The purpose of this editorial is to examine the role that systematic review protocols can play in accelerating the development of the discipline of engineering education and to explore how employing robust approaches developed in other fields can enhance the value of such reviews. The benefit of systematic reviews, as compared with narrative reviews, lies in the robust and transparent protocols employed in the collection, screening, and reporting of the studies included. Systematic reviews can identify gaps in the literature, highlight concepts that are accepted but lack empirical support, and help to evaluate the quality of research being produced for a specific topic. If structured properly, systematic reviews have the potential to be further developed into meta-analyses to examine the impact of interventions. This is particularly important for a field such as engineering education that is incorporating novel techniques to increase the effectiveness of efforts in classrooms and laboratories. However, current efforts to develop meta-analyses are hampered by a number of factors including widely varying study design (although the moderating influence of different study designs is a potential area for exploration), reporting, and concept overlap. These factors suggest that engineering education as a discipline can be classed as low consensus. Borrego (2007) outlines the low consensus nature of engineering education and concludes that key areas require further development to create a solid foundation for future development. These key areas are described by Borrego et al. (2014, p. 46):
{"title":"Enhancing engineering education through the integration of Open Science principles: A strategic approach to systematic reviews","authors":"J. Power","doi":"10.1002/jee.20413","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20413","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this editorial is to examine the role that systematic review protocols can play in accelerating the development of the discipline of engineering education and to explore how employing robust approaches developed in other fields can enhance the value of such reviews. The benefit of systematic reviews, as compared with narrative reviews, lies in the robust and transparent protocols employed in the collection, screening, and reporting of the studies included. Systematic reviews can identify gaps in the literature, highlight concepts that are accepted but lack empirical support, and help to evaluate the quality of research being produced for a specific topic. If structured properly, systematic reviews have the potential to be further developed into meta-analyses to examine the impact of interventions. This is particularly important for a field such as engineering education that is incorporating novel techniques to increase the effectiveness of efforts in classrooms and laboratories. However, current efforts to develop meta-analyses are hampered by a number of factors including widely varying study design (although the moderating influence of different study designs is a potential area for exploration), reporting, and concept overlap. These factors suggest that engineering education as a discipline can be classed as low consensus. Borrego (2007) outlines the low consensus nature of engineering education and concludes that key areas require further development to create a solid foundation for future development. These key areas are described by Borrego et al. (2014, p. 46):","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82129653","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}
Andrew L. Gillen, J. Grohs, H. Matusovich, Gary R. Kirk
Calls to improve learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and particularly engineering, present significant challenges for school systems. Partnerships among engineering industry, universities, and school systems to support learning appear promising, but current work is limited in its conclusions because it lacks a strong connection to theoretical work in interorganizational collaboration.
{"title":"A multiple case study of an interorganizational collaboration: Exploring the first year of an industry partnership focused on middle school engineering education","authors":"Andrew L. Gillen, J. Grohs, H. Matusovich, Gary R. Kirk","doi":"10.1002/jee.20403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20403","url":null,"abstract":"Calls to improve learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and particularly engineering, present significant challenges for school systems. Partnerships among engineering industry, universities, and school systems to support learning appear promising, but current work is limited in its conclusions because it lacks a strong connection to theoretical work in interorganizational collaboration.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78347218","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 : 2021-06-21DOI: 10.1080/22054952.2021.1934262
Kylie Munn, S. Goh, Marita Basson, D. Thorpe
ABSTRACT The objective of this systematic literature review was to investigate the current understanding of the competencies needed by Engineering Asset Management personnel in local authorities within Australia. During the development of the search string for the literature review, it was found that there were no available peer-reviewed articles on Engineering Asset Management competencies through an Australian local authority lens between January 2010 and December 2019 within the searched databases. Based on this, the search string criteria was re-focused onto Engineer Asset Management competencies within Australia (in general), as the new frame. Using this updated string search, the authors searched several databases (EBSCOHost, Informit, Scopus Informit and Web of Science) for research published in English between January 2010 and December 2019 that detailed the competencies deemed necessary for personnel undertaking Engineering Asset Management activities within the Australian context. Additional records were searched for in relation to the topic, from a range of Engineering and Engineering Management Conferences held between 2010 and 2019. Two hundred and thirty publications were identified through database searches, while eight conference proceedings were identified from the additional conference search. These were initially checked for duplicates, and then subjected to the refinement stage against a detailed review criteria, as per the PRISMA framework checklist process. Four articles progressed through the full PRISMA framework process. Further in-depth reviews of the remaining four papers found that one article was principally focused on the Australian Quality Framework (AQF) certification training processes, while the remaining three papers contained data of competency requirements (and example subjects) for Engineering Asset Management personnel within Australia. This data was collated, and through a deductive qualitative content analysis, was coded into three common themes: (1) Technical skills, (2) Professional skills – internally focused and (3) Professional skills – externally focused. The review process undertaken within this research initially showed that there were no papers within the original search frame of Australian local authorities, while the updated search detailed limited available literature within the general Australian context. This highlights an apparent gap within the available literature for the research topic scope during the period within January 2010 and December 2019.
