for cases where students choose the correct answer using incorrect reasoning, ask students to construct graphics as they respond to text‐only concept questions, and seek ways to help students recognize how core concepts apply to a broad range of contexts.
    April 06, 2016   doi: 10.1002/jee.20116   open full text
  • Bridging the Research‐to‐Practice Gap: Designing an Institutional Change Plan Using Local Evidence.
    Cynthia J. Finelli, Shanna R. Daly, Kenyon M. Richardson.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background Ample research provides evidence about the influence of effective teaching practices on student success. Yet the adoption of such practices has been slow at many institutions. Efforts to bridge the gap between research and practice are needed. Purpose We describe an institutional change plan we developed to bridge this research‐to‐ practice gap. Our plan is grounded in research and theories about faculty motivation and organizational change, and we designed it using local evidence from the University of Michigan College of Engineering. Design/Method We collected local data from three sources to provide context for our institutional change plan. First, faculty focus groups allowed us to determine factors that influence faculty adoption of effective teaching practices. Second, classroom observations allowed us to ascertain current teaching practices. Third, a student survey allowed us to identify teaching practices perceived by students to enhance their success. We used this local evidence with a “who/what/how” decision‐making process to design our change plan. Results Our institutional change plan for accelerating the adoption of effective teaching practices comprises a faculty action plan and an administrative change plan. Although still evolving, there is evidence of the success of both parts. Conclusions Local evidence is critical in our change plan. Change agents wishing to bridge the research‐to‐practice gap at their own institutions can design a plan that adapts our process and integrates relevant research and theory with their own local data.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20042   open full text
  • Faculty Motivation: A Gateway to Transforming Engineering Education.
    Holly M. Matusovich, Marie C. Paretti, Lisa D. McNair, Cory Hixson.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background Transformative change in higher education requires a continuous interplay between educational research and educational practice. In considering how to engage researchers and practitioners in “cycles of educational practice and research” (Jamieson & Lohmann, 2009), we focus on individuals and what motivates them to create and sustain innovations within the engineering education system. Purpose Through this study, we seek to better understand why faculty do or do not engage in the research–practice cycle. Specifically, we employ expectancy value theory and examine the success and value beliefs motivating individuals' choices. Design/Method We used mixed methods assessment data from two engineering education conferences that focused on promoting transformational change. Data included observational notes, open‐ended written responses submitted after conference sessions, open‐ended survey questions, and quantitative survey questions. For data analysis. we used descriptive statistics and open coding techniques. Results We identified expectancy of success and cost value and utility value as important to participants. Notably, the same motivation constructs generally matter for research, practice, and research‐informed practice, although practice‐informed research was nearly absent from the data. Participants cited strategies that are currently working to improve only some of the success and value categories. Conclusions Expectancy value theory provides a useful framework for understanding faculty choices in the research–practice cycles required for change and innovation in engineering education. Our findings indicate that in addition to improving individuals' competence with critical research and teaching practices, our field should also support collective efficacy and value beliefs.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20044   open full text
  • Research‐Informed Policy Change: A Retrospective on Engineering Admissions.
    Beth M. Holloway, Teri Reed, P. K. Imbrie, Ken Reid.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background Few studies have investigated how engineering education admission policies contribute to the underrepresentation of specific groups. Transforming these policies may significantly affect who becomes an engineer. This article reports the outcome of using research results to inform change in admission policy at a Midwestern public university. Purpose There were three research questions: Is there statistically significant evidence of admission decision gender bias for engineering applicants? Do affective and cognitive factors predictive of engineering student success differ between men and women? Can a difference in the resulting admitted class be confirmed when such factors inform admission policy? Design/Method Admissions records were examined for differences in cognitive metrics between men and women. Student records were analyzed before and after the policy change. Neural network modeling of student records predicted the cognitive and affective measures most important for success in retention and graduation. Results Statistical analysis indicated a gender bias in the admission process results, which was traced back to the policy. Success factor modeling suggested a different set of criteria could mitigate this bias. After admission criteria were changed, statistical analysis confirmed the gender bias against women was mitigated. Conclusions The application of research and the change process described shows the important role of research in motivating and informing policy change. This work highlights the contribution of institutional bias in admission policy to the underrepresentation of groups in engineering education, especially if admission is limited to a minimum standardized math test score.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20046   open full text
  • Hybrid Learning: An Integrative Approach to Engineering Education.
