WELCOME ADDITIONS TO THE JEE EDITORIAL BOARD We are pleased to welcome three new members to the I JEE i EDITORIAL BOARD: B Dr. Geoffrey Herman and Dr. James Huff b as Associate Editors and B Dr. Angela Minichiello b as an Assistant Editor. He has a BS in Computer Engineering from Harding University and an MS in Electrical and Computer Engineering and a PhD in Engineering Education, both from Purdue University. This issue of I JEE i provides some guidance for establishing a "new normal" in engineering education as it includes the first in a series of special themed sections on the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Engineering Education Community. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Journal of Engineering Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
{"title":"The New Normal","authors":"Lisa Benson","doi":"10.1002/jee.20461","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20461","url":null,"abstract":"WELCOME ADDITIONS TO THE JEE EDITORIAL BOARD We are pleased to welcome three new members to the I JEE i EDITORIAL BOARD: B Dr. Geoffrey Herman and Dr. James Huff b as Associate Editors and B Dr. Angela Minichiello b as an Assistant Editor. He has a BS in Computer Engineering from Harding University and an MS in Electrical and Computer Engineering and a PhD in Engineering Education, both from Purdue University. This issue of I JEE i provides some guidance for establishing a \"new normal\" in engineering education as it includes the first in a series of special themed sections on the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Engineering Education Community. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Journal of Engineering Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"322 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77853225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Traditionally, engineering education researchers rely on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed- or multi-method approaches for their research designs, each with its nuances, set of rules, and worldviews. Here we present a new approach that is yet to be widely accepted in engineering education research (EER): namely the multi-modal approach. This guest editorial is particularly timely because, in 2020, the EER taxonomy underwent a revision (Version 1.2), where the term “ multi-modal approaches ” was added to Section 12.d.iv (Finelli, 2020). With this addition to the taxonomy, it is important for EER scholars to understand what multi-modal approaches entail and how they are different from other approaches present in mixed-methods or multi-methods. To clarify this new approach further, we give examples of how multi-modal research is used in EER and other related studies.
{"title":"Situating multi‐modal approaches in engineering education research","authors":"Idalis Villanueva Alarcón, S. Anwar","doi":"10.1002/jee.20460","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20460","url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, engineering education researchers rely on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed- or multi-method approaches for their research designs, each with its nuances, set of rules, and worldviews. Here we present a new approach that is yet to be widely accepted in engineering education research (EER): namely the multi-modal approach. This guest editorial is particularly timely because, in 2020, the EER taxonomy underwent a revision (Version 1.2), where the term “ multi-modal approaches ” was added to Section 12.d.iv (Finelli, 2020). With this addition to the taxonomy, it is important for EER scholars to understand what multi-modal approaches entail and how they are different from other approaches present in mixed-methods or multi-methods. To clarify this new approach further, we give examples of how multi-modal research is used in EER and other related studies.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88398142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Laboratory studies explore the norms and characteristics of scientific practice and explain the constructive nature of knowledge production. However, how learning and research are sustained in engineering research laboratories at the graduate level requires further investigation.
{"title":"An ethnographic study of an engineering community: Mentoring as a tacit rule and its implications for how people learn","authors":"Mehmet C. Ayar, Bugrahan Yalvac","doi":"10.1002/jee.20454","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20454","url":null,"abstract":"Laboratory studies explore the norms and characteristics of scientific practice and explain the constructive nature of knowledge production. However, how learning and research are sustained in engineering research laboratories at the graduate level requires further investigation.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"17 1","pages":"400 - 419"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79708214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While students possess procedural knowledge associated with engineering calculations and calculus, they often exhibit a disconnect between the conceptual meaning of mathematics and the problem being solved. This conceptual understanding of what mathematics “says” is defined by the theoretical framework of numeracy. Many engineering numeracy studies have been conducted, but they lacked a unifying theoretical framework, a common lexicon, or formal definitions to connect related numeracy topics.