本系统文献综述的目的是调查目前对澳大利亚地方当局工程资产管理人员所需能力的理解。在为文献综述编写搜索字符串的过程中，我们发现，在搜索的数据库中，在2010年1月至2019年12月期间，通过澳大利亚地方当局的视角，没有关于工程资产管理能力的同行评议文章。在此基础上，搜索字符串标准重新集中在澳大利亚(一般)的工程师资产管理能力上，作为新的框架。使用这个更新的字符串搜索，作者搜索了几个数据库(EBSCOHost, Informit, Scopus Informit和Web of Science)，以获取2010年1月至2019年12月期间发表的英文研究，这些研究详细介绍了在澳大利亚背景下从事工程资产管理活动的人员所必需的能力。从2010年至2019年期间举行的一系列工程和工程管理会议中检索了与该主题相关的其他记录。通过数据库检索确定了230份出版物，而通过额外的会议检索确定了8份会议记录。最初检查这些文件是否重复，然后根据详细的审查标准进行细化阶段，按照PRISMA框架检查表流程。有四篇文章通过了整个PRISMA框架进程。对其余四篇论文的进一步深入审查发现，一篇文章主要关注澳大利亚质量框架(AQF)认证培训过程，而其余三篇论文包含澳大利亚工程资产管理人员的能力要求(和示例科目)的数据。对这些数据进行整理，并通过演绎定性内容分析，将其编码为三个共同主题:(1)技术技能，(2)专业技能-内部关注和(3)专业技能-外部关注。在这项研究中进行的审查过程最初表明，在澳大利亚地方当局的原始搜索框架内没有论文，而更新的搜索详细说明了澳大利亚一般背景下有限的可用文献。这凸显了2010年1月至2019年12月期间研究主题范围的现有文献之间的明显差距。
{"title":"Asset management competency requirements in Australian local government: a systematic literature review","authors":"Kylie Munn, S. Goh, Marita Basson, D. Thorpe","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2021.1934262","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2021.1934262","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The objective of this systematic literature review was to investigate the current understanding of the competencies needed by Engineering Asset Management personnel in local authorities within Australia. During the development of the search string for the literature review, it was found that there were no available peer-reviewed articles on Engineering Asset Management competencies through an Australian local authority lens between January 2010 and December 2019 within the searched databases. Based on this, the search string criteria was re-focused onto Engineer Asset Management competencies within Australia (in general), as the new frame. Using this updated string search, the authors searched several databases (EBSCOHost, Informit, Scopus Informit and Web of Science) for research published in English between January 2010 and December 2019 that detailed the competencies deemed necessary for personnel undertaking Engineering Asset Management activities within the Australian context. Additional records were searched for in relation to the topic, from a range of Engineering and Engineering Management Conferences held between 2010 and 2019. Two hundred and thirty publications were identified through database searches, while eight conference proceedings were identified from the additional conference search. These were initially checked for duplicates, and then subjected to the refinement stage against a detailed review criteria, as per the PRISMA framework checklist process. Four articles progressed through the full PRISMA framework process. Further in-depth reviews of the remaining four papers found that one article was principally focused on the Australian Quality Framework (AQF) certification training processes, while the remaining three papers contained data of competency requirements (and example subjects) for Engineering Asset Management personnel within Australia. This data was collated, and through a deductive qualitative content analysis, was coded into three common themes: (1) Technical skills, (2) Professional skills – internally focused and (3) Professional skills – externally focused. The review process undertaken within this research initially showed that there were no papers within the original search frame of Australian local authorities, while the updated search detailed limited available literature within the general Australian context. This highlights an apparent gap within the available literature for the research topic scope during the period within January 2010 and December 2019.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76716871","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}
K. Inkelas, Jennifer L. Maeng, Aaron L. Williams, Jason S. Jones
A strong calculus foundation is essential to undergraduate engineering success. However, some students may be self‐selecting to begin their mathematics sequence in a lower‐level calculus course than their prior achievement and aptitude would suggest is appropriate (i.e., undermatch).
{"title":"Another form of undermatching? A mixed‐methods examination of first‐year engineering students' calculus placement","authors":"K. Inkelas, Jennifer L. Maeng, Aaron L. Williams, Jason S. Jones","doi":"10.1002/jee.20406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20406","url":null,"abstract":"A strong calculus foundation is essential to undergraduate engineering success. However, some students may be self‐selecting to begin their mathematics sequence in a lower‐level calculus course than their prior achievement and aptitude would suggest is appropriate (i.e., undermatch).","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73591688","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}
Given the importance of engineers to a nation's economy and potential innovation, it is imperative to encourage more students to consider engineering as a college major. Previous studies have identified a broad range of high school experiences and demographic factors associated with engineering major choice; however, these factors have rarely been ranked or ordered by relative importance.
