Contextual Influences on the Adoption of Evidence-Based Instructional Practices by Electrical and Computer Engineering Faculty

IF 2.1 2区 工程技术 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES IEEE Transactions on Education Pub Date : 2024-01-15 DOI:10.1109/TE.2023.3338479
Amy L. Brooks;Prateek Shekhar;Jeffrey Knowles;Elliott Clement;Shane A. Brown
{"title":"Contextual Influences on the Adoption of Evidence-Based Instructional Practices by Electrical and Computer Engineering Faculty","authors":"Amy L. Brooks;Prateek Shekhar;Jeffrey Knowles;Elliott Clement;Shane A. Brown","doi":"10.1109/TE.2023.3338479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contribution: This study aimed to improve understanding of context-based affordances and barriers to adoption of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) among faculty in electrical and computer engineering (ECE). Context-based influences, including motives, constraints, and feedback mechanisms impacting EBIP adoption across six ECE faculty participants were documented using qualitative analysis. Background: Recent engineering education literature notes that the adoption of EBIPs by engineering faculty is lagging despite increased faculty awareness of EBIPs, belief in their effectiveness, and interest in integrating them. While researchers continue to investigate barriers to faculty adoption of EBIPs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education settings, few studies have dedicated examinations within a specific disciplinary context, particularly among ECE faculty members. Research Question: What context-based barriers and affordances influence adoption of EBIPs by ECE faculty members? Methodology: This study qualitatively analyzed data from in-depth interviews with six ECE faculty members from engineering programs throughout the United States. The study applied an iterative combination of case study and thematic analysis techniques to identify context-relevant and unique factors relevant to each individual participant and synthesize the process of decision making when incorporating EBIPs using a systems perspective. Findings: Overall, the approach identified drivers, constraints, and feedback mechanisms in regard to four emergent categories of EBIP adoption cases: 1) no use; 2) discontinued use; 3) in development; and 4) continued use. The study reports examples of context-based influences among the six participants in relation to their level of EBIP adoption, highlighting the substantial variation in faculty experiences with incorporating EBIPs.","PeriodicalId":55011,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Education","volume":"67 3","pages":"351-363"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10400397/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contribution: This study aimed to improve understanding of context-based affordances and barriers to adoption of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) among faculty in electrical and computer engineering (ECE). Context-based influences, including motives, constraints, and feedback mechanisms impacting EBIP adoption across six ECE faculty participants were documented using qualitative analysis. Background: Recent engineering education literature notes that the adoption of EBIPs by engineering faculty is lagging despite increased faculty awareness of EBIPs, belief in their effectiveness, and interest in integrating them. While researchers continue to investigate barriers to faculty adoption of EBIPs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education settings, few studies have dedicated examinations within a specific disciplinary context, particularly among ECE faculty members. Research Question: What context-based barriers and affordances influence adoption of EBIPs by ECE faculty members? Methodology: This study qualitatively analyzed data from in-depth interviews with six ECE faculty members from engineering programs throughout the United States. The study applied an iterative combination of case study and thematic analysis techniques to identify context-relevant and unique factors relevant to each individual participant and synthesize the process of decision making when incorporating EBIPs using a systems perspective. Findings: Overall, the approach identified drivers, constraints, and feedback mechanisms in regard to four emergent categories of EBIP adoption cases: 1) no use; 2) discontinued use; 3) in development; and 4) continued use. The study reports examples of context-based influences among the six participants in relation to their level of EBIP adoption, highlighting the substantial variation in faculty experiences with incorporating EBIPs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子与计算机工程学院教师采用循证教学实践的环境影响因素
贡献:本研究旨在进一步了解电子与计算机工程(ECE)专业教师在采用循证教学实践(EBIP)时所面临的基于情境的负担和障碍。研究采用定性分析的方法记录了基于情境的影响因素,包括影响六位幼教专业教师采用循证教学实践的动机、限制因素和反馈机制。背景:最近的工程教育文献指出,尽管工程学院教师对 EBIPs 的认识、对其有效性的信念以及对整合 EBIPs 的兴趣都有所提高,但工程学院教师对 EBIPs 的采用仍然滞后。尽管研究人员继续调查科学、技术、工程和数学教育环境中教师采用 EBIPs 的障碍,但很少有研究专门针对特定学科背景进行考察,尤其是在幼教教师中。研究问题哪些基于情境的障碍和可承受性会影响幼儿教育教师采用幼儿教育综合方案?研究方法:本研究对来自美国各地工程专业的六位幼教教员的深入访谈数据进行了定性分析。研究采用了案例研究和主题分析相结合的迭代技术,以确定与每位参与者相关的背景因素和独特因素,并从系统的角度综合分析在采用 EBIPs 时的决策过程。研究结果:总体而言,该方法确定了四类采用 EBIP 案例的驱动因素、制约因素和反馈机制:1) 未使用;2) 停止使用;3) 开发中;4) 继续使用。研究报告举例说明了六位参与者在采用 EBIP 的程度方面受到的基于环境的影响,强调了教师在采用 EBIP 方面的经验存在很大差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Transactions on Education
IEEE Transactions on Education 工程技术-工程:电子与电气
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The IEEE Transactions on Education (ToE) publishes significant and original scholarly contributions to education in electrical and electronics engineering, computer engineering, computer science, and other fields within the scope of interest of IEEE. Contributions must address discovery, integration, and/or application of knowledge in education in these fields. Articles must support contributions and assertions with compelling evidence and provide explicit, transparent descriptions of the processes through which the evidence is collected, analyzed, and interpreted. While characteristics of compelling evidence cannot be described to address every conceivable situation, generally assessment of the work being reported must go beyond student self-report and attitudinal data.
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents IEEE Transactions on Education Publication Information Guest Editorial Coding, Computational, Algorithmic, Design, Creative, and Critical Thinking in K–16 Education IEEE Transactions on Education Information for Authors The Universal Micro-Credential Framework: The Role of Badges, Micro-Credentials, Skills Profiling, and Design Patterns in Developing Interdisciplinary Learning and Assessment Paths for Computing Education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1