    Andrew Jamison, Anette Kolmos, Jette Egelund Holgaard.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background This article explores the contradiction that has developed between market‐driven and academic strategies of response to the challenges facing engineering and engineering education. In these contending response strategies there are deep‐seated, underlying historical tensions at work. Purpose This article aims to create a theoretical and conceptual framework, which allows engineering educators to reflect on their perceptions and practices in regard to institutional change and reform. Design A historical review traces the history of the tensions between different traditions of engineering education from their medieval roots through the institutionalization of engineering education in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and discusses the different conceptions of engineering and engineering knowledge on which they are based. We then relate the historical review to educational conceptualizations of the university as well as curriculum models. Results On the basis of a synthesis of the historical and educational perspectives, we present an analytical distinction between three modes of engineering education. We propose a transformation to an integrative mode that is less prominent historically, but growing in importance. By introducing the term hybrid learning, we furthermore outline important aspects to be considered in the process of transforming engineering education. Conclusions We conclude by inviting engineering educators, students, administrators, and policy makers to consult our theoretical and conceptual framework and consider a transformation to an integrative mode. This integrative mode is designed to foster hybrid learning, a contextual, transformative, collaborative, and situated learning approach that holds potential in facing the increasing complexity of engineering.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20041   open full text
  • Increasing the Use of Evidence‐Based Teaching in STEM Higher Education: A Comparison of Eight Change Strategies.
    Maura Borrego, Charles Henderson.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background Prior efforts have built a knowledge base of effective undergraduate STEM pedagogies, yet rates of implementation remain low. Theories from higher education, management, communication, and other fields can inform change efforts but remain largely inaccessible to STEM education leaders, who are just beginning to view change as a scholarly endeavor informed by the research literature. Purpose This article describes the goals, assumptions, and underlying logic of selected change strategies with potential relevance to STEM higher education settings for a target audience of change agents, leaders, and researchers. Scope/Method This review is organized according to the Four Categories of Change Strategies model developed by Henderson, Beach, and Finkelstein (2011). We describe eight strategies of potential practical relevance to STEM education change efforts (two from each category). For each change strategy, we present a summary with key references, discuss their applicability to STEM higher education, provide a STEM education example, and discuss implications for change efforts and research. Conclusions Change agents are guided, often implicitly, by a single change strategy. These eight strategies will expand the repertoire of change agents by helping them consider change from a greater diversity of perspectives. Change agents can use these descriptions to design more robust change efforts. Improvements in the knowledge and theory base underlying change strategies will occur when change agents situate their writing about change initiatives using shared models, such as the one presented in this article, to make their underlying assumptions about change more explicit.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20040   open full text
  • Changing Engineering Education: Views of U.S. Faculty, Chairs, and Deans.
    Mary Besterfield‐Sacre, Monica F. Cox, Maura Borrego, Kacey Beddoes, Jiabin Zhu.
    Journal of Engineering Education. April 25, 2014
    Background Many reports present a vision of what engineering education should look like, but few describe how this should happen. An American Society for Engineering Education initiative in 2006 attempted to bridge this gap by engaging faculty, chairs, and deans in discussion of change in engineering education; results were reported in a Phase I report (2009). In a second phase, survey data were integrated into a Phase II report (2012). Purpose This article uses the ASEE survey results to identify promising pathways for transforming engineering undergraduate education. Design/Method The survey asked faculty, chairs, and deans at engineering departments at 156 U.S. institutions to reflect on the recommendations of the Phase I report. Quantitative and qualitative responses were separately analyzed and then mixed by mapping findings to the Four Categories of Change Strategies model developed by Henderson et al. (2011), which frames the results and illustrates gaps and opportunities. Results Responses mapped to three of the four categories of the model that were most commonly used in other STEM education efforts: developing and disseminating new instructional approaches, supporting faculty members in their own scholarly teaching, and implementing policies that enable and reward teaching innovation. No responses mapped to developing a shared vision through activities such as strategic planning. Conclusions The greatest promise for transformative change in engineering education lies in developing a shared vision for educational innovation. The findings of this article provide a foundation for ongoing discussion and evaluating progress.