{"title":"Extending the theoretical framework of numeracy to engineers","authors":"K. Hadley, Wasiu Oyetunji","doi":"10.1002/jee.20453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20453","url":null,"abstract":"While students possess procedural knowledge associated with engineering calculations and calculus, they often exhibit a disconnect between the conceptual meaning of mathematics and the problem being solved. This conceptual understanding of what mathematics “says” is defined by the theoretical framework of numeracy. Many engineering numeracy studies have been conducted, but they lacked a unifying theoretical framework, a common lexicon, or formal definitions to connect related numeracy topics.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"51 4","pages":"376 - 399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72555928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Eric A. Holloway, K. Douglas, D. Radcliffe, W. Oakes
There are long‐held concerns about how graduate research programs prepare engineering PhD students for professional practice. Suitable instruments are lacking to effectively assess how research experiences contribute to the success of graduate students becoming professionals.
{"title":"Research experiences instrument: Validation evidence for an instrument to assess the research experiences of engineering PhD students' professional practice opportunities","authors":"Eric A. Holloway, K. Douglas, D. Radcliffe, W. Oakes","doi":"10.1002/jee.20451","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20451","url":null,"abstract":"There are long‐held concerns about how graduate research programs prepare engineering PhD students for professional practice. Suitable instruments are lacking to effectively assess how research experiences contribute to the success of graduate students becoming professionals.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"105 1","pages":"420 - 445"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79539615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Feedback is one of the most powerful and essential tools for learning and assessment, particularly when it provides the information necessary to close an existing gap between actual and reference levels of performance. The literature on feedback has primarily focused on addressing strategies for providing effective feedback rather than aspects of students' readiness to engage with feedback.
{"title":"Reflection types and students' viewing of feedback in a first‐year engineering course using standards‐based grading","authors":"H. Diefes‐Dux, Laura M. Cruz Castro","doi":"10.1002/jee.20452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20452","url":null,"abstract":"Feedback is one of the most powerful and essential tools for learning and assessment, particularly when it provides the information necessary to close an existing gap between actual and reference levels of performance. The literature on feedback has primarily focused on addressing strategies for providing effective feedback rather than aspects of students' readiness to engage with feedback.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"7 1","pages":"283 - 307"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89496073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While educators strive for optimal student motivation to enhance the quality of learning for all, different students attending the same course can have different needs. Person‐centered approaches on basic needs profiles, categorizing individuals into groups with similar motivational profiles, have the potential to inform the relationship between different variables per cluster and to support instructional design sensitive to student differences. However, they are still absent in engineering education research (EER).
{"title":"Motivational dynamics in basic needs profiles: Toward a person‐centered motivation approach in engineering education","authors":"G. Bombaerts, B. Vaessen","doi":"10.1002/jee.20448","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20448","url":null,"abstract":"While educators strive for optimal student motivation to enhance the quality of learning for all, different students attending the same course can have different needs. Person‐centered approaches on basic needs profiles, categorizing individuals into groups with similar motivational profiles, have the potential to inform the relationship between different variables per cluster and to support instructional design sensitive to student differences. However, they are still absent in engineering education research (EER).","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"61 1","pages":"357 - 375"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84872303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Engineering programs have increasingly incorporated design challenges into courses. These design challenges vary in the degree to which they present complex, ill‐structured, and relevant problems, and therefore may vary in the degree to which they support students to learn to frame design problems.
