An official website of the United States government
This full paper sets out a methodological protocol for conducting a scoping review of literature relating to teamwork effectiveness and equity. The goal of the study is to understand how academic discourse over the five-year period prior to the study being carried out has conceptualized teamwork success in educational and professional contexts, and to what extent equitable team practices are embedded within such conceptualizations. In line with ongoing initiatives to promote transparency in research, this protocol paper is intended for dissemination prior to the conduct of the study itself. The research context, questions, and rationale are set out, and a detailed methodology described, outlining procedures for data retrieval, screening, extraction, and analysis. The paper concludes with an outline of intended reporting methods for the study, including the reporting of deviations from the procedures set out herein. This paper contributes to the scoping review methodology, and especially its application in the field of engineering education research and education research more broadly.
more »
« less
Is an Effective Team an Equitable Team? Protocol for a Scoping Review
This full paper sets out a methodological protocol for conducting a scoping review of literature relating to teamwork effectiveness and equity. The goal of the study is to understand how academic discourse over the five-year period prior to the study being carried out has conceptualized teamwork success in educational and professional contexts, and to what extent equitable team practices are embedded within such conceptualizations. In line with ongoing initiatives to promote transparency in research, this protocol paper is intended for dissemination prior to the conduct of the study itself. The research context, questions, and rationale are set out, and a detailed methodology described, outlining procedures for data retrieval, screening, extraction, and analysis. The paper concludes with an outline of intended reporting methods for the study, including the reporting of deviations from the procedures set out herein. This paper contributes to the scoping review methodology, and especially its application in the field of engineering education research and education research more broadly.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2120252
- PAR ID:
- 10354679
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in education
- ISSN:
- 2504-284X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
There are a variety of urgent calls for institutional initiatives and actions to transform engineering education. For a transformational change to occur, the initiatives must alter the culture of the institutions (Eckel, Hill, and Green, 1998). In this work in progress, we detail the methods used to conduct a scoping literature review (ScR) concerning the current state of the literature surrounding institutional culture and transformational change in engineering education at institutions of higher learning in the United States. As institutional culture and transformational change are currently underexplored topics in the engineering education literature, we investigated the larger body of computer science and engineering literature in the United States. Once completed, this study aims to reveal the current trends, theories, and potential gaps in the literature regarding these topics. Arksey and O’Malley’s methodology for conducting scoping reviews informed the development of our scoping review protocol, which similarly includes five stages: (1) identify the research questions, (2) identify relevant studies, (3) select relevant studies, (4) chart the data, and (5) collate, summarize, and report results (Arksey and O’Malley, 2005). University librarians who specialize in conducting systematic reviews aided in the refinement of this protocol. From the research question and aim of the study, three main inclusion criteria were created: (1) the literature must discuss both organizational culture and transformational change, (2) discussion of transformational change must describe the institution where the change happened, and (3) the literature must emphasize the agents of transformational change. Additional inclusion and exclusion criteria were created in collaboration with both the librarians and reviewers. These criteria guided the search for existing literature in the following online databases: Elsevier (Engineering Village – Compendex and Engineering Village – INSPEC), ProQuest (ERIC and Education Database), Scopus, and Web of Science. These six databases were selected as they often include publications relevant to the field of engineering education. After the search was conducted, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were turned into questions to inform a three-step screening process (title, abstract, and full text) used by reviewers to determine whether a publication was eligible for the study. Reviewers were assigned to review papers through Covidence, a cloud-based systematic literature review management platform. There are currently two primary reviewers and a third additional reviewer to resolve any conflicts or disagreements if they should arise. Before each review cycle, the inclusion and exclusion criteria are revisited, revised, and agreed upon by the three reviewers. This screening process is performed iteratively, allowing for critical reflection at each stage to drive the resulting findings by the reviewers in consultation with content matter experts. We are currently conducting our first round of screening in the study selection (third stage) of the scoping review protocol. After the removal of duplicates, 999 publications were found by searching in the six selected databases. This number is expected to be further reduced with each step of the screening process. When this scoping review is complete, the resulting publication will contain an analysis of the literature and synthesis of our findings, and present the prominent themes, theories, and potential gaps in the literature. This publication is expected to unite disparate lines of research on institutional culture and transformational change, challenge the assumptions in the field, and change the way engineering education views transformational change.more » « less