{"title":"Using random forest analysis to identify student demographic and high school‐level factors that predict college engineering major choice","authors":"Li Tan, Joyce B. Main, R. Darolia","doi":"10.1002/jee.20393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20393","url":null,"abstract":"Given the importance of engineers to a nation's economy and potential innovation, it is imperative to encourage more students to consider engineering as a college major. Previous studies have identified a broad range of high school experiences and demographic factors associated with engineering major choice; however, these factors have rarely been ranked or ordered by relative importance.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79419325","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}
Megan E. Tomko, Melissa W. Alemán, W. Newstetter, R. Nagel, J. Linsey
Engineering education has observed considerable growth in academic makerspaces with initial data indicating significant potential for makerspaces to support learning.
工程教育在学术创客空间中有相当大的增长，初步数据表明，创客空间支持学习的潜力巨大。
{"title":"Participation pathways for women into university makerspaces","authors":"Megan E. Tomko, Melissa W. Alemán, W. Newstetter, R. Nagel, J. Linsey","doi":"10.1002/jee.20402","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20402","url":null,"abstract":"Engineering education has observed considerable growth in academic makerspaces with initial data indicating significant potential for makerspaces to support learning.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74730648","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}
Over the past two decades, state policies and industrial associations have challenged engineering educators to expand the training of future engineers beyond technical competencies to the broader domain of professional skills development, with one key aspect being engineering leadership.
{"title":"Engineering leadership in a Chinese industrial context: An exploration using the four capabilities model","authors":"Jiabin Zhu, Yu Hu, Tianyi Zheng, Yike Li","doi":"10.1002/jee.20404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20404","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades, state policies and industrial associations have challenged engineering educators to expand the training of future engineers beyond technical competencies to the broader domain of professional skills development, with one key aspect being engineering leadership.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80378194","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 : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1080/22054952.2021.1928867
Elena Prieto, Allyson Holbrook
ABSTRACT There is a significant concern in Australia that insufficient numbers of students are enrolling in, and graduating from, engineering degree programmes. Research studies and government reports continue to reveal that young people’s negative views of engineering are a major factor contributing to this phenomenon. To unearth how these views are formed and evolve, we investigated a sample of primary (n = 555), secondary (n = 493) and university (n = 1517) students in Australia. The students completed a survey that examined their interests in, attitudes towards, and knowledge and understandings of engineering. Key findings were that primary students were more positively predisposed towards engineering and its related sub-disciplines than secondary students; and that in terms of influences on career choice, an innate interest in science or engineering is a stronger influence than the potential earning power of an engineering position. It was also evident that careers advisors were seen to have a strong influence on secondary students’ choices. We argue that there is strong potential to harness and work with interest in engineering at an early age, and that there is considerable work needed to leverage advice and sustain interest at secondary level.
{"title":"Why we should capitalise on early childhood interest in engineering: changes in students’ interest over the school years","authors":"Elena Prieto, Allyson Holbrook","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2021.1928867","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2021.1928867","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There is a significant concern in Australia that insufficient numbers of students are enrolling in, and graduating from, engineering degree programmes. Research studies and government reports continue to reveal that young people’s negative views of engineering are a major factor contributing to this phenomenon. To unearth how these views are formed and evolve, we investigated a sample of primary (n = 555), secondary (n = 493) and university (n = 1517) students in Australia. The students completed a survey that examined their interests in, attitudes towards, and knowledge and understandings of engineering. Key findings were that primary students were more positively predisposed towards engineering and its related sub-disciplines than secondary students; and that in terms of influences on career choice, an innate interest in science or engineering is a stronger influence than the potential earning power of an engineering position. It was also evident that careers advisors were seen to have a strong influence on secondary students’ choices. We argue that there is strong potential to harness and work with interest in engineering at an early age, and that there is considerable work needed to leverage advice and sustain interest at secondary level.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86863637","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 education research frequently examines students' persistence (or intentions to persist) into engineering careers from engineering school. However, the variety of engineering‐related occupations has increased substantially in recent years, challenging researchers' abilities to discern what constitutes persistence in engineering.
{"title":"Characterizing engineering work in a changing world: Synthesis of a typology for engineering students' occupational outcomes","authors":"James N. Magarian, W. Seering","doi":"10.1002/jee.20382","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20382","url":null,"abstract":"Engineering education research frequently examines students' persistence (or intentions to persist) into engineering careers from engineering school. However, the variety of engineering‐related occupations has increased substantially in recent years, challenging researchers' abilities to discern what constitutes persistence in engineering.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78459772","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：