{"title":"A funds of knowledge approach to developing engineering students' design problem framing skills","authors":"Vanessa Svihla, Yan Chen, S. Kang","doi":"10.1002/jee.20445","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20445","url":null,"abstract":"Engineering programs have increasingly incorporated design challenges into courses. These design challenges vary in the degree to which they present complex, ill‐structured, and relevant problems, and therefore may vary in the degree to which they support students to learn to frame design problems.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"63 1","pages":"308 - 337"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74397567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/22054952.2021.2020958
S. Caldera, C. Desha, L. Dawes
ABSTRACT Higher Education Institutions around the world are all facing the challenge of delivering coursework online. Following a decade of evolving online education options, in 2020 ‘Emergency Remote Teaching’ emerged as an accelerated intervention to enable the rapid implementation of wholly online coursework delivery during the COVID-19 crisis. There is ongoing uncertainty about how to ensure quality offerings in such online learning environments, to meet national and international programme accreditation requirements. The authors undertook an exploratory study of engineering educator experiences with online curriculum delivery during the COVID-19 crisis. The Cynefin framework was used to conceptualise a structured narrative for considering the institutional context likely to be present in a given crisis, to then provide a pathway for educators to consider curriculum delivery options where the pedagogical tools must be changed but the underlying desired competency development remain unchanged. Semi-structured interviews with educators were conducted to help appreciate the spectrum of challenges faced in one university. Synthesising the findings, we present a summary of ERT concerns and opportunities to support educators in rapid curriculum renewal during times of crisis. We conclude the significant opportunity to replicate this study’s exploration with a larger sample size, to manage online curriculum renewal going forward.
{"title":"Applying Cynefin framework to explore the experiences of engineering educators undertaking ‘emergency remote teaching’ during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"S. Caldera, C. Desha, L. Dawes","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2021.2020958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2021.2020958","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Higher Education Institutions around the world are all facing the challenge of delivering coursework online. Following a decade of evolving online education options, in 2020 ‘Emergency Remote Teaching’ emerged as an accelerated intervention to enable the rapid implementation of wholly online coursework delivery during the COVID-19 crisis. There is ongoing uncertainty about how to ensure quality offerings in such online learning environments, to meet national and international programme accreditation requirements. The authors undertook an exploratory study of engineering educator experiences with online curriculum delivery during the COVID-19 crisis. The Cynefin framework was used to conceptualise a structured narrative for considering the institutional context likely to be present in a given crisis, to then provide a pathway for educators to consider curriculum delivery options where the pedagogical tools must be changed but the underlying desired competency development remain unchanged. Semi-structured interviews with educators were conducted to help appreciate the spectrum of challenges faced in one university. Synthesising the findings, we present a summary of ERT concerns and opportunities to support educators in rapid curriculum renewal during times of crisis. We conclude the significant opportunity to replicate this study’s exploration with a larger sample size, to manage online curriculum renewal going forward.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"3 - 15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82163272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/22054952.2022.2030105
A. Valentine, I. Belski, M. Hamilton
ABSTRACT Creativity is an important skill for engineers but many students face a lack of experience in idea generation, often compounded by low-self efficacy towards creativity. Providing students with online training modules has been suggested as one solution. However, the literature demonstrates using a computer can influence performance and self-efficacy in a different manner to using pen-and-paper. There is a current lack of research on whether computers may influence self-efficacy during idea generation tasks. Two experiments involving computer-based and pen-and-paper groups were designed. Groups were provided with templates that guided them through the process of applying an idea generation technique and were given sixteen minutes to generate ideas to solve a presented problem. Results revealed that students’ performance was similar and using a computer does not negatively influence self-efficacy. This shows that students can engage in idea generation learning tasks using computer-based modes without negatively influencing performance or self-efficacy, suggesting an avenue for educators to engage students with building creativity skills.
{"title":"Influence of using a pen-and-paper or computer-based approach on engineering students’ self-efficacy during idea generation","authors":"A. Valentine, I. Belski, M. Hamilton","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2022.2030105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2022.2030105","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Creativity is an important skill for engineers but many students face a lack of experience in idea generation, often compounded by low-self efficacy towards creativity. Providing students with online training modules has been suggested as one solution. However, the literature demonstrates using a computer can influence performance and self-efficacy in a different manner to using pen-and-paper. There is a current lack of research on whether computers may influence self-efficacy during idea generation tasks. Two experiments involving computer-based and pen-and-paper groups were designed. Groups were provided with templates that guided them through the process of applying an idea generation technique and were given sixteen minutes to generate ideas to solve a presented problem. Results revealed that students’ performance was similar and using a computer does not negatively influence self-efficacy. This shows that students can engage in idea generation learning tasks using computer-based modes without negatively influencing performance or self-efficacy, suggesting an avenue for educators to engage students with building creativity skills.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"29 1","pages":"16 - 25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90828586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：