    April 25, 2014   doi: 10.1002/jee.20043   open full text
  • Pedagogical Agent Signaling of Multiple Visual Engineering Representations: The Case of the Young Female Agent.
    Amy M. Johnson, Gamze Ozogul, Roxana Moreno, Martin Reisslein.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2013
    Background Prior studies have shown that visual signaling improves learning from text or narration in conjunction with one depictive visual representation; however, engineering instruction typically employs multiple descriptive and depictive visual representations. Animated pedagogical agents (APAs) positively influence student attitudes about engineering. Whether APA signaling improves engineering learning and which APA characteristics are most conducive to learning is largely unknown. Purpose We examined the effects of visual signaling in engineering learning materials with multiple descriptive and depictive visual representations. We compared visual signaling by a young female APA with arrow signaling. Design/Method In the APA signaling condition, at appropriate points within a narration about electric circuits, the relevant areas in a circuit diagram, a sequence of equation calculations, and a Cartesian graph were signaled using APA gestures. In the arrow signaling condition, the same relevant areas were signaled using a dynamic arrow; the no‐signaling (control) condition had no visual signaling. Student learning and perceptions were measured with a problem‐solving posttest and a survey. Results Results indicated an aptitude‐treatment interaction. Low prior knowledge learners had higher learning gains in the APA signaling condition, compared with the no signaling condition; high prior knowledge learners did not benefit from visual signaling. Conclusions Precollege students with low prior knowledge benefit from the signaling by a young female APA in instruction with multiple visual representations; high prior knowledge learners do not benefit from such support.
    July 19, 2013   doi: 10.1002/jee.20009   open full text
  • Effects of Course and Instructor Characteristics on Student Evaluation of Teaching across a College of Engineering.
    Michael D. Johnson, Arunachalam Narayanan, William J. Sawaya.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2013
    Background Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are a widely used metric to evaluate instructor effectiveness and are used to make promotion, tenure, and retention decisions for faculty. There is also growing interest by those outside the university community to use these metrics to evaluate faculty and broader academic performance. Purpose (Hypothesis) This study seeks to understand if and how course and instructor characteristics affect SETs and thereby to improve the usefulness of these metrics. This article aims to statistically examine the relationship between course and instructor characteristics and SETs. Design/Method SETs from a large engineering college at a major public university were evaluated over a seven‐semester period that covered 3938 courses taught by 549 unique engineering instructors. Course and instructor demographic data were statistically evaluated for their effects on SETs. Results Course characteristics such as class size, course level, and whether a course was an elective or required had statistically significant effects on SETs. Instructor characteristics of gender and academic rank affected SETs and average course grades, respectively. Average course grades were positively correlated with SETs. Conclusions Data analysis showed that course characteristics, faculty demographics, and average course grades had statistically significant effects on SETs; however, in some cases the effect sizes of these variables were small. Administrators and senior faculty members should be cognizant of these relevant factors and their effects when assigning faculty to certain courses and evaluating their teaching effectiveness using SETs.
    July 19, 2013   doi: 10.1002/jee.20013   open full text
  • Indispensable Resource? A Phenomenological Study of Textbook Use in Engineering Problem Solving.