-
Communication and collaboration are key components of engineering work (Trevelyan, 2014), and teamwork, including interdisciplinary teamwork, is increasingly seen as an important component of engineering education programs (Borrego, Karlin, McNair, & Beddoes, 2013; Male, Bush, & Chapman, 2010, 2011; Paretti, Cross, & Matusovich, 2014; Purzer, 2011). Employers and education researchers alike advocate teamwork as a means of developing skills that engineering graduates need (Purzer, 2011), and accreditation bodies consider the ability to both lead and function on teams as an important outcome for engineering graduates (Engineers Australia, 2017). However, “despite the clear emphasis on teamwork in engineering and the increasing use of student team projects, our understanding of how best to cultivate and assess these learning outcomes in engineering students is sorely underdeveloped (McGourty et al., 2002; Shuman, Besterfield-Sacre, & McGourty, 2005)” (Borrego et al., 2013, p. 473). In order to contribute to the current conversation on interdisciplinary teamwork in engineering education, and to advance understandings of how best to cultivate teamwork learning outcomes, this paper discusses the most common teamwork challenges and presents boundary negotiating artifacts as a conceptual framework for addressing them. Drawing on data from long-term ethnographic observations of a design competition project, and the challenges students experienced, we utilise findings from a systematic literature review and the conceptual framework of boundary negotiating artifacts to present a case study of how boundary negotiating artifacts can support important teamwork constructs.more » « less
-
Background The study of emotions in engineering education (EEE) has increased in recent years, but this emerging, multidisciplinary body of research is dispersed and not well consolidated. This paper reports on the first systematic review of EEE research and scholarship. Purpose The review aimed to critically assess how researchers and scholars in engineering education have conceptualized emotions and how those conceptualizations have been used to frame and conduct EEE research and scholarship. Scope/Method The systematic review followed the procedures of a configurative meta‐synthesis, mapping emotion theories and concepts, research purposes and methods, and citation patterns in the EEE literature. The review proceeded through five stages: (i) scoping and database searching; (ii) abstract screening, full text sifting, and full text review; (iii) pearling; (iv) scoping review, and (v) in‐depth analysis for the meta‐synthesis review. Two hundred and thirteen publications were included in the final analysis. Results The results show that the EEE literature has not extensively engaged with the wide range of conceptualizations of emotion available in the educational, psychological, and sociological literature. Further, the focus on emotion often seems to have been unintentional and of secondary importance in studies whose primary goals were to study other phenomena. Conclusions More research adopting intentional, theorized approaches to emotions will be crucial in further developing the field. To do justice to complex emotional phenomena in teaching and learning, future EEE research will also need to engage a broader range of conceptualizations of emotion and research methods, drawing on diverse disciplinary traditions.more » « less
-
Background: Over the past two decades, the use of Metaverse-enhanced simulations in medical education has witnessed significant advancement. These simulations offer immersive environments and technologies, such as augmented reality, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence that have the potential to revolutionize medical training by providing realistic, hands-on experiences in diagnosing and treating patients, practicing surgical procedures, and enhancing clinical decision-making skills. This scoping review aimed to examine the evolution of simulation technology and the emergence of metaverse applications in medical professionals' training, guided by Friedman's three dimensions in medical education: physical space, time, and content, along with an additional dimension of assessment. Methods: In this scoping review, we examined the related literature in six major databases including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC. A total of 173 publications were selected for the final review and analysis. We thematically analyzed these studies by combining Friedman's three-dimensional framework with assessment. Results: Our scoping review showed that Metaverse technologies, such as virtual reality simulation and online learning modules have enabled medical education to extend beyond physical classrooms and clinical sites by facilitating remote training. In terms of the Time dimension, simulation technologies have made partial but meaningful progress in supplementing traditional time-dependent curricula, helping to shorten learning curves, and improve knowledge retention. As for the Content dimension, high-quality simulation and metaverse content require alignment with learning objectives, interactivity, and deliberate practice that should be developmentally integrated from basic to advanced skills. With respect to the Assessment dimension, learning analytics and automated metrics from metaverse-enabled simulation systems have enhanced competency evaluation and formative feedback mechanisms. However, their integration into high-stakes testing is limited, and qualitative feedback and human observation remain crucial. Conclusion: Our study provides an updated perspective on the achievements and limitations of using simulation to transform medical education, offering insights that can inform development priorities and research directions for human-centered, ethical metaverse applications that enhance healthcare professional training.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