    Christine S. Lee, Nathan J. McNeill, Elliot P. Douglas, Mirka E. Koro‐Ljungberg, David J. Therriault.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2013
    Background Textbooks play an important role in engineering education, influencing instructors' pedagogical approaches and providing much of the information students learn. Research has explored students' recollections of the roles that textbooks played in their educational experiences, but how students actually use textbooks remains largely unexplored. Purpose This phenomenological study describes engineering students' textbook use during problem‐solving activities. This study directly examined how students employed a textbook in order to generate detailed descriptions of students' behaviors, approaches, and reflections regarding their actual problem‐solving experiences. Method Ten senior materials engineering students (8 males and 2 females) were asked to think aloud while solving engineering problems. Follow‐up retrospective interviews regarding the think aloud session were conducted to gain in‐depth information on students' textbook use during the problem‐solving activities. Results Students used the textbook primarily to find information related to problem constraints that were explicitly stated in the problem. Furthermore, textbook example problems exerted a strong influence on students' problem‐solving processes. Students also reported limitations of the textbook, contrasting it to the diversity of resources available via the Internet. Conclusions This study provides insight into students' textbook use during engineering problem‐solving activities. Students' limited application of the textbook during problem solving suggests that textbooks may not be serving their intended purposes.
    July 19, 2013   doi: 10.1002/jee.20011   open full text
  • Returning to Graduate School: Expectations of Success, Values of the Degree, and Managing the Costs.
    Diane L. Peters, Shanna R. Daly.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2013
    Background Limited research exists on the experiences of engineering returners – those with undergraduate degrees who work for at least five years and return to academia for graduate degrees. Returners bring a different perspective to their graduate studies and postgraduate work than direct‐pathway students but face additional challenges. Purpose Our aim was to understand practitioners' decisions to return to graduate school and complete graduate degrees. Guided by expectancy value theory, we investigated their beliefs about their ability to succeed; the interest, attainment, and utility values returners placed on graduate school; the costs they experienced in returning; and the personal, programmatic, and cultural factors that mitigated these costs. Design/Method We employed a qualitative interpretivist approach to investigate the returning experience through semi‐structured interviews with 10 returners. We analyzed the results deductively, using expectancy value theory to understand participants' expectations of success and the values of those experiences, and inductively, to understand the types of costs that influenced the decision to return and complete graduate school. Results Utility value drove participants' decisions to return and complete graduate programs, and participants had a high expectancy of success in earning their graduate degrees. Four types of costs emerged from analysis of the interviews: intellectual, balance, cultural and environmental, and financial. Participants employed various strategies to mitigate these costs. Conclusions With the results of our study, potential returners can more effectively plan for success in the graduate environment, and universities can develop initiatives to better recruit returners and support their success.
    July 19, 2013   doi: 10.1002/jee.20012   open full text
  • The Role of Social Capital in the Experiences of Hispanic Women Engineering Majors.
    Julie P. Martin, Denise R. Simmons, Shirley L. Yu.
    Journal of Engineering Education. July 19, 2013
    Background Women and minorities remain significantly underrepresented in the undergraduate engineering disciplines despite decades‐long recruitment and retention efforts. As United States demographics shift and the nation continues to recognize the value of workplace diversity, engineering education stakeholders continue to seek ways to increase participation of women and minority students. Purpose Our research examines the following question: For Hispanic women whose parents have limited educational attainment, what available sources of potential social capital do they identify, and by what means do they access and activate these resources in their decisions to select and persist in engineering as a college major? We hope to provide insights for United States institutions that serve Hispanic students, as well as those seeking to diversify their student body. Design/method Utilizing Lin's network theory of social capital as a framework, we employed semi‐structured interviews in a multiple case study research methodology, taking a constructivist epistemological view. Results Three major findings are that (1) lack of available family social capital was supplemented mostly by school personnel; (2) delayed recognition or identification of available resources slowed access and activation of resources, leading to difficult university transitions; and (3) if accessed and activated, peer groups and institutional support systems provided sources of social capital. Conclusions Even single instances or weak ties can be effective in bridging gaps in engineering‐related social capital. Facilitating opportunities for students to develop sustained social capital may have potential to attract and retain underrepresented students in engineering.
    July 19, 2013   doi: 10.1002/jee.20010   open full text